Early Childhood Care and Education Programs: Background and Funding

Karen E. Lynch
Analyst in Social Policy

Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Policy

Federal support for child care and education comes in many forms, ranging from grant programs to tax provisions. Some programs serve as specifically dedicated funding sources for child care services (e.g., the Child Care and Development Block Grant, or CCDBG) or education programs (e.g., the Preschool Grants Program and Infants and Toddlers Program funded under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). For other programs (e.g., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF), child care is just one of many purposes for which funds may be used. In many cases, federal programs target low-income families in need of child care, but in the case of certain tax provisions, the benefits reach middle- and upper-income families as well. This report provides an overview of federal child care, early education, and related programs, and their current funding statuses.

Funding for many child care, early education, and related programs is provided each year as part of the annual appropriations process for the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), and Education (ED). This report briefly summarizes funding requests for a selection of early childhood care and education programs in the Obama Administration’s FY2012 President’s Budget, which was released on February 14, 2011. In addition, this report reviews funding developments in FY2011, as compared to both the FY2011 President’s Budget Request and enacted funding levels for FY2010, before concluding with a six-year funding history for the selection of early childhood care and education programs and tax provisions discussed throughout.

Final FY2011 funding levels for many of the programs covered in this report remain uncertain. Congress has passed a series of continuing resolutions for FY2011, the most recent of which, P.L. 112-4, is scheduled to expire on March 18, 2011. The first four continuing resolutions generally maintained funding at the FY2010 rate for the annually appropriated early childhood programs discussed in this report. The fifth continuing resolution for FY2011 (P.L. 112-4) reduced funding rates for two programs (the Child Care and Development Block Grant and Even Start), but maintained funding rates for others. Congress has recently taken steps toward full-year FY2011 appropriations, though such legislation has yet to be enacted. H.R. 1, a full-year continuing resolution, was passed by the House on February 19, 2011. This bill proposes reductions in FY2011 funding levels for several early childhood programs (e.g., Head Start, the Child Care and Development Block Grant, and Even Start). The Senate rejected H.R. 1 in a vote on March 9, 2011. The Senate also rejected Senate Amendment 149 to H.R. 1 (in the nature of a substitute) on March 9, 2011. S.Amdt. 149 would have provided increases to certain early childhood programs (e.g., Head Start, Child Care and Development Block Grant), while eliminating others (e.g., Even Start).

Several early childhood care and education programs have funding authorizations that have already expired or are due to expire soon. The Child Care and Development Block Grant, for instance, expired in FY2002. However, it has continued to be funded through appropriations legislation. Authorization for many programs under the No Child Left Behind Act expired at the end of FY2008, though they have also continued to receive funding. Mandatory child care and TANF funds were temporarily extended for FY2011 by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-291), but they are also due for reauthorization in this Congress.


Date of Report: March 11, 2011
Number of Pages: 22
Order Number: R40212
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Educational Assistance Programs Administered by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

Cassandria Dortch
Analyst in Education Policy

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), previously named the Veterans Administration, has been providing veterans educational assistance benefits since 1944. Although the programs are administered by the VA, the Department of Defense (DOD) pays for certain benefits and provides additional benefits to certain persons with critical skills or lengthy service. The benefits have been intended, at various times, to compensate for compulsory service, encourage voluntary service, avoid unemployment, provide equitable benefits to all who served, and promote military retention. In general, the benefits provide grant aid to eligible individuals enrolled in approved educational and training programs.

The newest program, the Post-9/11 GI Bill, has the largest number of individuals receiving benefits. The Post-9/11 GI Bill provides benefits to veterans and servicemembers who serve on active duty after September 10, 2001. The program is designed to provide individuals who served on active duty for 36 months and who are pursuing undergraduate studies at public colleges and universities with the full cost of attendance: tuition and fees, housing, books and supplies, tutorial and relocation assistance, and fees for testing and certification, as needed. The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-377), enacted on January 4, 2011, makes several amendments to eligibility and benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill.

Before the Post-9/11 GI Bill was effective, the most popular program was the Montgomery GI Bill-Active Duty (MGIB-AD). The MGIB-AD provides a monthly allowance primarily to veterans and servicemembers who enter active duty after June 30, 1985.

The Montgomery GI Bill-Selected Reserve (MGIB-SR) provides a lower monthly allowance than the MGIB-AD to reservists who enlist, re-enlist, or extend an enlistment after June 30, 1985. The Reserves Educational Assistance Program (REAP) provides a monthly allowance that is higher than the MGIB-SR but lower than the MGIB-AD to reservists with active duty service.

The program with the fewest individuals receiving benefits is the Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program (VEAP). VEAP provides a monthly allowance to veterans who first entered active duty service between December 31, 1976, and July 1, 1985.

Finally, the dependents of individuals with military service may be eligible for educational assistance. The Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance (DEA) program provides benefits to the spouse and children of servicemembers who, as a result of service, are seriously disabled, die, or are detained. The Army allows certain servicemembers to transfer their MGIBAD benefits to their dependents. Servicemembers who stay in the military for several years are able to transfer their Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to their dependents. Also, the Post-9/11 GI Bill includes a scholarship program for the children of servicemembers who die in the line of duty, the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship Program.

This report provides a description of the eligibility requirements, benefit availability, and benefit payments of the veterans educational assistance benefit programs. See Table 4 for a summary of selected characteristics of the programs. The report also provides some summary statistics and comparisons between the programs.


Date of Report: March 15, 2011
Number of Pages: 73
Order Number: R40723
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Department of Education Proposed Rules for Postsecondary Education Programs That Prepare Students for Gainful Employment in a Recognized Occupation

David P. Smole
Specialist in Education Policy

Postsecondary education programs eligible for participation in the federal student aid programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), include those that, as a condition for eligibility, must prepare students for gainful employment in recognized occupations. These programs are offered by public and private not-for-profit institutions of higher education and postsecondary vocational institutions, and by for-profit, proprietary institutions of higher education.

In the summer of 2010, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) published proposed rules on programs that prepare students for gainful employment. These proposed rules were designed to address concerns about the quality of the programs and the amount of student loan debt that students who attend such programs incur. Essentially, the proposed rules called for the establishment of a series of reporting and disclosure requirements and a set of three performance metrics designed to measure how effectively program attendees repay the student loans they borrow to attend these programs, and the relationship between the debt of program completers and their earnings. A loan repayment rate measure would assess how effectively program attendees repay the student loans they borrow to attend these programs. Two debt-to-earnings measures would assess the relationship between the student loan debt of program completers and their earnings. A more stringent and a less stringent performance threshold would be established for each of the three measures.

Programs that meet the more stringent performance threshold for at least one of the three measures would remain fully eligible to participate in HEA, Title IV programs. Programs that do not meet the more stringent threshold for any of the measures but do meet the less stringent performance threshold for at least one of the measures would remain eligible to participate in HEA, Title IV programs, but they would become subject to sanctions, including having their enrollment of students who receive Title IV federal student aid restricted. Programs that do not meet at least the less stringent criteria on any of the three measures would lose their Title IV eligibility.

On October 29, 2010, ED finalized rules on a number of requirements for programs that prepare students for gainful employment. The final rules establish requirements for institutions to report certain information on students who attend or complete programs that prepare students for gainful employment; and establish requirements for institutions to disclose certain information on completion rates, placement rates, median student loan debt, and program costs for programs that prepare students for gainful employment. The final rules also establish a process for institutions to apply for approval to offer new programs that lead to gainful employment. ED has not yet published final rules on the proposed performance metrics.

On February 19, 2011, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, which, among other things, would prohibit ED from using funds made available by the act to implement, administer, or enforce the final rules on gainful employment, to issue or implement additional final rules on gainful employment based on the proposed rules, or to promulgate or enforce any new regulations or rules related to the term “gainful employment.”

This report explains and provides observations on the rules that were proposed in the summer of 2010 and the rules that were finalized in the fall of 2010.


Date of Report: March 21, 2011
Number of Pages: 26
Order Number: R41397
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Private Schools

Nancy Lee Jones
Legislative Attorney

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a grants and civil rights statute which provides federal funding to the states to help provide education for children with disabilities. If a state receives funds under IDEA, it must make available a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) for all children with disabilities in the state. Education for children with disabilities in private schools is included in IDEA, but the requirements of the statute for children in private schools are not always the same as the requirements for children with disabilities in public schools.

Under current law, there are several ways a child with a disability may be placed in a private school, and the LEA’s responsibilities under IDEA vary depending on the type of placement. A child with a disability may be placed in a private school by the local education agency (LEA) or state educational agency (SEA) as a means of fulfilling the FAPE requirement for the child. In this situation, the full cost is paid for by the LEA or the SEA. A child with a disability may also be unilaterally placed in a private school by his or her parents. In this situation, the cost of the private school placement is not paid by the LEA unless a hearing officer or a court makes certain findings. However, IDEA does require some services for children in private schools, even if they are unilaterally placed there by their parents, and there is no finding that FAPE was not made available to the child. In this situation, IDEA requires that a proportionate amount of the federal funds shall be made available.


Date of Report: March 10, 2011
Number of Pages: 10
Order Number: R41678
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

State Assessments Required by the No Child Left Behind Act: An Analysis of Requirements, Funding, and Cost

Erin D. Lomax
Analyst in Education Policy

The Title I-A program of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB; P.L. 107-110), is the largest source of federal funding for elementary and secondary education. States that receive Title I-A funding must comply with certain requirements related to measuring student achievement by using state-level standards and assessments. The standards and assessment requirements adopted in the NCLB have resulted in vast growth in and demand for new types of assessment products. Estimates of annual expenditures on NCLB-required assessments range from $500 million to $900 million. The NCLB authorized a new grant assessment program to help states pay the additional costs of meeting the expanded assessment requirements. The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of the factors that influence the overall cost of student assessment and a description of state expenditures on assessment systems.

This report describes factors that influence the cost of student assessment systems, including assessment development, scoring, and the effect of certain policy choices and implementation practices. It also reports and examines the results of existing research on state assessment expenditures, which highlight the variability among states in assessment expenditures. Next, the report presents the results of an analysis of how state assessment expenditures differ across states of varying populations. Results suggest that state assessment expenditures are dependent, in part, on a state’s population; however, there are other factors that contribute to the overall cost of state assessment systems (e.g., design choices regarding assessment development and scoring).

This report examines assessment issues that Congress may address during the reauthorization of the ESEA. As Congress considers reauthorization, it is likely that the standards and assessment provisions will be reviewed and debated. State assessments are currently the primary policy tool used to measure whether schools, LEAs, and states are meeting certain academic targets. As such, the effectiveness of federal policy is dependent upon a valid state assessment system. Designing an assessment system requires states to consider certain tradeoffs in order to meet the federal assessment requirements while meeting state requirements and containing costs. Decisions made in the design of a state assessment system have direct implications for the validity of the federal accountability system and direct consequences for schools. This report examines assessment practices that may be cost-effective and could be promoted by federal policy, including the following:

·         The use of various scoring practices—such as distributed scoring, teacher scoring, and artificial intelligence—that may have the potential to lower the cost of state assessment systems while maintaining quality. 

·         The use of state consortia that promote information sharing and other collaborative practices across states that may reduce assessment costs by realizing economies of scale. 

·         The use of technology, which may increase the efficiency of assessment administration. As technology becomes less expensive, online delivery of state assessments may lower administration and scoring costs. .

Date of Report: March 3, 2011
Number of Pages: 38
Order Number: R41670
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Proposed FY2011 Appropriations for the Departments of Education and Labor Under H.R. 1 and Related Bills

Rebecca R. Skinner
Specialist in Education Policy

David H. Bradley
Analyst in Labor Economics

Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Policy

On February 19, 2011, the House passed H.R. 1, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. H.R. 1 would provide appropriations to federal agencies for the remainder of FY2011. Based on specific congressional interest in the level of appropriations that H.R. 1 would provide for the Departments of Education and Labor for FY2011, this report provides proposed programby- program funding levels for programs in these departments that receive funding through the annual Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. Subsequently, on March 1, 2011, the House passed the Further Continuing Appropriations Amendments, 2011 (H.J.Res. 44) to extend government operations through March 18, 2011, while modifying funding for several ED and Labor programs relative to their FY2010 funding levels. The following day, the Senate passed H.J.Res. 44.


Date of Report: March 2, 2011
Number of Pages: 22
Order Number: R41657
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.