Order Code RL31240
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
21st Century Community Learning Centers
in P.L. 107-110: Background and Funding
Updated March 16, 2004
Gail McCallion
Specialist in Labor Economics
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

21st Century Community Learning Centers
in P.L. 107-110: Background and Funding
Summary
Most Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs, including the
21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program, expired at the end
of FY2000. This program was reauthorized by H.R. 1, the No Child Left Behind Act,
a bill to extend and revise the ESEA. On December 13 and 18, 2001, respectively,
the House and Senate adopted the conference version of H.R. 1. The President
signed H.R. 1 into law (P.L. 107-110) on January 8, 2002. This report summarizes
the major provisions of the reauthorized 21st CCLC program.
The 21st CCLC program was originally authorized as Part I of Title X, of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended. The amendment
authorizing the 21st CCLC program was included as part of the Improving America’s
Schools Act of 1994, P.L. 103-382. The 21st CCLC program was authorized for 5
years, FY1995-FY1999. The 21st CCLC program was not reauthorized in the 106th
Congress, and consequently its authorization (but not its funding) expired in
FY2000. Under the previous authorization, the 21st CCLC program was a
competitive grant program with grantees selected by the U.S. Department of
Education (ED). Grant recipients could receive an award for up to three years and
were required to include at least 4 out of 13 potential activities intended to serve the
local community.
In contrast, the reauthorized 21st CCLC program is structured as a formula grant
to states, with local grants awarded competitively to eligible local entities for a period
of three to five years. State educational agencies (SEAs) must award at least 95% of
their state allotment to eligible local entities (defined as local educational agencies
(LEAs), community based organizations (CBOs), other public or private entities, or
consortia of one or more of the above). To the extent possible, SEAs are to distribute
funds equitably among geographic areas within the state, including urban and rural
communities. SEAs are to make awards only to eligible entities who will be serving
students who attend schools eligible for schoolwide programs under Section 1114
(i.e., are eligible for Title I-A grants on a schoolwide basis because they have a high
percentage of low income pupils) and the families of these students. The authorizing
level is $1.25 billion for FY2002, rising to $2.5 billion in 2007.
Eligible entities may use 21st CCLC grants for a broad array of before and after
school activities that advance student academic achievement. The program’s focus
is now exclusively on after school hours activities for children and youth, and
literacy related activities for their families. Funding for FY2004 is $999,070,000
(including the FY2004 across the board reduction). The Administration has
requested level funding for the program for FY2005. This report will be updated
periodically.

---

Contents
Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
National Reservations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Formula Grants to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Competitive Local Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Local Uses of 21st CCLC Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Program Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Legislation in the 107th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
List of Tables
Table 1. 21st Century Learning Centers: Funding History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

---

21st Century Community Learning Centers
in P.L. 107-110: Background and Funding
Most Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs, including the
21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program, expired at the end
of FY2000.1 Included in the No Child Left Behind Act is the reauthorization of the
21st CCLC, with, a new location (Title IV, Part B, 21st Century Schools), and several
substantive changes. On December 13 and 18, 2001, respectively, the House and
Senate adopted the conference version of H.R. 1, The No Child Left Behind Act.
The President signed H.R. 1 into law (P.L. 107-110) on January 8, 2002. This report
summarizes the major provisions of the reauthorized 21st CCLC program. The
reauthorized program is structured as a formula grant program to states, in response
to concerns that a program as large as the 21st CCLC could no longer be equitably
administered as a competitive grant program. In addition, the reauthorized program
formally endorses a focus for the 21st CCLC on after-school hours activities for
children and youth.
The 21st CCLC program emphasizes activities in the non-school hours that offer
learning opportunities for children and youth. The stated purposes of the program,
as reauthorized, are threefold:
1.
Provide opportunities for academic enrichment to help students
(particularly those attending low-performing schools) to meet state and
local student academic achievement standards;
2.
Offer students a wide variety of additional services, programs and
activities intended to reinforce and complement their regular academic
program; and
3.
Offer families of students served, an opportunity for literacy and related
educational development.
Funding
H.R. 1 authorizes the 21st CCLC program at $1.25 billion for FY2002, $1.5
billion for FY2003, $1.75 billion for FY2004, $2 billion for FY2005, $2.25 billion
for FY2006, and $2.5 billion for FY2007. One billion dollars was appropriated for
the program for FY2002 in H.R. 3061, the FY2002 Departments of Labor, Health
and Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The
Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003 (P.L. 108-7), signed into law on
February 20, 2003, provided $1 billion for the program (not including the FY2003
across the board reductions). Funding for FY2004 is $999,070,000 (including the
1 For more on the history of the 21st CCLC program, see CRS Report RL30306, 21st Century
Community Learning Centers: A History of the Program, by Gail McCallion.

---

CRS-2
FY2004 across the board reduction). The Administration has requested level funding
of the program for FY2004. (See Table 1 for the program’s entire funding history.)
Table 1. 21st Century Learning Centers: Funding History
President’s budget
FY
request (in $)
Appropriation (in $)
1995
0
750,000
1996
0
750,000
1997
0
1,000,000
1998
50,000,000
40,000,000
1999
200,000,000
200,000,000
2000
600,000,000
453,377,000a
2001
1,000,000,000
845,614,000b
2002
845,614,000
1,000,000,000
2003
1,000,000,000
993,500,000c
2004
600,000,000
990,070,000d
2005
990,070,000
—
a. This amount includes a rescission of FY2000 discretionary budget authority required by the
FY2000 appropriations act (P.L. 106-113).
b. This amount includes an across the board rescission of FY2001 appropriations adopted in the
Miscellaneous Appropriations Act (H.R. 5666) enacted into law by The Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY2001 (P.L. 106-554).
c. This amount includes an across the board reduction per P.L. 108-7.
d. This amount includes an across the board reduction per P.L 108-199.
National Reservations
From amounts appropriated in any fiscal year, the Secretary shall reserve:
amounts necessary for continuation awards (under the terms of those grants); not
more than 1% for national activities; and not more than 1% for the outlying areas and
the BIA.
Formula Grants to States
The reauthorized 21st CCLC, unlike its predecessor, is structured as a formula
grant program to states. States will be awarded grants in proportion to the awards
they received under Subpart 2 of Title I-A for the preceding fiscal year.2 All states
receiving awards will receive at least one-half of 1% of the total allotted for state
2 See CRS Report RL31487, Education for the Disadvantaged: Overview of ESEA Title I-A
Amendments Under the No Child Left Behind Act, by Wayne Riddle.

---

CRS-3
awards. The Secretary of ED must make a written determination that a state’s
application is not in compliance within 120 days of its receipt, or the state’s
application is deemed to be approved.
State educational agencies (SEAs) may use not more than 2% of their award for
state administration (including administrative costs, establishing and implementing
a peer review process for grant applications, and supervising the awarding of funds
to eligible entities).
SEAs may use not more than 3% of their award for state activities (including
monitoring and evaluation, training and technical assistance, and comprehensive
evaluation).
Competitive Local Grants
SEAs must award at least 95% of their state allotment to eligible local entities
(defined as local educational agencies (LEAs), community based organizations
(CBOs), other public or private entities, or consortia of one or more of the above.)
This is a change from the program as originally authorized, which only permitted
schools or consortia of schools (or LEAs operating on their behalf), to be directly
awarded 21st CCLC grants.3 P.L. 107-110, Section 4204 (b) (2) (D), indicates that
in order to receive a 21st CCLC grant in the reauthorized program, recipients must
provide “an assurance that the proposed program was developed, and will be carried
out, in active collaboration with the schools the students attend.” In practical terms,
this means that grant recipients other than schools must partner with a school or
LEA. All recipients are strongly encouraged to form a partnership, however, P.L.
107-110 Section 4202 (i) (2) states that if an eligible LEA: “demonstrates that it is
unable to partner with a community-based organization in reasonable geographic
proximity and of sufficient quality to meet the requirements of this part,” then this
LEA is to be given the same priority by SEAs in awarding grants, as eligible LEAs
with a partner.
Grants are awarded competitively by SEAs for a period of three to five years.
To the extent possible, SEAs are to distribute funds equitably among geographic
areas within the state, including urban and rural communities. SEAs are to make
awards only to eligible entities who will be serving students who attend schools
eligible for schoolwide programs under Section 1114 (i.e., are eligible for Title I-A
grants on a schoolwide basis because 40% or more of their pupils are from low-
income families), or schools that serve a high percentage of students from low-
income families; and the families of these students.
SEAs are to give priority to applications that propose to target services to
students who attend schools that have been identified as in need of improvement
under Section 1116 (schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress for two
3 Although they were encouraged to: “collaborate with other public and nonprofit agencies
and organizations, local businesses, educational entities, recreational, cultural, and other
community and human service entities.”

---

CRS-4
consecutive years by state measures); and are submitted jointly by an LEA and a
CBO or other public or private entity.4
Local Uses of 21st CCLC Grants. Eligible entities may use 21st CCLC
grants for a broad array of before and after school activities that advance student
academic achievement including:
1.
Remedial education activities and academic enrichment learning
programs;
2.
Mathematics and science education activities;
3.
Arts and music education activities;
4.
Entrepreneurial education programs;
5.
Tutoring services and mentoring programs;
6.
Programs that emphasize language skills and academic achievement
for limited English proficient students;
7.
Recreational activities;
8.
Telecommunications and technology education programs;
9.
Expanded library service hours;
10. Programs that promote parental involvement and family literacy;
11. Programs that provide assistance to improve academic achievement
for students who have been truant, suspended or expelled;
12. Drug and violence prevention programs, counseling programs, and
character education programs.
History
The 21st CCLC program was authorized by Title X, Part I, as amended, of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), and is administered by the U.S.
Department of Education (ED). The amendment authorizing the 21st CCLC program
was included as part of the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994, P.L. 103-382.
The 21st CCLC program was authorized for five years, FY1995-FY1999.5 The 21st
CCLC program was a competitive grant program with grantees selected by ED.
Grant recipients could receive an award for up to three years and were required to
include at least 4 out of 13 potential activities intended to serve the local community.6
The 21st CCLC program has grown dramatically, as evidenced by the program’s
funding trajectory (see Table 1). The program shifted in emphasis as the amount
appropriated for the program increased. The original authorizing language included
an absolute priority for those 21st CCLC projects that “offer a broad selection of
4 Unless, as discussed above, an LEA demonstrates that it is unable to partner with a CBO
of sufficient quality and reasonable geographic proximity.
5 Section 422 of the General Education Provisions Act provides an automatic one-year
extension authority to all ED programs. Thus the 21st CCLC program’s authorization (but
not its funding), expired in FY2000. Legislation reauthorizing the program through FY2007
was signed into law on Jan. 8, 2002.
6 For more history on the program see CRS Report RL30306, 21st Century Community
Learning Centers: A History of the Program, by Gail McCallion.

---

CRS-5
services which address the needs of the community.”7 Beginning with the program’s
significant expansion in FY1998, an additional absolute priority was added for:
“activities that offer expanded learning opportunities for children and youth in the
community and that contribute to reduced drug use and violence.”
Program Effectiveness
The U.S. Department of Education has contracted with Mathematica Policy
Research Inc., for both an implementation and an impact study, of 21st CCLC after-
school programs. The first report from the evaluation was published in February of
2003. Based on one year of data for the 2000-2001 school year the first year
evaluation did not find significant improvements from 21st CCLC programs in
academic outcomes or in the numbers of latchkey kids. The study was designed to
focus on outcomes of typical 21st CCLC programs, rather than of programs
implementing best practices. The study authors indicated more confidence in the
results for middle school students (sample size 4,400) than for the elementary school
students (sample size 1,000). More data on the first year will be published later with
a larger sample of elementary school students.8
Other research on after school programs has found positive effects from these
programs. However, most of this research did not employ random research designs
and hence the results are not considered to be as reliable.9 In a survey of the research
literature, Fashola Olatokunbo finds that for all extended learning time programs,
characteristics linked to success include: consistent structure; community
involvement; extensive staff training; and, responsiveness to the needs of the
program participants. For programs that focus specifically on academic achievement,
structure is even more important, as are: a connection to the student’s regular school
curriculum, and the chance for one-on-one tutoring.10
7 20 U.S.C. 8244. Only projects that met these absolute priorities were funded. In addition,
the Secretary had the discretion to include competitive priorities that awarded additional
points to potential grantees’ applications.
8 CRS Report RL32174, 21st Century Community Learning Centers: Evaluation and
Implementation Issues, by Gail McCallion.
9 Almost all after school programs suffer from selection bias. This means that students
chose to participate (self-selection) in the program, and as a consequence are different from
non-enrollers in motivations, parental support, etc. These characteristics all affect
performance. In addition, few studies have control groups to compare with the students who
participated in the program. And, even if a control group is used, the assessment usually
focuses on the material taught in the program, but to which the control group may not have
been exposed. Fashola Olatokunbo, Review of Extended Day and After-School Programs
and Their Effectiveness, Baltimore, MD, Center for Research on the Education of Students
Placed at Risk, Oct. 1998.
10 Ibid.

---

CRS-6
Legislation in the 107th Congress
On December 13 and 18, 2001, respectively, the House and Senate adopted the
conference version of H.R. 1, The No Child Left Behind Act. The President signed
H.R. 1 into law (P.L. 107-110) on January 8, 2002.
The House version of H.R. 1, was passed by the full House on May 23, 2001.
It would have reauthorized the 21st CCLC as a formula grant program as part of a
new Title V — Safe Schools for the 21st Century. One-half of the amount awarded
to states would have been allocated in proportion to their school aged population; and
one-half would have been awarded in proportion to their share of grants received in
the preceding fiscal year under Subpart2, Part A, of Title I of the ESEA. States
receiving grants would have awarded competitive grants to eligible entities (a LEA,
CBO, and other public entity or private organization or a consortium of two or more
of such groups). The House Committee on Education and the Workforce amended
H.R. 1 to retain a separate funding stream ($900 million in FY2002 and such sums
as may be necessary for the succeeding four fiscal years) for the 21st CCLC program.
Authorized activities would have included before and after school activities to
advance student achievement. Sixty million dollars would have been authorized for
FY2002 for national programs to evaluate the effectiveness of all Title V programs,
including the 21st CCLC program.
The Senate’s version of H.R. 1, the Better Education for Students and Teachers
(BEST) Act, a bill to reauthorize and revise the ESEA, was passed by the full Senate
on June 14, 2001. The BEST Act would have reauthorized the 21st CCLC program
as a new Part F of Title I. Under the BEST Act, the list of potential 21st CCLC
grantees would have been expanded to include general purpose units of local
government (counties, cities, etc.) and CBOs, as well as LEAs. The BEST Act would
have reauthorized the 21st CCLC program as a formula grant to states and as a
competitive grant from the states to eligible local grantees. It would have allocated
grants to states (after reservations) in proportion to their share of grants received in
the preceding fiscal year under Subpart 2, Part A, Title I of the ESEA. Like the No
Child Left Behind Act, the BEST Act would have focused the 21st CCLC program on
before and after-school activities intended to advance student achievement. In
addition, the BEST Act would have authorized the 21st CCLC program to offer
families of participating students opportunities for lifelong learning and literacy
development. It also would have authorized $1.5 billion for the program in FY2002,
and such sums as may be necessary for each of the six succeeding years.

---