The Federal Stimulus Bill and ESEA Reauthorization: Pitfalls and Possibilities

“Is ARRA [the federal stimulus bill] a threat or an opportunity for those of us working on adequacy issues?” asked Baruch Kintisch, a staff attorney for the Philadelphia-based Education Law Center, at the panel discussion on “The Federal Stimulus Bill and ESEA Reauthorization: Pitfalls and Possibilities.”

Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the U.S. Department of Education will be distributing to states, school districts and higher education institutions in all 50 states, approximately $100 billion over the next two years. This amount is more than twice the Department’s current annual appropriation for all its programs. The largest pot of money is the approximately $48.3 billion earmarked for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, which is intended to avoid severe cut-backs in funding for public schools and public postsecondary institutions. The Act will also provide the states an additional $13 billion for educationally disadvantaged children under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and an additional $12.2 billion in funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Act over the next two years. States are also eligible to compete for a portion of an additional $5 billion in discretionary grants that the Department will be distributing under a “Race to the Top” Incentive fund and a separate Innovation Fund.

This significant infusion of money carries with it a serious challenge for school systems and education advocates to ensure that the money is used in a productive and accountable manner. The ARRA statute, in fact, sets forth four priority areas that are closely aligned with the language and goals of No Child Left Behind/ESEA: 1) improving teacher effectiveness; 2) making progress toward college and career-ready standards and rigorous assessments; 3) enhancing data systems to track educational practice; 4) improving achievement in low-performing schools.

Kintisch’s point was that if the U.S. Department of Education consistently enforces these priority areas, and the states follow up with appropriate reform agendas, there is great potential for significant progress toward meeting NCLB’s challenging goals of overcoming the achievement gaps and having all students achieve proficiency in meeting challenging state standards. On the other hand, if the money is not used in an appropriate manner, this major infusion of funds could support those who have argued that “money doesn’t matter” in terms of achieving meaningful educational progress.

In an effort to begin dialogue on the role that advocates can play in shaping the usage of the additional funding, Kintisch sought to discuss the language in ARRA that directly addresses adequacy and equity. Stating that the rapid infusion of stimulus money may have been “too much, too fast,” Kintisch raised concerns regarding the state systems’ ability to strategically distribute the large quantities of money that they will receive and must spend in a limited time period. Additionally, he worried about the potential for mismanagement and fraud, as well as the limited capacity of the federal government to hold state governments responsible for their use of the monies. Noting that there “need to be collaborators on the inside,” he underlined the importance of advocates working with the schools, districts, and lawmakers to ensure productive usage of the funds.

The second panelist, Myrna Mandlawitz, a Washington, D.C. lobbyist, co-chairman of the National Alliance of Pupil Services Organizations, and a member of the Executive Committee of the Committee for Education Funding, largely agreed with Kintish’s view that accountability is essential to the effective use of the stimulus money. In regard to the reauthorization of ESEA, Mandlawitz was optimistic about the emphasis on standards and assessments, longitudinal data systems, teacher effectiveness, and supports for the lowest performing schools. However, she pointed to a gapping omission from the bill: the importance of the other critical services that must be present in all schools in order to ensure that all students walk into classrooms everyday prepared to learn. As Mandlawitz put it, “How do you work with all demographics to ensure that they are ready to learn?” Mandlawitz stated that there is no one in the U.S. Department of Education right now who is in charge of coordinating all of the services that are needed to prepare students to learn.

Ricardo Martinez, policy adviser for the House Education Committee, was the third panelist. Commenting that the large amount of stimulus money creates an opportunity for advocates to be involved in determining and crafting the specific uses of the money statewide and in individual school systems, Martinez emphasized that, “Now is probably the best time for advocacy groups to make their arguments [to lawmakers].”