The Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA): A Legal Analysis

Jody Feder
Legislative Attorney

Introduced in the 111th Congress and again in the 112th (H.R. 998/S. 555), the Student Non- Discrimination Act (SNDA) would prohibit discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in public elementary and secondary schools. The stated purpose of the legislation is to ensure that students are free from discriminatory conduct such as harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence. SNDA appears to be patterned on Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded education programs or activities, although SNDA does differ from Title IX in several important respects.


Date of Report: August 9, 2012
Number of Pages: 9
Order Number: R42652
Price: $19.95

To Order:

R41652.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Education for Homeless Children and Youth: Background and Legislation in the 112th Congress

Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Policy

The Education for Homeless Children and Youth program (EHCY) provides formula grants to state educational agencies (SEAs) to help ensure that all homeless children and youth have equal access to the same free and appropriate public education, including public preschool education, that is provided to other children and youth. It is the only federal education program exclusively focused on homeless children and youth. SEAs competitively subgrant funds to local educational agencies (LEAs). Not all LEAs receive EHCY grants. In school year (SY) 2010-2011, 3,651 LEAs, out of a total of 16,290, received awards. Although only 22% percent of LEAs received EHCY grants in SY2010-2011, they enrolled 71% of all homeless students in that year. Education and related services for homeless children and youth are also funded through required set-asides from Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. National data on the amount of funding set aside are not available.

The EHCY program was most recently reauthorized as part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, P.L. 107-110). Reauthorization of EHCY is being considered by the 112th Congress as part of the reauthorization of ESEA. EHCY received $65.2 million in funding for FY2012; the Administration has requested level funding for the program in FY2013. In addition to regular appropriations, EHCY received $70 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds in FY2009.

All LEAs are required to report data to the Department of Education on the number of homeless students enrolled in school each year, regardless of whether or not they receive an EHCY grant. In SY2008-2009, 956,914 homeless students were reported enrolled in school; in SY2009-2010, 939,903 homeless students were reported enrolled; and in SY2010-2011, the number of enrolled homeless students reported was 1,065,794. The total number of homeless students enrolled decreased by 2% between SY2008-2009 and SY2009-2010; it increased 13% between SY2009- 2010 and SY2010-2011. During the three-year period between SY2008-2009 and SY2010-2011, it increased by 11%. Four states accounted for 42% of the total number of students enrolled in both LEAs with EHCY subgrants and those without in SY2010-2011. Those states, and their percentages of total homeless student enrollment were, California (21%), New York (9%), Texas (8%), and Florida (5%).

Legislation to reauthorize EHCY as part of the reauthorization of ESEA has been reported by both House and Senate committees. Some of the issues that are under consideration include EHCY program funding; costs of transporting homeless students to their school of origin; implementation of the ESEA Title I-A set-aside for EHCY; whether to permit separate schools for homeless students; clarification of the “best interest” school selection process; how to enhance the ability of LEA homeless liaisons and state coordinators to meet the needs of homeless students; how to improve the identification of, and services provided to, preschool students and unaccompanied youth; how to increase access to education and related services for homeless students; and the impact of potential changes to the definition of homeless in EHCY and other legislation.


Date of Report: August 1, 2012
Number of Pages: 29
Order Number: R42494
Price: $29.95

To Order:

R42494.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Primer

Heather B. Gonzalez
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy

Jeffrey J. Kuenzi
Specialist in Education Policy

The term “STEM education” refers to teaching and learning in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It typically includes educational activities across all grade levels— from pre-school to post-doctorate—in both formal (e.g., classrooms) and informal (e.g., afterschool programs) settings. Federal policymakers have an active and enduring interest in STEM education and the topic is frequently raised in federal science, education, workforce, national security, and immigration policy debates. For example, more than 200 bills containing the term “science education” were introduced between the 100th and 110th congresses.

The United States is widely believed to perform poorly in STEM education. However, the data paint a complicated picture. By some measures, U.S. students appear to be doing quite well. For example, overall graduate enrollments in science and engineering (S&E) grew 35% over the last decade. Further, S&E enrollments for Hispanic/Latino, American Indian/Alaska Native, and African American students (all of whom are generally underrepresented in S&E) grew by 65%, 55%, and 50%, respectively. On the other hand, concerns remain about persistent academic achievement gaps between various demographic groups, STEM teacher quality, the rankings of U.S. students on international STEM assessments, foreign student enrollments and increased education attainment in other countries, and the ability of the U.S. STEM education system to meet domestic demand for STEM labor.

Various attempts to assess the federal STEM education effort have produced different estimates of its scope and scale. Analysts have identified between 105 and 252 STEM education programs or activities at 13 to 15 federal agencies. Annual federal appropriations for STEM education are typically in the range of $2.8 billion to $3.4 billion. All published inventories identify the Department of Education, National Science Foundation, and Health and Human Services as key agencies in the federal effort. Over half of federal STEM education funding is intended to serve the needs of postsecondary schools and students; the remainder goes to efforts at the kindergarten-through-Grade 12 level. Much of the funding for post-secondary students is in the form of financial aid.

Federal STEM education policy concerns center on issues that relate to STEM education as a whole—such as governance of the federal effort and broadening participation of underrepresented populations—as well as those that are specific to STEM education at the elementary, secondary, and postsecondary levels. Governance concerns focus on perceived duplication and lack of coordination in the federal effort; broadening participation concerns tend to highlight achievement gaps between various demographic groups. Analysts suggest a variety of policy proposals in elementary, secondary, and postsecondary STEM education. At the K-12 level, these include proposals to address teacher quality, accountability, and standards. At the post-secondary level, proposals center on efforts to remediate and retain students in STEM majors.

This report is intended to serve as a primer for outlining existing STEM education policy issues and programs. It includes assessments of the federal STEM education effort and the condition of STEM education in the United States, as well as an analysis of several of the policy issues central to the contemporary federal conversation about STEM education. Appendix A contains frequently cited data and sources and Appendix B includes a selection of major STEM-related acts.


Date of Report: August 1, 2012
Number of Pages: 38
Order Number: R42624
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:

R42624.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Higher Education Tax Benefits: Brief Overview and Budgetary Effects

Margot L. Crandall-Hollick
Analyst in Public Finance

Since 1997, education tax benefits have become an increasingly important component of federal higher education policy. Fourteen tax benefits are currently available for college students and their parents to help pay for higher education. The available tax benefits are a mixture of credits, deductions, exclusions, and other incentives. The benefits can be placed into one of three general categories: incentives for current year expenses, preferential tax treatment of student loans, and incentives for saving for college. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates the cost to the federal government of education tax benefits—the revenue foregone from offering these benefits—to be $78.9 billion between 2011 and 2015.1

This report provides a brief overview of the higher education tax benefits that are currently available to students and their families. The report contrasts higher education tax benefits with traditional student aid, presents a brief history of higher education tax policy over the past 60 years, summarizes key features of the available tax benefits, and provides JCT estimates of revenue losses resulting from individual tax provisions. The summary is contained in Table 1 and provides information on various aspects of each tax benefit including the type of benefit (credit, deduction, etc.), the annual dollar amount of the benefit, what expenses qualify for the benefit, what level of education the benefit can be claimed for, income levels at which the benefit phases out and any aspects of the benefit which are expiring during the 112th Congress. Table 2 contains estimates of the annual forgone federal revenue attributable to each provision.


Date of Report: July 10, 2012
Number of Pages: 11
Order Number: R41967
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:

R41967.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

An Analysis of STEM Education Funding at the NSF: Trends and Policy Discussion

Heather B. Gonzalez
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy

Federal policymakers have a longstanding interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education that dates to at least the 1st Congress. In its contemporary construct, this interest largely focuses on the connection between STEM education and the U.S. science and engineering workforce, which, in turn, is often perceived as instrumental to national security and the U.S. economy.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is a key component of the federal STEM education effort. Several inventories of the federal STEM education portfolio have highlighted NSF’s important role—both in terms of funding and in the number and breadth of programs. The NSF is also the only federal agency whose primary mission includes supporting education across all fields of science and engineering. As such, funding for STEM education at the NSF impacts not only the agency, but also the entire federal STEM education effort.

Congress reduced enacted funding levels (from the prior year) for NSF’s main education account in both FY2011 and FY2012. Those year-over-year reductions followed several years of varying funding, as well as changes in the distribution of the Foundation budget that reduced funding for the main education account as a percentage of the total NSF budget. For the most part, these changes appear to result from a combination of holding the main education account more-or-less constant while applying most of the Foundation’s FY2003-FY2011 budget growth to the main research account. However, in constant dollar terms, it appears at least some of the increase in funding for research activities during the observed period may have come at the expense of education activities.

It is not clear if these funding changes reflect evolving congressional and Administration policy priorities and an intentional prioritization of research over educational activities at the NSF or if they reflect the cumulative impact of funding decisions made in response to specific conditions in specific fiscal years that happen to have had this effect. Further, the significance of these changes for NSF’s STEM education and research missions—and for the overall federal STEM effort— depends, in part, on how they fit within the broader policy context. In particular, it depends (among other things) on how policymakers perceive and assess the policy rationale behind STEM education funding at the NSF; the character of NSF’s STEM education activities; the Foundation’s role in the federal STEM education portfolio; and the impact of changes in NSF’s education account on the Foundation’s other primary mission, research.

This report analyzes NSF funding trends and selected closely related STEM education policy issues in order to place conversations about FY2013 funding in broader fiscal and policy context. It concludes with an analysis of potential policy options.


Date of Report: April 9, 2012
Number of Pages: 24
Order Number: R42470
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.