[Senate Hearing 108-134]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-134
INVESTMENT IN AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
MAY 13, 2003--WASHINGTON, DC
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
senate
______
88-459 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky TOM HARKIN, Iowa
CONRAD BURNS, Montana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HARRY REID, Nevada
JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah PATTY MURRAY, Washington
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
James W. Morhard, Staff Director
Lisa Sutherland, Deputy Staff Director
Terrence E. Sauvain, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi TOM HARKIN, Iowa
JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas HARRY REID, Nevada
TED STEVENS, Alaska HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio PATTY MURRAY, Washington
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
Professional Staff
Bettilou Taylor
Jim Sourwine
Mark Laisch
Sudip Shrikant Parikh
Candice Rogers
Ellen Murray (Minority)
Erik Fatemi (Minority)
Adrienne Hallett (Minority)
Administrative Support
Carole Geagley
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening statement of Senator Arlen Specter....................... 1
Statement of Hon. William D. Hansen, Deputy Secretary, Department
of Education................................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Statement of Senator Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator from California. 17
Prepared statement........................................... 22
Statement of Arnold Schwarzenegger, national chairman, National
Inner-city Games Foundation.................................... 23
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Statement of Hon. John DeStefano, Jr., mayor, New Haven, CT...... 33
Prepared statement........................................... 36
Statement of Harvey Sprafka, chief of police, Knoxville, IA...... 38
Prepared statement........................................... 40
Statement of Steven Kinlock, student, the Preparatory Charter
School for Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Careers,
Philadelphia, PA............................................... 42
Prepared statement........................................... 43
Statement of Madison White, student, Massillon Public Schools,
Massillon, OH.................................................. 44
Prepared statement........................................... 45
INVESTMENT IN AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:40 a.m., in room SH-216, Hart
Senate Office Building, Hon. Arlen Specter (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senator Specter.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER
Senator Specter. The Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor,
Health, Human Services, and Education will now proceed.
21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS
Our hearing this morning is to consider the budget request
by the Department of Education for fiscal year 2004 for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. The request by
the Department is for $600 million, which is a very sharp
reduction of last year's appropriation, which was $993 million.
This is a program which serves approximately 1,300,000 students
in 1,400 communities throughout the United States. It provides
a wide variety of educational experiences and has generally
been regarded to be a highly effective program until the
Department of Education this year has cited what they conclude
to be, quote, ``disappointing initial findings from a rigorous
evaluation.'' In light of this conclusion, albeit preliminary,
the subcommittee concluded that it would be important to have a
hearing and go into this issue in some detail.
We have respect, obviously, for what the administration has
to say, but constitutionally the responsibility for the
appropriations process rests with the Congress, and it begins
with this subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over the
Department of Education.
STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM D. HANSEN, DEPUTY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
ACCOMPANIED BY RUSS WHITEHURST, DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
SCIENCES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Senator Specter. Our first witness is Deputy Secretary Bill
Hansen, who has had that position since May of 2001. Prior to
that appointment, he was president and chief executive officer
of the Education Financial Council. He has a bachelor's degree
from George Mason University. He's accompanied by Mr. Russ
Whitehurst, who is the director of the Institute of Education
Sciences at the Department of Education.
Thank you for joining us, Mr. Hansen. Our subcommittee rule
on testimony is 5 minutes, and we ask witnesses to adhere to
that to the extent possible. Some people think that 5 minutes
is brief. We recently had a memorial service for Ambassador
Walter Annenberg, and the speakers included President Ford,
Secretary of State Colin Powell, and myself, and we were
limited to 3 minutes. So I want you to know what a generous
allocation 5 minutes is.
Secretary Hansen, the floor is yours. You may proceed.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And everything I have
to say, I will say in 5 minutes here.
Thank you for the invitation to be before your subcommittee
this morning, and I am grateful that the name card is here on
the table, so that nobody is going to mistake me for a major
Hollywood star. But I have seen what happens when Mr.
Schwarzenegger walks into a building. When he came to meet with
Secretary Paige at the Department, we practically had to call
the fire marshal in to clear the hallways.
Senator Specter. Excuse me, is he one of the students
involved in this testimony?
Mr. Hansen. That is right.
Senator Specter. I am surprised to hear your star is Mr.
Schwarzenegger, as opposed to the students, but proceed.
Mr. Hansen. But everybody wanted to grab a glimpse of him,
and I must also say I have testified dozens of times on Capitol
Hill, and this is the first time my children have come to see
me, so they are not here for me.
Anyway, Mr. Schwarzenegger does have many fans, and it is
not just those who flock to the theaters to see his films. Many
of his biggest fans are the schoolchildren all across America,
who have found him a good friend and an inspiration, and a
strong advocate on their behalf. And in this mission, he has
strong allies in President Bush, Secretary Paige, and all of us
at the Department of Education.
AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM--ASPIRING YOUTH
As Houston school superintendent, Secretary Paige helped
launch an after-school program called Aspiring Youth that
blended both academics and the athletic focus that Mr.
Schwarzenegger's Inner City Games Foundation produces. I am
also pleased to have with me today--behind me, Texas Juvenile
Court Judge Eric Andell, who led that program when he was in
Houston. Judge Andell now heads the Department of Education's
Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools.
President Bush and Secretary Paige believe in the bright
potential of every child, and I know you do, and the
subcommittee does, as well, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the
bipartisan support of many here in Congress, the President last
year signed the most sweeping reform of Federal education
policy in over three decades, the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001. This new law lays out a loud and clear message that every
child can learn, no matter what their background, where they
live, or how much money their parents earn.
21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS FUNDING
An important part of this effort is the 21st Century
Community Learning Centers Program that calls for safe and
caring places for children to go to after school lets out,
where they can make quality use of their time by getting help
with homework or playing sports or studying. We backed that
commitment with significant funding, $1 billion last year, and
$993.5 million this year.
Our commitment to children, great as it is, is also matched
by our commitment to use hard-earned taxpayer dollars more
wisely. And President Bush and Secretary Paige have been very
clear on this point. Our focus is the child. We will fund only
what works to help children. We will not pour limited resources
into programs that fail their mission.
MATHEMATICA STUDY OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
So you can imagine our concern, Mr. Chairman, when some
troubling findings turned up in a rigorous evaluation by
Mathematica Policy Research of the 21st Century After School
Program. The study found that many of the after-school
providers did not improve academic performance, did not
decrease delinquent behavior, and did not make students feel
safer.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 REQUEST FOR AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Clearly, this was not our definition of success, so we made
the decision to reduce funding for this program in our 2004
budget request to $600 million and spend those resources on
proven effective programs where they have demonstrated results.
In particular, the Title I program for educationally and
economically disadvantaged children, and also special education
for children with disabilities. The President's budget request
for both of these programs received a billion-dollar increase
representing our priorities.
But to help ensure future success, we are also taking
action steps to ensure that the billion dollars we are spending
this fiscal year and what Congress appropriates for 2004 will
be driven towards results for children.
AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS SUMMIT
Let me just highlight a couple of our initiatives that we
are working on. Next month, the Department will co-host a
summit with Mr. Schwarzenegger that will bring together
experts, after-school providers, educators, and parents to talk
about what it takes to create a quality after-school program.
And, I must say, when Secretary Paige met with Mr.
Schwarzenegger in Palo Alto several months ago, this was
Arnold's suggestion, and it was a wonderful idea. We are
looking forward to working with him on it as we move into the
summer months.
MODEL PROGRAMS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Second, the Department is about to begin researching the
effectiveness of some promising after-school models that have
come to our attention. And, finally, we are providing technical
assistance to many new applicants for State grant funds to help
strengthen their programs.
ADMINISTRATION COMMITMENT TO QUALITY AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
This administration is totally committed to quality after-
school programs that will provide a safer place for more young
people to grow and learn, away from the temptations and dangers
of the streets. It is a goal that we share with Mr.
Schwarzenegger.
We look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and also
your distinguished colleagues on this subcommittee, to
accomplish these noble goals on behalf of America's children.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I would also just like to conclude by saying that we very
much look forward to, as this Committee and as this Congress
maps out their budget resolution and their priorities for the
upcoming appropriations process, working with you as we
prioritize where our funding levels should go. We look forward
to working with you in that capacity.
Mr. Chairman, thanks again for the opportunity to be with
you this morning.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William D. Hansen
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: Thank you for this
opportunity to discuss the benefits of after-school programs in the
context of the Department of Education's 21st Century Community
Learning Centers program. The Administration supports the development
of local after-school programs, and believes they play an important
role in many communities. The Administration also supports the 21st
Century Community Learning Centers program, but has taken three
important factors into consideration in setting forth its 2004 budget
proposal for this program.
First, the recent rigorous evaluation of this Federal program
indicates, among other things, that grantees are not having a positive
impact on students' achievement. This Administration is dedicated to
funding programs that work, and this rigorous evaluation, initiated by
the Clinton Administration, indicates this Federal program has
shortcomings.
Second, this Federal program is undergoing a significant,
legislatively directed change. Congress established that the Federal
Government shift 21st Century grant funding from Washington-selected
grantees to those selected by States. Third, the program has grown
rapidly with little consideration of its effectiveness. In light of
these three factors, the Administration believes the most responsible
use of Federal funds would be to fund the 21st Century Community
Learning Centers program at $600 million in 2004.
Today I will place 21st Century funding in the context of the
President's 2004 budget. Then I will go into more detail about the
specific evaluation findings that led us to believe that this is a good
time to reconsider and improve our support for after-school and other
extended learning programs.
EDUCATION IS A MAJOR DISCRETIONARY BUDGET PRIORITY
As you know, earlier this year we celebrated the first anniversary
of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which President Bush signed
into law on January 8, 2002. State officials, administrators, and
teachers across the country now are working hard to strengthen their
accountability systems, identify research-based strategies for
improving student achievement, and offer new choices to parents whose
children attend low-performing schools.
The President's budget seeks $53.1 billion for Department of
Education programs in 2004. That represents more than a 25-percent
increase since 2001, and a 130-percent increase in Federal education
funding since fiscal year 1996. Key increases for the cornerstones of
the Federal role in education include:
--$12.4 billion for Title I, a 41-percent increase since the passage
of No Child Left Behind;
--$9.5 billion for IDEA grants to states, a 50-percent increase since
he was elected; and
--$12.7 billion for Pell grants, for a record 4.9 million students.
The challenge for the President is balancing all of the priorities
within and outside education in a responsible budget. The President
believes that the limited sums of available Federal funds should be
concentrated on programs that have the greatest impact; impact derives
from programs that are effective and demonstrate results-in other
words, programs that are accountable. This discipline is more difficult
in light of the competing demands of the war on terrorism and efforts
to restore economic growth.
REALLOCATING SCARCE RESOURCES
Program accountability links to resource allocation. The 2004
budget proposes the elimination of funding for 45 education programs
totaling $1.5 billion, and reduces funds for other programs to focus on
higher priority activities. In making such decisions we considered the
history of the program, recent legislative changes, and program
effectiveness. Each of these factors contributed to our decision on the
21st Century Community Learning Centers program.
First, program funding had grown very rapidly, from just $1 million
in fiscal year 1996 to $1 billion in fiscal year 2002. This rapid
growth was due in large part to the program's presumed contribution to
improving academic achievement, particularly for students in low-
performing schools.
Second, the No Child Left Behind Act changed the program from a
federally administered competitive grant program to a State formula-
grant program under which States will make competitive awards. Since
all previously awarded projects will conclude during fiscal year 2003,
all of the $600 million requested for 2004 would be available to States
for new awards during a natural transition year. The requested level
actually represents a slight increase over the amount that States will
have in 2003 for sub-State awards. The remaining $400 million is for
federally administered continuation grants that will end in 2003.
Third, recent evaluation findings strongly suggested that the 21st
Century program was not having the desired impact on student
achievement. Nor was it effective in achieving other goals, such as
reducing delinquent behavior. For all of these reasons, and in
combination with the tremendous challenges involved in the
implementation of the NCLB Act, we made difficult choices and funded
programs that benefit our greatest needs most effectively-Title I,
Special Education, and Pell Grants.
EVALUATION FINDINGS SUGGEST A NEED FOR PROGRAM CHANGES
To gain a better sense of future program directions for 21st
Century Community Learning Centers, I think it helps to take a closer
look at our initial evaluation findings. This evaluation, which was
conducted by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., uses far more rigorous
methodologies than other studies cited in the after-school program
literature. The research design included random selection of
elementary-level program participants and matched comparison groups for
middle school participants. While no single study can ever provide a
final or complete picture of the effectiveness of a program, good
budgeting in times of scarce resources demands that decisions be made
on the best available evidence. This study, which is the strongest to
date in the after-school literature, points out very basic shortcomings
in the current Federal program:
--Content.--After-school programs should emphasize and result in
improved academic achievement. Those funded under the 21st
Century program do not. Children's reading scores did not
improve. They did not perform better on homework or other
assignments.
--Behavior.--The Federal program had no positive impact on delinquent
behavior. In fact, program participants in federally funded
programs were slightly more likely to have sold drugs or smoked
marijuana than non-participants.
--Safety.--The program did not make students feel safer, with program
participants actually suffering greater property damage than
non-participants.
--Participation.--Put simply, participation was weak. Children in
federally funded programs attended just two days a week, on
average, and more frequent participation in the program did not
lead to better outcomes.
Current investments in the 21st Century Community Learning Centers
program have not paid off. We believe the program's implementation
should be reformed, and in light of the transition to State grants, we
believe there should be a reallocation of a portion of the funds
supporting previous rapid growth.
KEY CHANGES ARE UNDER WAY
With the transition of the 21st Century program to a State-
administered competitive grant program, we are taking a number of steps
to improve program quality and outcomes. These include: (1) developing
model after-school programs based on sound theory and scientific
evidence; (2) new research to test the effectiveness of various
interventions; (3) improving the availability of research findings and
effective after-school practices through our What Works Clearinghouse;
and 4) expanding technical assistance at both the State and local
levels.
For example, the Department is helping to establish networks of
State and local program coordinators so they can share best practices
and effective approaches. The Department will continue its practice of
convening annual summer grantee institutes in which States and local
grantees share ideas on building programs that include high-quality
academic instruction.
The Department also plans to work with States to implement
successfully the statutory requirement that States establish
performance indicators and measures for 21st Century projects to help
ensure that this is truly a performance-based program. For example, we
plan to issue guidance providing a model of a performance-based
competitive grant system that States could use to guide their efforts
to comply with the statute. Such a model would help States quantify and
monitor the value of academic achievement, behavior and safety
performance, and student participation levels linked to recipients of
the new State grants.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman, Congress and the President share the same goals with
this program: supporting local after-school programs that provide a
safe environment for students that improve their academic and social
outcomes. And we agree that federally funded programs should be
rigorously evaluated for their performance under those goals. In light
of the evidence, the President believes the best avenue to reach those
goals in 2004 will be for the Department of Education to implement the
reforms that I have mentioned, and to support this program at the level
requested in the President's budget.
EVALUATION OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Senator Specter. Well, thank you, Mr. Hansen.
This is the first of three studies? Is that correct?
Mr. Hansen. It is.
Senator Specter. When are the other two studies going to be
completed?
Mr. Whitehurst. Well, we have an ongoing study, the first
reports of which occurred in the publication that is referenced
in Mr. Hansen's testimony. The second wave of that study is
being analyzed now, and the results should be available within
6 to 12 months, if not sooner.
Senator Specter. And how about the third phase?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am not aware of a third phase, Senator. I
will have to check on that and get back to you.
[The information follows:]
Reports From 21st Century Community Learning Centers Evaluation
The current study of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers
program includes three reports. The first report was recently released
(February 2003) and includes implementation and impact findings from
the first year of data collection from the Department's study. The
second report will include implementation and impact findings from the
second year of data collection from the study and is projected to be
available within the next 6 months. The third report is a synthesis
report.
21ST CENTURY LEARNING CENTERS EVALUATION
Senator Specter. Well, is there a third phase?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am saying I am not aware of the third
phase of that----
Mr. Hansen. We do have program evaluation monies that we
are working with and national activities funds that we are
contemplating using for some further look into the program.
Mr. Whitehurst. What we have----
Senator Specter. And what, specifically, is the ``further
look into the program''?
Mr. Whitehurst. What we have decided to do with evaluation
money for the after-school program going forward is to try to
identify and develop programs that are likely to be more
effective in addressing safety needs and academic needs for
children, to demonstrate that those programs are effective, if,
in fact, they are, and, then to disseminate those programs
widely.
Senator Specter. Well----
Mr. Hansen. Mr. Chairman, I think the third report you are
referencing is going to be a combination of the first two
reports. It is going to be a summary report. It will not have
new research or new data. It will be a summary report.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST
Senator Specter. Well, the question, the initial question,
which comes to my mind is why such a drastic reduction, when
these are only preliminary findings and you have a second
survey which is in process which you have not analyzed? To take
it from $900-million-plus and reduce it to $600 million really
is an enormous reduction. It may really gut the program in many
respects. Why is it sound to do that before your studies are
complete?
CHANGE FROM DISCRETIONARY TO STATE GRANT FUNDING
Mr. Hansen. Mr. Chairman, the information we received from
the studies also aligned with the changing of this program.
This program, from 1997 up until last year, was a discretionary
grant program. The applications came into the Department, and
we funded them based on the quality of those applications. In
the No Child Left Behind Act, the program was changed to a
State grant program. And 2003, our current funding year, will
be the last year of funding for all of those discretionary
grants that we had given out before. So it is also what you
might call a natural turnoff time in the way that the program
is operated under the new reauthorized law.
CHANGES IN PROGRAM OPERATION
Senator Specter. Mr. Hansen, I do not understand that at
all. What is the relevancy of whether it is a discretionary
program or a State grant program on the question as to how well
it is working?
Mr. Hansen. Because of the way that the program has worked
before--under the previous statutory construction--we do not
believe, and I do not think Congress believed, that the program
was designed effectively, and that is why the changes were made
in the No Child Left Behind law.
Senator Specter. Well, now just a minute. Speak for
yourself; do not speak for Congress. Do not tell this
subcommittee what Congress thinks unless you have some factual
basis for it. Do you?
Mr. Hansen. There were changes that were made in the
reauthorization of the program that now require that States run
these competitions and that also open up the program not just
to school districts, but to other community-based providers and
faith-based providers and nonprofit organizations.
Senator Specter. Well, there are frequently changes in
reauthorization which do not bear on a determination that the
program is ineffective. Do you have something specific from the
reauthorization legislation which supports your statement that
there is a congressional conclusion that the program was
ineffective?
Mr. Hansen. I did not say that Congress said it was
ineffective. They made changes to strengthen the program and
change the direction of the program.
Senator Specter. No, you said that the Congress as well as
the administration--adopted language to the effect of being
disappointed in the program, not satisfied with it.
Mr. Hansen. They made changes in the program, in the 2001
reauthorization of the program.
Senator Specter. Well, aside from the changes, do you have
any basis for saying that Congress was dissatisfied with the
program?
Mr. Hansen. We do not, sir.
TRANSITION TO STATE-ADMINISTERED PROGRAM
Senator Specter. Well, when you talked about a change from
discretionary funding to State grants, how is that relevant on
the quality of the program?
Mr. Hansen. We think that the way that the States are going
to work with these grants, also the changes that were made in
the reauthorization include a provision that States also have
to focus the after-school programs on schools that are
identified as needing improvement, and this is, we think, a
better targeting of those school districts, to the schools
within those school districts, that need the monies targeted
for the after-school program.
Senator Specter. Well, if you are talking about targeting,
that could be the object of a discretionary program, as well,
could it not?
Mr. Hansen. Absolutely.
Senator Specter. So I still do not understand the relevancy
of your distinction between discretionary and State grants.
Mr. Hansen. We think this gives States more control and
more authority over how to spend their funds, and also by
aligning the way that they are going to be approving the
applications at the local district level to make sure that they
are targeting those schools that are in need of improvement.
Senator Specter. But does that say anything about the
inadequacy or failure of the discretionary program?
Mr. Hansen. No, sir.
PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT FINDINGS IN EVALUATION
Senator Specter. The studies show that, as summarized, that
there was more parental involvement in the program. Is that an
accurate conclusion from your preliminary studies?
Mr. Hansen. Yes, sir.
MATH PERFORMANCE FINDINGS IN EVALUATION
Senator Specter. And it showed that math scores were at
least slightly higher?
Mr. Whitehurst. Yes, but we had very small numbers of
children who were tested in math. But your conclusion is
correct; math scores were slightly higher.
Senator Specter. And that African American and Hispanic
middle-school students had better grades, had less absenteeism
and tardiness?
Mr. Whitehurst. Those subgroups did better than other
groups in the after-school program.
Senator Specter. Is it not pretty important how it impacted
on the Hispanic and African American students where there is
customarily a greater concern about the quality of education?
Mr. Whitehurst. We think that the subgroup analysis is very
interesting and suggests an avenue to proceed, in terms of
designing new programs. Clearly, there are subgroups that are
likely to benefit. How one could structure a program so that it
is particularly appealing to those subgroups and serves their
needs would be an avenue for future development and research.
MATHEMATICA STUDY OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Senator Specter. Well, does not it also support the
conclusion that it is a good program?
Mr. Whitehurst. It is very difficult to go in after the
fact, analyze for subgroups, and be sure that the effects would
be the same as they are generalized to programs at large. This
study, the study you are referring to, the Mathematica study,
is a very carefully designed study in the context of typical
research and education evaluation. It, for one thing, involved
a randomization, which is very rare in education research. It
also involved, at the middle-school level, a carefully matched
comparison group. So it is one of the stronger studies we have
available in the whole of the education evaluation literature,
and it spoke generally to weak effects--no increases in reading
scores, a slight increase in the possibility of drug
involvement at the middle-school level--some positive effects,
some negative effects; added up, all small in both directions
and an overall sense that the program is simply not
accomplishing what everyone hopes it would accomplish, at least
in those sites that were studied.
Senator Specter. Well, you have moved from the area where
there had been improvement to your generalization of
dissatisfaction. And your last answer identifies the
difficulties of evaluation. And that is why, frankly, I am
surprised that, when your studies are incomplete, you come in
and want to reduce it from $933 million to $600 million. Your
last answer articulates the difficulty of making an evaluation.
And the evaluation is incomplete.
Mr. Whitehurst. Well, my comments are intended to indicate
that this is one of the strongest evaluations that exists in
the education literature. There are a number of policy
decisions that could be made with respect to a particular
evaluation outcome. This study does not compel a budget
reduction, but it is a very strong study, and I am here to
speak to the qualities of the study and not to the budget
decision.
Senator Specter. Mr. Hansen or Mr. Whitehurst--we had heard
you were not going to testify, Mr. Whitehurst, but we are glad
to have you testify.
Mr. Whitehurst. Thank you, sir.
BENEFIT-TO-COST FINDINGS IN TWO AFTER-SCHOOL STUDIES
Senator Specter. Are you familiar with the Washington State
Institute for Public Policy, which found that after-school
programs can yield a benefit-to-cost ratio to taxpayers and
crime victims of $1.87 to $5.29 for every dollar spent?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am aware of that conclusion, yes, sir.
Senator Specter. And the Rose Institute study finds that
quality after-school programs can reduce costs related to
welfare, crime, and education, remedial services, and grade
repetition, for an average net benefit of between $79,000-plus
to $119,000-plus per participant?
Mr. Whitehurst. Yes, sir, I am aware of that conclusion.
CENTER FOR THE STUDY AND PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE
Senator Specter. And are you aware of the studies, without
detailing each of them, which have concluded that after-school
programs assist students in achieving in school--most notably
the conclusion drawn by the Center for the Study and Prevention
of Violence?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am aware of a number of studies that
examine many of the----
Senator Specter. How about the Center for the Study and
Prevention of Violence? That is the question.
Mr. Whitehurst. I am not sure of which study that is. I
have probably read it, but I am not sure, Senator.
Senator Specter. Well, would you take a look at it and tell
us what----
Mr. Whitehurst. I would be pleased----
Senator Specter [continuing]. You think of it?
Mr. Whitehurst. I would be pleased to.
[The information follows:]
Analysis of the Brandeis University Study of the After-School Quantum
Opportunities Program, as Commented on by the Center for the Study and
Prevention of Violence
Below is the Department's brief analysis of the Brandeis University
study, which is the basis for the comments by the Center for the Study
and Prevention of Violence. The Center's statement on the Brandeis
study's findings is followed by the Department's analysis of the study.
STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``Participation in the Quantum Opportunities Program led to higher
rates of graduation: 63 percent of participants graduated high school
compared to 42 percent of the control group.''----Center for the Study
and Prevention of Violence
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
The Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence references a
summary of a report by three researchers from Brandeis University of
the Quantum Opportunities Program (QOP).
--The finding is from a study of a program that offers more
expensive, different services from those offered through after-
school programs.--QOP was a small demonstration program
operating with approximately two and a half times the funding
per student than a 21st CCLC program. It also paid cash
incentives to participants for various accomplishments and to
staff based on student participation hours.
--Methodological problems with the study.--Although originally the
study was a random assignment design, the study appeared to
include follow-up information only for a subset of the
originally selected study participants who remained in the
program (Hahn, Andrew, Tom Leavitt, and Paul Aaron.
``Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunities Program (QOP). Did
the Program Work? A Report of the Post Secondary Outcomes and
Cost-Effectiveness of the QOP Program (1989-93).'' Waltham, MA:
Brandeis University, Heller Graduate School, Center for Human
Resources, 1994: p. 2). Not following the full sample of study
participants invalidates the random assignment design. To the
extent that program participants who benefit less from the
program are more likely to be those who dropped out of the
program, the estimated benefits from this study are
exaggerated.
DISCUSSION OF TWO AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM BENEFIT-COST STUDIES CONDUCTED
BY THE WASHINGTON STATE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, AND THE ROSE
INSTITUTE
In addition, the Department has included a brief analysis of the
two studies conducted by the Washington State Institute for Public
Policy, and the Rose Institute--discussed during the hearing--which
looked at the cost-effectiveness of after-school programs. Both of
these benefit-cost analysis studies are either based on studies that
are not of after-school programs or of studies where long-term follow-
ups of services provided were so long ago--the early 1940s or early
1960s--that their relevance to today's programs is at least
questionable (the Perry Preschool study and the Cambridge-Somerville
Youth Study). A brief description and discussion of the two cited
benefit-cost analysis studies follows:
STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``The Washington State Institute for Public Policy finds that
effective after-school programs can yield a benefit-to-cost ratio to
taxpayers and crime victims of $1.87 to $5.29 for every dollar
spent.''----The Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Discussion and Analysis
The calculated benefit-to-cost ratios cited here are based on
evaluation studies of three programs--the Quantum Opportunities
Program, the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program, and the Cambridge-
Somerville Youth Study, as well as the estimates of cost implications
based on the criminal justice system operating in Washington State.
--Estimates are based on programs that offer different services from
those offered by after-school programs.--The Quantum
Opportunities Program (QOP) is an intensive comprehensive
service program including mentoring for youth. The other two
are mentoring programs. In contrast, after-school programs are
offered in group settings with typical student to staff ratios
of 10:1. Therefore, attributing the benefits found in these
studies to typical after-school programs is likely to misstate
the likely benefits of after-school programs.
--Estimates only compare one program to another.--The intention of
the report was to provide relative costs and benefits of
various programs. The authors caution about using such results
as actual dollar benefits--``it is probably more useful to
compare [the] results from one program to another, rather than
solely focusing on the absolute value of any particular
benefit-to-cost ratio.'' (Aos, Steve, Polly Phipps, Robert
Barnoski, and Roxanne Lieb. ``The Comparative Costs and
Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime. Version 4.0.'' Olympia,
WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2001: p. 3).
STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``The Rose Institute finds that quality after-school programs can
reduce costs related to welfare, crime, and education (remediation
services and grade repetition) for an average net benefit of between
$79,484 and $119,427 per participant.''----Rose Institute
Discussion and Analysis
The calculated benefit-to-cost ratios cited here are primarily
based on two evaluation studies--the Quantum Opportunities Program
(QOP) and the Perry Preschool Project.
--Estimates are based on programs that offer different services from
those offered through after-school programs. QOP was a
demonstration program providing intensive services to a small
number of high school students. The Perry Preschool project
provided a high quality active preschool environment for 3 to 4
year olds.
--Imprecise benefit estimates. Most of the estimated benefits in this
report originate from estimated increased lifetime income and
estimated benefits associated with estimated reduced crime--
both of which are difficult to estimate with much precision or
credibility.
ACADEMIC GAINS OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS
Senator Specter. How about the study by Gansk & Associates
reporting gains in standardized test scores and reading and
math were greater for students participating in after-school
programs than for comparable students according to a study of
19 elementary schools in five States? Are you familiar with
that study?
Mr. Whitehurst. I do not have that one in front of me. I
would have to check, again, to give you my reaction to it.
Senator Specter. Does not come to mind.
Mr. Whitehurst. It does not come to mind, sir.
LA'S BEST AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM EVALUATION
Senator Specter. Uh-huh. And how about the UCLA Center for
the Study of Evaluation? In the initial year of study, LA's
BEST students began with the math achievement scores that were
significantly lower than nonparticipants. After long-term
participation in the after-school programs, these students
increased their test scores to be comparable to their peers.
Familiar with that one?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am very aware of that study, yes, sir.
Senator Specter. Is there some defect in that study that
would lead you to disagree with its conclusion?
Mr. Whitehurst. Most of the studies that have addressed
after-school programs are flawed in the following respect.
Senator Specter. Well, I do not want to hear about most.
Mr. Whitehurst. I will talk to you about this one then, as
an example----
Senator Specter. That is what I would like to hear.
Mr. Whitehurst [continuing]. As an example of a flaw that
is present in many of the studies like this.
Senator Specter. Well, now----
Mr. Whitehurst. The flaw----
Senator Specter [continuing]. I am interested in this
study----
Mr. Whitehurst. I am responding to the question, sir.
Senator Specter [continuing]. And if you could respond to
flaws in it, as to this study.
DRAWING CONCLUSIONS FROM OUTCOMES OF EVALUATION SUBSETS
Mr. Whitehurst. I am glad to respond simply to this study
then, Senator.
Senator Specter. Thank you.
Mr. Whitehurst. The problem with the L.A.'s BEST study is
that it examines the differences between children who were
long-term participants in the after-school program and compares
the findings for those children with children at large in the
district or children who were similar to children who entered
the program in the initial years. So there is a comparison
between a small subset of children, who chose, either because
of their own interests or the interests of their parents, to
participate over an extended period of time, over a period of
years, with the outcomes of children who never volunteered for
an after-school program and did not participate. It is a very
awkward and potentially misleading comparison.
If you, Senator, were out looking for a diet program--you
would not need one; I might add--and I asked the diet program
how participants in the program do, and the diet program said:
``Well, those people who participate in our program for 5 years
lose a lot of weight.'' That would not, for me, be a compelling
comparison. I would like to know how people, in general, the
typical customer of that program, performs.
That is the question that has to be asked for after-school
programs. How does the average, the typical, child who enrolled
in the program do compared to similar children who did not
enroll, and that comparison is not present in the L.A. BEST
program.
Senator Specter. Would that critique apply to your studies?
Mr. Whitehurst. No, it would not.
MATHEMATICA, INC. FINDINGS ON TARDINESS AND MATH SCORES
Senator Specter. Are you familiar with the study of
Mathematica, Inc., which concluded that after participating in
a 21st Century Community Learning Center programs, its black
and Hispanic students reduced tardiness to class and increased
math scores compared to nonparticipants?
Mr. Whitehurst. Yes, I am aware of that.
Senator Specter. Do you disagree with those conclusions?
Mr. Whitehurst. I do not disagree with the conclusions. The
conclusions----
Senator Specter. Is there some problem----
Mr. Whitehurst [continuing]. Are there----
Senator Specter. Is there some problem with that study?
Mr. Whitehurst. The problem is the subgroup analysis. There
was no directly comparable group among the nonparticipants. So
it is a very promising finding. It is not a conclusive finding.
Senator Specter. It is a very what?
Mr. Whitehurst. A very promising finding, something we
certainly need to follow up on.
Senator Specter. Would you do that?
Mr. Whitehurst. We are planning on doing that, yes, sir.
Senator Specter. Uh-huh. If you have enough subgroups, Mr.
Whitehurst, do you not have a pretty solid basis for a
generalized conclusion?
Mr. Whitehurst. If you have enough subgroups, you have a
pretty good basis for a finding that some of those subgroups do
better than other of the subgroups, and that is the problem
with the subgroup analysis. Once you start----
Senator Specter. Well, but if you had----
Mr. Whitehurst [continuing]. Going in and trying to look
for findings in particular subgroups, you are likely to find
them for some of those groups, and it is very difficult to know
whether that would replicate. That is why it is a very
interesting and encouraging finding that we are very intent on
following up.
NRC FINDINGS AND SCHOOL-SPONSORED ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATION
Senator Specter. Are you familiar with the National
Research Council, which found students who reported spending no
time in school-sponsored activities after school versus
students spending 1 to 4 hours in such activities were 57
percent more likely to have dropped out before reaching 12th
grade?
Mr. Whitehurst. I am aware of that, Senator. It would
probably be the same finding for participation in sports or
music or anything else. Kids who choose to participate in
activities compared to those who do not are likely to finish
school, do better in terms of grades, and a number of other
factors, which represents differences in the motivation and
background and interest of children who are voluntary
participants versus children who do not avail themselves of
opportunities that are present at school.
Senator Specter. Well, the subcommittee would like you to
give us an analysis of those programs without further
questioning at this time----
Mr. Whitehurst. Thank you, I would be pleased to do that.
Senator Specter [continuing]. And compare them to the
studies which you have undertaken.
[The information follows:]
Analysis of the Findings of Six Studies on After-School Programs
Overall, we find that the studies cited at the Congressional
hearing on May 13, 2003, do not provide scientifically based evidence
of effectiveness of after-school programs. First, some of the cited
studies are not of after-school programs. Second, most of the studies
did not use scientifically rigorous methods and thus the results cannot
be reliably attributed to participation in the program. Other factors,
such as student or family background characteristics, could result in
the outcome differences between participants and non-participants. In
some cases, the researchers of the original reports openly discussed
the limitations of the methods they used, cautioning readers about
placing too much weight on the findings.
Below is the Department's response to Senator Specter's request to
provide a brief analysis of a list of study findings on after-school
programs.
1. STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``Gains in standardized test scores in reading and math were
greater for students participating in after-school programs than for
comparable students, according to a study of 19 elementary schools in
five states.''----Gansk & Associates
Discussion and Analysis
The statement refers to a report on the Foundations After-School
Enrichment Program (Klein, Stephen, and Roger Bolus. ``Improvements in
Math and Reading Scores of Students Who Did and Did Not Participate in
the Foundations After School Enrichment Program During the 2001-2002
School Year.'' Santa Monica, CA: GANSK & Associates, 2002).
--Study design is not scientifically rigorous.--The authors calculate
test score gains for a small number of program participants and
nonparticipants at the same schools in five counties in which
this program operates. The study design is seriously flawed
constructing an inappropriate group of students for comparison.
Since the unsophisticated analyses fail to account for
potentially important differences between participants and non-
participants (e.g., initial test score differences and likely
motivational differences since the non-participants elected not
to participate in the program even though it was available),
the findings cannot be attributed to participation in the
program.
2. STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``In the initial year of study, LA's BEST students began with math
achievement scores that were significantly lower than non-participants.
After long-term participation in the after-school program, these
students increased their test scores to be comparable to their
peers.''----UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation
Discussion and Analysis
This is an evaluation of a single program, LA's BEST after-school
program, with two reports conducted by the Center for the Study of
Evaluation at the University of California at Los Angeles (Brooks,
Pauline E., Cynthia M. Mojica, and Robert E. Land. ``Final Evaluation
Report. Longitudinal Study of LA's BEST After School Education and
Enrichment Program, 1992-94.'' Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of
Evaluation, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies,
1995; Huang, Denise, Barry Gribbons, Kyung Sung Kim, Charlotte Lee, and
Eva L. Baker. ``A Decade of Results: The Impact of the LA's BEST After
School Enrichment Program on Subsequent Student Achievement and
Performance.'' Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for the Study of
Evaluation, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies,
2000).
--Study design is not scientifically rigorous.--The 1995 study
compares a select sample of 130 students: a nonrandom sample of
program participants with 66 students who participated in the
program for less than 3 months and left the program. The 2000
study compares a group (an unspecified number) of program
participants with those who elected not to participate in the
program (even though it was available to them). Constructing
groups for comparison in these manners results in likely group
differences that are unmeasurable and thus unable to be taken
into consideration in the analyses. Therefore, the findings in
both reports cannot be attributed to participation in the
program.
--Study findings are mixed and incomplete.--Both reports, but
particularly the more recent report, lack proper documentation
(e.g., response rates, sample size, full reporting of findings,
and details of analysis techniques) that is routinely reported
in high-quality research. In the 1995 report, the findings were
sensitive to estimation method (LA's BEST participants scored
lower than the comparison group when one method was used, and
an alternative method showed opposite findings). The first
method ``controlled for length of time the students attended
the program and statistically adjusted the before program'
performances of both groups of students . . . this analysis
yielded little in the way of encouraging results. The only
significant effects were associated with ethnicity and gender''
(Brooks et al. 1995:13). With this method, LA's BEST students
had lower grades than the control group in all areas. The
second method ``controlled for initial differences by
eliminating outliers'--students who had unusually high or low
performances--from both groups'' (Brooks et al. 1995:14). With
this method, LA's BEST students had higher grades than the
control group in all areas.
3. STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``After participating in the 21st Century Community Learning
Centers program, black and Hispanic students reduced tardiness to class
and increased math scores compared to non-participants.''--Mathematica,
Inc.
Discussion and Analysis
This is one select finding from the Department's evaluation of the
21st CCLC program conducted by Mathematica Policy Research. As
mentioned at the hearing, this is a promising subgroup finding among
many other findings for the program that indicate, on average, the
program fails to demonstrate effectiveness. Due to the nature of
statistics, given enough different outcomes, it is possible to find one
or two findings or a single subgroup that is statistically significant.
It is impossible at this point without further data and additional
studies to know the importance and reliability of this finding.
4. STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``Students who reported spending no time in a school-sponsored
activity (after school) versus students spending 4 hours in such
activities were 57 percent more likely to have dropped out before
reaching the 12th grade.''----National Research Council
Discussion and Analysis
This finding is based on analyses of the National Educational
Longitudinal Study (NELS) a longitudinal survey conducted by the
National Center for Education Statistics (Zill, Nicholas, Christine W.
Nord, and Laura S. Loomis. ``Adolescent Time Use, Risky Behavior, and
Outcomes: An Analysis of National Data.'' Rockville, MD: Westat, 1995).
--Finding not related to after-school programs.--This finding is
based on sophisticated analytical techniques to investigate
high school student responses to the question: ``In a typical
week, how much total time do you spend on all SCHOOL-SPONSORED
extracurricular activities.'' Inclusion of activities such as
band, orchestra, and organized sports clearly indicates that
responses were not necessarily referencing after-school
programs.
--Study also includes negative findings.--Although the statement
highlights a positive finding, the study also found that
students who participated in particular extracurricular
activities actually increased their chances that they would
engage in certain risky behaviors.
5. REPORTED SOURCE
Sacramento START program--two reports by Minicucci Associates--
(Minicucci, Catherine. ``Students Today Achieving Results for Tomorrow:
Evaluation Report for START 1999/2000.'' Sacramento, CA: Minicucci
Associates, August 2001. Minicucci, Catherine. ``Students Today
Achieving Results for Tomorrow: Evaluation Report for START 2000/
2001.'' Minicucci Associates, Sacramento, California. October 2001.)
Discussion and Analysis
The evaluation compared data on program participants for which
there was test score data for the school years 1999-2000 and 1998-99.
--Study design is not scientifically rigorous.--All analyses are
based only on program participants. With such a design, it is
impossible to determine whether program participants fared
better or worse than they would have without the program.
Because students generally improve their academic proficiency
with an additional year of schooling, any gain in test scores
could reflect normal progress.
--Reported findings are mixed.--Reported results indicated that
participant math scores increased while participant reading
scores declined between the two school years.
6. STATEMENT AND REPORTED SOURCE
``Participation in the Quantum Opportunities Program led to higher
rates of graduation: 63 percent of participants graduated high school
compared to 42 percent of the control group.''----Center for the Study
and Prevention of Violence
Discussion and Analysis
The Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence references a
summary of a report by three researchers from Brandeis University of
the Quantum Opportunities Program (QOP).
--The finding is from a study of a program that offers more
expensive, different services from those offered through after-
school programs.--QOP was a small demonstration program
operating with approximately two and a half times the funding
per student than a 21st CCLC program. It also paid cash
incentives to participants for various accomplishments and to
staff based on student participation hours.
--Methodological problems with the study.--Although originally the
study was a random assignment design, the study appeared to
include follow-up information only for a subset of the
originally selected study participants who remained in the
program (Hahn, Andrew, Tom Leavitt, and Paul Aaron.
``Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunities Program (QOP). Did
the Program Work? A Report of the Post Secondary Outcomes and
Cost-Effectiveness of the QOP Program (1989-93).'' Waltham, MA:
Brandeis University, Heller Graduate School, Center for Human
Resources, 1994: p. 2). Not following the full sample of study
participants invalidates the random assignment design. To the
extent that program participants who benefit less from the
program are more likely to be those who dropped out of the
program, the estimated benefits from this study are
exaggerated.
Senator Specter. Okay, thank you very much.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Specter. The subcommittee would now be pleased to
hear from Senator Barbara Boxer.
Good morning, Senator Boxer.
Senator Boxer. Good morning, Senator.
Senator Specter. Thank you for joining us.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR BARBARA BOXER, U.S. SENATOR FROM
CALIFORNIA
Senator Boxer. It is wonderful to be here with you.
Senator Specter. We are going to turn on the lights for
you, like we do for everybody, if----
Senator Boxer. Yes, that is fine.
Senator Specter [continuing]. That is satisfactory.
Senator Boxer. I will not--I will endeavor to stick within
the time. If I go over, it will be a mini-go-over.
So let me, first of all, thank you for the last 7 years,
you have been working with me and others in a bipartisan way. I
want to start off by thanking you, because for the last 7 years
you have worked with me and others in a bipartisan way to make
after-school something that we do here, that we do well here,
and that we can assist the States and the local school
districts in doing.
I want to just--because I was so interested in the first
panel and your questioning of them, I wanted to ask if I might
put in the record an executive summary of a report that was
done on the Sacramento START Program, just the executive
summary.
Senator Specter. Certainly, without objection, it will be
made a part of the record.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The information follows:]
Supporting Student Achievement: Evaluation Report for START 2000/2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The is a summary of the 2000/2001 evaluation of the START after
school program, an innovative regional after school program operated by
the City of Sacramento in collaboration with the County of Sacramento
and six area school districts. The evaluation includes findings on
student learning and attendance, findings from student interviews, and
results of staff focus groups. The evaluation team would like to
express its appreciation to the school district staff who assisted in
the gathering of the information on student learning and attendance
needed for this report.
Highlights Include
--Student learning gains in math (3 NCE points) with higher gains for
English
--Language Learners (4 NCE points)
--Slight decline in reading (1 NCE point) for all students and
English speakers and no change in reading for English Language
Learners
--Attendance improvement for students who missed 10 or more days of
school in the previous year: 4.7 fewer absent days in the year
they were in START compared to the previous year
--Steady gain in math achievement over two years for students
followed for two years
--Improved attendance for students in the program for two years with
improved attendance evident in the first year of START
continued into the second year. 2.2 fewer days absent over two
years. For problem attenders there was a two year decline in
days missed of school of 6.2 days
Background
START was founded in 1995 with 18 elementary schools in five
districts. In 2000/2001, the program involved six school districts and
32 elementary schools. START programs on school sites served 3,820
students in grades 1-6 in 2000/2001. The total number of participants
by site range from 52 to 359 students, with an average of 119 students.
Participating elementary schools serve low income neighborhoods. The
City of Sacramento Department of Neighborhood Services serves as the
fiscal agent for the program, employs and trains staff, and prepares
reports to funders. The schools and districts provide space for the
program on elementary school campuses, collaborate on curriculum
planning and support the program financially with matching funds.
In the 2000/2001 school year, the following districts participated
in Sacramento START. The number of elementary schools in the program
within each district are in parentheses: Del Paso Heights School
District (1), Elk Grove Unified School District (1), Natomas School
District (2), North Sacramento School District (4), Rio Linda Union
School District (3) and Sacramento City Unified School District (21).
Evaluation Methods
The evaluation consultant selected 1,200 students in grades 3
through 6 who had participated at least 30 days in START in February
and March of 2001. State requirements for evaluation call for a
comparison between student achievement and attendance in the program
year (2000/2001) compared to the previous year (1999/2000)The
evaluators researched school district records and found that 748 of
these students had complete SAT9 testing information for spring 2000
and spring 2001 and 705 students had complete attendance information
for the 1999/2000 and 2000/2001 school years. The evaluation group in
2000/2001 included 227 students who were included in last year's
evaluation for the 1999/2000 report, Achieving Results. A separate
analysis of results for these 227 students enabled the evaluation to
examine the impact of START on students who remain in the program two
consecutive years. The state also asks local programs to administer
four interview question to students as they begin the program and at
the end of the program. These four questions about student behavior and
connection to school are also used in the federal government's 21st
Century Learning Community evaluation of federally funded after school
programs.
Preparing the 2000/2001 evaluation report was a collaborative
effort between the evauation team, school district staff, and START
staff. During the process, the school district staff expressed a desire
for additional analyses by district and school and potential for
comparison groups of non participating START students. The extent of
district staff involvement and engagement with the evaluation has grown
over the past six months as Minicucci Associates have prepared two
evaluation reports for the program under state guidelines. District
preferences and desires for enhancements for the evaluation analysis
have become more prominent in the 2000/2001 study and will become even
more apparent in the 2001/2002 evaluation next fall.
Findings
The 748 students in the evaluation group were more female (54
percent) than male (44 percent). (For 2 percent of sample students,
gender was unknown.) Younger students were more heavily represented
that upper grade students in the program. Third graders comprised 30
percent of the students, fourth graders were 33 percent, 24 percent
were in the fifth grade and 13 percent were in the sixth grade.
Ethnically, the students were diverse with 29 percent Hispanic, 27
percent African American, 23 percent Asian, 15 percent White and the
remaining 1 percent other. For 5 percent of sample students, ethnicity
information was not available. Slightly over one third of the students
(34 percent) were English Language Learners and spoke a language other
than English. Major languages represented included: Spanish (45
percent), Hmong (31 percent), Hindi (7 percent), Mien (5 percent) and
Chinese (5 percent) (both Mandarin and Cantonese.)
1. Student Learning Outcomes on SAT9
Overall, the average results on SAT9 reading for the 748 students
showed a 1 point decline between 1999/2000 and 2000/2001. In math there
was a 3 NCE point gain. Both changes were statistically significant.
English Language Learners remained stead in math with no gain or loss
in NCE points in spring 2001. English speakers lost 1 NCE point in
reading. In math, English Language Learners gained 4 NCE points
compared to English speakers who gained 2 NCE points. These findings
are similar to those in the 1999/2000 report on START: English Language
Learners make greater achievement test gains and all students do better
in math than in reading on the standardized tests.
The state requests districts to examine growth in learning for
students in the bottom 25 percentile rank or quartile. For reading, 37
percent of START students were in the bottom quartile in 1999/2000 and
20 percent of those students moved up to a higher achievement level out
of the 25th percentile rank in spring 2001. In math, 30 percent were in
the bottom quartile in 1999/2000 and 42 percent of those students moved
up in spring 2001 to higher quartiles in math achievement. Overall,
there were 2 percent more students in the bottom quartile in reading in
spring 2001 than in spring 2000. In math, there were 31 percent of
students in the bottom quartile in spring 2000 and 24 percent in spring
2001, a drop of 7 percentage points. English Language Learners showed a
1 percent drop in the proportion scoring in the lowest quartile in
reading and a 10 percent drop in the lowest quartile in math. English
speakers showed a 3 percentage point gain in the lowest quartile in
reading and a 6 percent drop in the lowest quartile in math between
spring 2000 and spring 2001.
Turning to the group of 227 returning START students who were in
last year's report, they showed steady gains in math while continuing
to struggle in reading. In reading, the students declined 2 NCE points
between spring 1999 and spring 2001. In math, the students gained 4 NCE
points between spring 1999 and spring 2001. Low performing students in
this group did slightly better than the 748 evaluation group students
as a whole. In the spring of 2000, 38 percent of the returning group
was in the lowest reading quartile and 28 percent was in the lowest
math quartile. When the students were tested in the spring of 2001, 22
percent moving out of the lowest performing cartel in reading and 45
percent moving out of the lowest quartile in math.
2. Student Attendance
Students in START in the 2000/2001 school year showed a small
improvement in overall school attendance compared to the 1999/2000
school year: from 5.5 days missed to 5.4 days missed for 0.1 fewer
absent days. In missing fewer than 10 days of school, these children
can be characterized overall as good attenders. Students who had been
problem attenders in the previous year, missing 10 or more days of
school showed a dramatic gain in attendance and a reduction in days
absent, dropping from 14.8 days absent to 10.1 days, a reduction of 4.7
days absent. These children got five more days of instruction in the
year they particpated in START.
The group of 227 returning START students showed improved
attendance in the first year they were in START and that that
improvement continued into the second year. These students missed 7.3
days in 1998/1999, 5 days in 1999/2000 and 5.1 days in 2000/2001 or a
two year drop in days absent of 2.2 days. The problem attenders missing
10 or more days of school went from 15.9 days absent in 1998/99 to 9.8
days to 9.7 days absent in 2000/2001. Their two year drop in days
absent was 6.2 days. These results suggest that students who continue
in START sustain their improved attendance over a two year period. By
attending more days in school, these children have more opportunity to
learn academic content.
3. Student Interviews
Students in federal and state funded after school programs are
asked four questions at the start and end of the program. A total of 76
responses to the pre and post questions for participants in START were
gathered, about 10 percent of the achievement test sample for 2000/
2001. The children are asked: ``In the past 30 days
--How often have you wanted to go to school?
--How often have you studied for a test?
--How often have you felt unsafe at school?
--How often has your mom, dad or guardian talked to you about school
or homework?''
In general, the pre-tests show that the START students like going
to school, about two thirds of them reported studying hard for a test
in the past month, almost 60 percent report never feeling unsafe at
school and 45 percent speak with their parent or guardian daily about
school. On the post test, the proportion of children wanting to go to
school dropped, as did the proportion reporting they studied hard for a
test in the past month. About the same number as on the pre-test
reported feeling safe always at school on the post test. A higher
proportion, over half, reported speaking daily with their parent or
guardian about school on the post test.
4. Focus Groups With START Staff
The evaluation team conducted end-of-the-year reflection
discussions with 25 Site Directors and 5 Regional Directors in May
2001. Staff related their pride in START as a safe alternative for
children after school, providing reliable after school care for parents
to enable them to work. This is particularly helpful for families
coming off of welfare. Milestones in the 2000/2001 school year
included: involving high school students as tutors and mentors in a
science program, participation in 4H Cooperative Extension enrichment
activities, UC Davis ``Steps to College'' program at eight START sites,
the Grant High School art and garden project at four START schools and
a special nutrition program at eleven START sites. START also
participated in the Sacramento County Fair ``Chicken in the Egg''
contest in which student efforts resulted in 47 blue ribbons for the
program.
Site Directors report that many of the children they work with in
START need support services: basic needs like food and clothing, social
services or health services. They also report that students come into
the program often are tired and in need of some fun, a snack and a
break. They feel the kids need a break to unwind so it is very hard to
launch immediately into academic program content with them when they
start the after school program.
The largest challenges for Site Directors and Regional Directors is
turnover in Program Leaders. The need to train new Program Leaders
during the school year is time consuming for Site Directors. All staff
voiced the belief that consistent, well trained after school program
staff is key to ensuring a high quality program. Many Site Directors
were previously Program Leaders or school aides so they bring valuable
experience to their assignment in START. Successful strategies for
training staff include shadowing experienced START staff, observing
skilled classroom teachers during the school day and having classroom
teachers observe the new hires and offer suggestions. Site Directors
and Regional Directors feel that a lower staff/child ratio (lower than
the current 20:1) and higher hourly pay would be desirable. A key
requirement of START is the need to collaboratively share classroom
space with teachers at each site. In about half of the schools, staff
report that the relationships have been carefully worked out. In the
other half, the challenge continues of trying to operate a program in
space that is used during the day by the regular faculty of the school.
START staff felt that regular communication between the START staff and
the school faculty would help bridge the gap.
START staff feel pressure to advance academic learning of students,
particularly in literacy. Students want, more music and art which is
often lacking in the regular school day. Staff expressed frustration
with the pressure to stress reading with students who crave enrichment
and fun. The challenge is how to make reading fun and worthwhile for
students.
START staff offered a number of concrete suggestions for
strengthening the program, including adding more enrichment
opportunities and field trips. Site directors would like a parent
volunteer component integrated into the program. Site Directors
appreciated the opportunity to reflect together and requested that this
discussion opportunity be repeated on a regular basis. Quarterly
reflection discussions will be continued in the 2001/2002 school year
with evaluation team members facilitating the discussion.
``In established START sites, students tell their teachers what
they're doing in START, their homework gets completed and the teachers
learn the value of the program directly from the children.''---- Site
Director
``Get college students to be Program Leaders in START, especially
those who want to be teachers. START could be a laboratory for people
who want to work with kids.''----Site Director
THE SACRAMENTO START PROGRAM
Senator Boxer. That was outsourced to a group called
Minicucci Associates, and they did this report. And without
going into too much time on the findings, they said, ``START
fosters enthusiasm for learning by engaging children in fun,
literacy-focused activities in a safe and caring environment.
START expands the school day and supports district goals.'' And
then they actually quantify the increase in learning, Mr.
Chairman, compared to the kids who do not go, which was one of
the things, criteria, that was laid out here. So thank you for
allowing me to do that.
I want to start off by showing you an ad that ran in
yesterday's New York Times and USA Today and all over the
country, ``It is 3 p.m. Do you know where your kids are?'' I
have to just go up so I get this right. The Office of National
Drug Control Policy, which is an arm of this administration,
and what a wonderful ad this is, I might say. It really caught
my attention, and I think everybody who would see it, on a big,
you know, newspaper page, blank except for that. And it goes
into saying how kids can get in trouble. So it seems like an
anomaly to me, Mr. Chairman, that while the administration is
working hard to give this message to parents, how important it
is they know where their kids are; on the other hand, we are
looking at deep cuts in after-school. And I wanted to point
that out, because I think those two things are contradictory.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST
I also just wanted to quickly show you the numbers. I know
you know them, but for the record, make it really simple as to
where we are, with your help, again on a bipartisan basis, and
I was able to write the authorization bill with Senator Ensign,
who has a very compelling story about his life as a kid and the
fact that he did not have a dad in the home and that he got in
a lot of trouble as a kid and that he feels very strongly that
our children need to be protected and need to be accounted for.
And he teamed up with me, and we were able to get so much
support. And we are up to the billion-dollar level this year.
The Bush proposal, as you noted, would take this down a huge
amount, 40 percent. That means the number of children kicked
out of the program, 570,000. So, I mean, if you hold up, again,
that first chart, Liz--thank you for being such a wonderful
helper--we are going to have 570,000 kids, if we do not do
something about that number, who are now unaccounted for. It
makes things worse.
Now, the next chart I wanted to show you is where we should
be under the Leave No Child Left Behind Act, which our
President signed and we all, so many of us, supported. Under
that bill, we should be, in 2004, at 1.75 billion. And, again,
taking that where it is, it will wind up--if we were to fully
fund it, we would be taking care of a 1,600,000 more children.
It is a pretty stark cut, and I think that your
questioning, which I followed closely, and your prodding, was
essentially this is a pretty deep cut when we do not really
have the final studies.
And, Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to place
my entire statement in the record, and I am going to----
Senator Specter. Without objection, it will be made a part
of the record.
Senator Boxer [continuing]. And I am going to try to finish
this in 1 or 2 minutes at the most.
L.A.'S BEST AND SACRAMENTO START: AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
I have gone all over the State to look at these programs,
from L.A.'s BEST to Sacramento START. Those are very large
programs. There are also smaller programs. And I have seen the
kids, and I see the look in their faces, and I talk to their
parents. And I know what these programs have meant to these
families. Our studies show the kids do better. But you know
what, Mr. Chairman? You can see. You can see it when you look
at the kids, how good they feel about themselves and how
motivated they are to do their homework, because they have
support there.
I have here two stories. I only have time to read one. And
this is a young man from L.A.'s BEST. Let me make sure I get
the right story. As a first-grader at Langdon Elementary School
in North Hills, Mauricio faced the strong possibility that his
lifestyle would be one of gangs, crimes, drugs, and violence.
Instead, he became one of the first participants in L.A.'s BEST
after-school program when he was in the first grade. Through
L.A.'s BEST, Mauricio came into contact with police officers,
tutors, and others, who gave them an alternative to gang life.
Mauricio continued to be a part of L.A.'s BEST by working at
the Langdon site all through high school. He said: ``I saw a
lot of young people doing drugs and crime and dying when I was
growing up. But today I am the first member of my family to
attend college.'' And after graduation he plans to become a
teacher because: ``Young people need someone to look up to and
someone to help them. I want to give them what people gave to
me.''
So we can talk numbers, and we should, and we must, and we
have to, but this is real. And I know when I talked to you
about this, you really said to me: ``Senator, I want to work
with you on this.'' I hope, Mr. Chairman, through your efforts
and that of Senator Harkin and other Members of the Committee,
that we can take a stand for our children.
PREPARED STATEMENT
And my final word is this. In the 1970s, I had little kids,
and I started to work part-time, and I realized there was no
after-school program. We worked, we set up an after-school
program in the Kentfield Unified School District in a suburban
area. It is still going strong today, and the people think it
is just the best. It is a sliding scale, because some people
can afford to pay more than others. Bottom line, it works for
our children, and that is what our country is really all about.
I thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for your
leadership on this.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Barbara Boxer
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here today.
I would first like to bring to your attention an advertisement
printed in the New York Times yesterday. One arm of the federal
government, the Administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy
agrees that afterschool programs keep kids safe and away from drugs. A
full-page advertisement from the Drug Control Policy Office states that
``kids involved in after school activities are less likely to use
drugs.''
Meanwhile, based on one study on afterschool programs conducted for
the Department of Education, the President's Budget has proposed a $400
million cut to afterschool programs because the President concluded
that afterschool programs do not work .
If Congress goes along with the Administration's proposed funding
cut, 570,000 kids already in programs will be turned out onto the
streets. This deep, unprecedented cut would leave lots of children
behind after school--not just leave them behind, but leave them home
alone or leave them to join a gang.
However, this is not even the full story. In 2001, I teamed up with
Senator John Ensign in offering an amendment to the No Child Left
Behind bill to authorize funding for afterschool programs. It passed
the Senate 60-39--the first afterschool amendment ever to pass the
Senate on a roll call vote.
As enacted, authorized funding for afterschool programs increases
$250 million each year until it reaches $2.5 billion by 2007. This
would cover 4 million kids.
By not funding afterschool programs at the level promised--$1.75
billion--1.6 million children will be left behind [Chart 3]. We cannot
let this happen. A bipartisan letter that I circulated--signed by 3
Democrats and 3 Republicans--was recently sent to you Mr. Chairman,
urging full funding of afterschool programs.
The federal afterschool program is vital to so many children and
families across America. I would like take a moment to share just two
stories of the millions of stories.
As a first grader at Langdon Elementary School in North Hills,
Mauricio faced the strong possibility that his lifestyle would be one
of gangs, crime, drugs and violence. Instead, he became one of the
first participants in LA's BEST afterschool program when he was in the
first grade. Through LA's BEST, Mauricio came into contact with police
officers, tutors and others who gave him an alternative to gang life.
Mauricio continued to be a part of LA's Best by working at the Langdon
site all through high school. Mauricio said, ``I saw a lot of young
people doing drugs and crime and dying [when I was growing up] but
today, I am the first member of my family to attend college.'' After
graduation from college, Mauricio plans to be a teacher because ``young
people need someone to look up to and someone to help them-I want to
give them what people gave to me.''
A second story: Jerry had received several written warnings for his
behavior during the regular school day. During a parent conference, it
was discovered that problems existed at home, too. Jerry was
``hanging'' with gang members and beginning to act like them--and he
was only 10-years old. Rallying their resources, his concerned parents
began to work with the LA's Best site coordinator and school staff to
ensure close supervision of Jerry while he was on the playground (where
his gang member friends would be looking for him). Family counseling
and increased emphasis on academics were also part of the plan. Soon
Jerry was involved in computer and geometry classes, the science club
and the LA's Best sports program, where he led his teams to several
tournaments. LA's Best kept Jerry off the streets and out of a gang.
But it's more than these 2 examples. Dozens of respected,
independent studies--some of them going into great depth and conducted
over many years--confirm that afterschool programs keep children safe,
reduce crime and drug use, and improve academic performance.
For example, an evaluation of the Sacramento START afterschool
program compared students who participated in afterschool programs and
those who did not. Among students who were low performing in reading
and writing on state tests, those who participated in afterschool
programs improved their scores 3 times greater than those who did not
participate.
Mr. Chairman, I have visited some 20 afterschool programs all
around California, from LA's Best to Sacramento Start, to programs in
San Diego and San Francisco, among many others. I have talked with
students, parents, and instructors to understand how to give every
child the best quality experiences after the school bell rings. When
doing so, it is obvious how important afterschool programs are to
keeping our children safe, keeping them out of gangs, and keeping them
off drugs.
As the Senate begins working on this year's appropriations bills, I
hope that you will get us back on track to fully funding afterschool
programs.
Finally, I would like to mention another Californian who has become
a tireless advocate for afterschool programs. Since accepting the
National Chair of ``Lights on Afterschool'' in 2001, Arnold
Swartzeneggar has brought attention to the importance of afterschool
programs throughout California and across country. I am so pleased to
see him here today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Senator Boxer, for
your devotion to this very important cause. We appreciate your
testimony.
Senator Boxer. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it.
Senator Specter. Thank you.
INTRODUCTION OF SECOND-PANEL WITNESSES
We will now turn to our second panel, Mr. Arnold
Schwarzenegger, Mayor John DeStefano, Mr. Harvey Sprafka, Mr.
Steven Kinlock, and Ms. Madison White. If you would all come
forward.
STATEMENT OF ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, NATIONAL CHAIRMAN,
NATIONAL INNER-CITY GAMES FOUNDATION
Senator Specter. As you are being seated, I will introduce
our first witness, Mr. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has appeared
in many blockbuster films, including The Terminator, True Lies,
Kindergarten Cop, Twins, won numerous body-building awards from
Mr. Europe, Junior, to Mr. World, three times winner of the Mr.
Universe competition, and an unprecedented seven-time Mr.
Olympia champion. During President Bush's administration, he
has served as chairman of the President's Council on Physical
Fitness and Sports. He is the founder and national chairman of
the Inner-City Games Foundation, which is currently operating a
program called Arnold's All Stars, an after-school program
offering academic, recreational, and cultural enrichment
programs for middle schools in California. He received his
business degree from the University of Wisconsin.
Mr. Schwarzenegger, thank you for your leadership in this
field, and thank you for joining us today. And thank you for
drawing this big crowd.
Mr. Schwarzenegger. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the subcommittee, it
is an honor to be here today to discuss one of my greatest
passions, improving the lives of children. That is the reason
that I am here today, to advocate for continued funding of the
21st Century Learning Grant Program.
There are many problems in the world today. And given
enough time and my Terminator-like determination, I might be
able to tackle them all. Nevertheless, I have chosen to focus
my time and energy for the past quarter century on our
children, because they are, quite literally, our future.
Ronald Reagan so eloquently told us, ``America is the
shining city on the hill. Welcome all who enter to follow their
dreams.'' There is no greater American dream than to hope that
our children will live a better life. A better life for our
children can only happen with a good education, and educating
our children should not stop at 3 p.m. when the school bell
rings. For millions of American children, this is exactly what
happens.
Law enforcement, teachers, parents, and students know that
between 3 and 6 p.m. is the danger zone for our kids. This is
the time when our children are most likely to become victims of
violent crimes, more likely to use drugs, abuse tobacco and
alcohol, get pregnant, or commit violent crimes themselves.
I was lucky growing up. I had two parents who kept me on
the straight and narrow 24 hours a day. Every day when I came
home, my mother was there to greet me at the door. She sat down
with me, helped me with my homework, made me read out loud
until I got every word just right. Only after my homework was
finished I could go outside, where my dad or a coach would take
over my instruction and take me skiing, sledding, ice skating,
or work on my ice-curling techniques or soccer kick or whatever
sport was in season.
The bottom line is that there was someone there for me 24
hours a day, coaching me, teaching me, mentoring me, telling me
that they loved me, and always reminding me that I can turn any
dream that I have into reality. It was this foundation that
built my self-confidence, enabled me to achieve so much in my
life.
When I came to America in 1968, I had empty pockets, but I
was full of dreams, desire, and determination. I believed that
I could accomplish anything I set my mind to, a belief that has
strengthened with time.
I became the world champion 13 times over. I have made
dozens of successful movies, grossing billions of dollars
worldwide. I became successful in real estate and in the
business world. I took English classes at night until I spoke
and wrote well enough to earn a bachelor degree.
I make these points not to share with you my life's
accomplishments, but, more importantly, to make the point that
none of this, absolutely none of this, would have been possible
without the foundation built by caring parents, coaches, and
other adults early in my life. Because of my experience, I had
every reason to believe that what I had been told all my life
was true, that America is the greatest country in the world and
that America is the land where dreams can come true. I always
said, ``If a little farm boy like me from Austria can make it
in this country, then anyone can make it.''
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON PHYSICAL FITNESS AND SPORTS
Then I had an experience that would change my point of view
forever. In 1990, I was appointed by President George Bush as
chairman of the President's Council on Physical Fitness and
Sports. I visited schools in all 50 States, pumping up the kids
to get them off the couch and to get them into fitness and
sports activities, and all the time spreading the word that
winners stay away from drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. Our fitness
program was a huge success.
NEED FOR AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
But while I was promoting fitness, I saw something that was
disturbing to me. I saw, in the inner cities, too many children
who seemed to have no aspiration, no dreams, and no hope. They
were involved with gangs and drugs, spending their afternoons
hanging around the street corner, shopping malls, video
arcades, often getting into serious trouble. I realized how
wrong I was when I said, ``Everyone in America can turn their
dreams into reality.'' In fact, I used to say, ``Everyone
should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.'' Only I had
to learn that not everyone had boots.
Many of our children are not getting the same foundation I
did as a child. Half of the American children come from a
working single parent and from a family where both parents work
outside the home. Millions of children are left unsupervised
when the bell rings, ending the school day. This takes its toll
on our children, our neighborhoods, and on the moral fabric of
our country.
If our children are our future, our future is in jeopardy
every afternoon between 3 and 6 p.m., when unsupervised
children are roaming the streets.
But it does not have to be this way. After-school programs
can reduce crime, make our streets safer, and improve the lives
of our most vulnerable children. I have seen it work all over
this country.
CREATION OF INNER-CITY GAMES FOUNDATION
I do not believe in talk. I believe in action. And so in
1991, with the help of Danny Hernandez and the Los Angeles
Hollenbeck Youth Center, we started providing after-school
programs for thousands of children in Los Angeles. As a matter
of fact, the program was so successful that, nearly 10 years
ago, I decided to take it national and we created the Inner-
City Games Foundation, which has reached almost 200,000
children in 15 different cities in this country.
ARNOLD'S ALL-STARS
A couple of years ago, we decided to target at-risk junior-
high-school students and started Arnold's All-Stars, a model
after-school program co-chaired by Los Angeles Mayor Jim Hahn
and City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo that is operating
successfully in some of the most disadvantaged middle schools
in Los Angeles County right now.
PROPOSITION 49--CALIFORNIA COMPREHENSIVE AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM
But as Columbine and other school shootings across the
Nation have shown us, troubled children come from all
socioeconomic backgrounds. Every public school that chooses
should have the resources to offer their unsupervised students
a safe, educationally enriching place to go to after school.
With that goal in mind, last year I sponsored Proposition
49, a California statewide ballot initiative that the voters
passed overwhelmingly. I am proud to report to you today that
California is the first State in the Nation to make it possible
for every public elementary and middle school to provide a
comprehensive after-school program.
The support that we have received for the initiative was
unprecedented. We received tremendous support from across the
political spectrum. Hundreds of elected officials endorsed our
initiative, including Republicans such as former Governor and
United States Senator Pete Wilson and Senate Republican Leader
Jim Brulte, and also Democrats such as San Francisco Mayor
Willie Brown and Attorney General Bill Lockyer. Over 80
organizations representing nearly 6 million members joined
together to support California's children--groups as diverse as
the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the National Tax
Limitation Committee, and the California Taxpayers Association,
as well as the California Teachers Association, the California
AARP, and the California PTA, and nearly every law enforcement
organization in the State--endorsed our proposition, which just
goes to show you, when it comes to children, there is no room
for partisan politics.
I agree with President Kennedy, who said, ``Children are
the world's most valuable resource and its best hope for the
future.''
FINDINGS OF STUDIES OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
There are many studies from across this country, which I
have footnoted in my comments. These reports, sponsored by
universities and organizations, looked at various after-school
programs and clearly demonstrated that children that
participate in after-school programs are more likely to stay in
school and graduate, get higher grades, and go on to higher
education, improve their test scores, avoid gang membership, as
well as stay away from violent and dangerous behavior. For
example, studies show that students who did not join an after-
school program were six times more likely to get a criminal
conviction than kids in the same school who participated in
after-school programs. According to a study by the University
of Southern California, being unsupervised after school doubles
the risk an eighth grader will smoke, drink, or abuse drugs.
But crime prevention is not the only benefit. Studies show
that students who participate in after-school programs were
half as likely to drop out of high school, and 2\1/2\ times
more likely to go on to further their education.
COST EFFECTIVENESS OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
After-school programs are cost effective. If run correctly,
they actually save taxpayers dollars. I consider myself
fiscally conservative. Simply throwing taxpayer dollars at a
problem is not the solution. The facts show that investing in
after-school programs makes good financial common sense.
A recent study by the Rose Institute on State and local
Government at California's Claremont McKenna College found that
for every dollar invested in an after-school program by the
State of California, taxpayers saved three dollars by reducing
juvenile arrests, incarceration, grade repetition, and other
costs to society. It costs the State of California under $1,000
a year to provide a comprehensive after-school program for a
child, but over $49,000 a year to incarcerate a juvenile
offender in the California Youth Authority and over a million
dollars a year in direct and indirect costs if a juvenile
becomes a career criminal. Simply put, we can invest in our
children now, or we can pay for it a much higher price later
on.
The benefits of after-school programs are clear. And,
frankly, you do not need a stack of academic studies to come to
that conclusion. Just ask any parent, teacher, or law
enforcement official in your State, and they will tell you that
a child who participates in after-school programs do better in
school and stay out of trouble.
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT
I know that, for most of you here today, I am repeating
what you already know and believe about after-school programs.
President Bush and you, in Congress, have shown your tremendous
commitment to children by passing the No Child Left Behind Act
and for making significant investment in the 21st Century
Community Learning Centers and other federally funded after-
school programs over the last several years. Clearly, you and
your colleagues have recognized the benefits of after-school
programs. I am confident that your recognition of this
opportunity and your continued commitment to provide Federal
funding for after-school programs will, in the full light of
history, prove to be a pivotal decision for our Nation.
Current funding for the 21st Century Learning Centers
provide over 1.2 million kids in 6,800 centers with
educationally enriching and youth-development activities. And
thanks to the changes made by the No Child Left Behind Act,
after-school programs have even greater flexibility because
community-based organization can now run programs.
RESPONSE TO MATHEMATICA, INC. EVALUATION FINDINGS
Recently, some of you may have heard about the first
installment of the 3-year study on the progress of the 21st
Century Community Learning Program. The study found that some
of the after-school programs need improvement. I and others in
the after-school community would agree with some of those
findings. But it would be a big mistake--and let me reiterate,
a big mistake--to use that study as a justification to reduce
current funding levels for after-school programs. Instead of
cutting back the funding for after-school programs, we should
begin to work together to focus on finding ways to improve
them--such as participation.
IMPROVING AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
We need to make sure that kids want to join and want to
stay in an after-school program. These programs are not
mandatory, so kids are reluctant to join an after-school
program they perceive as an extension of the school day. My
experience is that we must offer programs that interest kids,
not just give them study hall or Government-sponsored
babysitting. If we hope to have after-school programs help with
grades and behavior, we must first get the child to participate
in the program.
We must also train after-school program providers to
include the children in the decisionmaking process so that they
feel some ownership. At my Arnold's All-Stars after-school
program, for instance, the kids chose the name of the program,
designed the logo and the T-shirt, and played a role in
deciding what types of activities we offer. And, to date, we
have had almost no dropouts, and we have had a long waiting
list for kids that want to join.
CONTENT
A comprehensive after-school program should include
academics, homework assistance, reading, computer classes, and
language skills, et cetera. But a quality program must include
much more. It should also offer enriching activities, such as
drama, music, physical fitness and other experiences that build
self-esteem, maturity, and social responsibility. Offering a
variety of activities and experiences might give the child that
one spark that excites them about learning and encourages them
to do better in their studies.
The last is accountability. How do you judge if an after-
school program is a success? Today, there are only vague
standards of measurement. The No Child Left Behind Act directs
States to develop performance indicators by which an after-
school program can be evaluated. But many States have yet to
develop them, or use vague standards and need some additional
guidance. 21st Century after-school program providers are eager
for clear standards so that they can judge the success of their
programs. Therefore, we must work together to institute
standards by which a successful after-school program can be
evaluated.
I, for one, believe that after-school programs should be
judged----
Senator Specter. Mr. Schwarzenegger, may I inquire as to
how much longer you will need?
Mr. Schwarzenegger. One minute. Thank you, Senator.
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, 21ST CENTURY AFTER-SCHOOL SUMMIT
I, for one, believe that after-school programs should be
judged not just on how they impact the child, but also how they
impact the parents, our schools, our neighborhoods, our
workforce, and our society. Without such standards, we cannot
truly judge the success of the 21st Century Program or any
other after-school program, and it is understandable that the
Federal Government is having trouble determining if our tax
dollars are being spent wisely.
The good is, is there are a large number of people and
organizations in this country with a great deal of expertise on
how to create and run successful after-school programs. And I
can tell you that those people and organizations are eager to
share their experiences with anyone that is willing to listen.
In that regard, I am pleased to announce to you today that
I am joining the United States Department of Education to
organize a No Child Left Behind, 21st Century After-School
Summit to be held at the Department of Education on June 5 and
6. At that summit, we will bring together the Nation's leaders,
experts, after-school program providers, teachers, principals,
and law-enforcement officials, and professional evaluators to
share their experiences and knowledge on how to build a
comprehensive after-school program.
For many Americans, the family dynamics have changed
dramatically since I was a child. Having a mom and a dad home
every afternoon working on homework with their children or
kicking the soccer ball around is just not a possibility.
The one thing that has not changed are the benefits of
adult supervision that it can bring for the child's life,
whether at home or at a well-run after-school program.
In many ways, I embody the American dream. An immigrant
farm boy who has come to this country with no money and
speaking very little English. Yet I realized every dream that I
dared reach for. My new dream is that every child in America
has the same chance I had.
After-school programs work. Test scores go up, crime rates
go down, and taxpayers save money. Most importantly, after-
school programs offer America's children the chance to realize
their dreams in this land of opportunity.
prepared statement
So thank you, once again, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee, for the vision and support that you have provided
for after-school programs and for this opportunity to testify
before your subcommittee. I look forward to our continued
working together to make certain that no child in America is
left behind. And remember, when it is time for the committee to
consider funding for after-school programs in the next budget
cycle, you can count on one thing: I will be back.
Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Arnold Schwarzenegger
Mr. Chairman and Honorable Members of the Subcommittee: It is an
honor to be here today to discuss one of my greatest passions--
improving the lives of children. That is the reason I am here today to
advocate for continued funding of the 21st Century Learning Grant
Program.
There are many problems in the world today, and given enough time
and my Terminator like determination, I might be able to tackle them
all. Nevertheless, I have chosen to focus my time and energy for the
past quarter century on our children because they are quite literally
our future.
Ronald Reagan so eloquently told us, America is the Shining City on
the Hill--Welcoming all who enter to follow their dreams.
There is no greater American dream than the hope that our children
will live a better life. A better life for our children can only happen
with a good education and educating our children should not stop at
3:00 p.m. when the school bell rings.
For millions of America's children this is exactly what happens.
Law enforcement, teachers, parents and students know that 3-6 p.m.
is the ``danger zone'' for our kids. This is the time when our children
are most likely to become victims of violent crime, more likely to use
drugs, abuse tobacco and alcohol, get pregnant, or commit violent
crimes themselves.
I was lucky growing up. I had two parents who kept me on the
straight and narrow 24 hours a day. Every day when I came home, my
mother was there to greet me at the door. She sat with me, helping me
with my homework, making me read out loud until I got every word just
right.
Only after my homework was finished, could I go outside where my
dad or a coach would take over my instruction and take me skiing,
sledding or work on my ice-curling technique or soccer kick or whatever
sport was in season.
The bottom line is that there was someone there for me 24 hours a
day, coaching me, teaching me, mentoring me, telling me they loved me,
telling me that I could achieve anything I set my mind to, that if I
worked hard enough I could turn any dream into reality.
It was this foundation that built my self confidence and enabled be
me to achieve so much in my life.
When I came to America in 1968, I had empty pockets but I was full
of dreams, desires and determination. I believed I could accomplish
anything I set my mind to--a belief that has strengthened with time.
I became the world bodybuilding champion 13 times over. I have made
dozens of successful movies, grossing billions of dollars worldwide, I
became successful in the real estate and business world, I took English
classes at night until I could speak and write well enough to earn my
Bachelor's degree.
I make these points, not to share with you my life's
accomplishments, but more importantly to make the point that none of
this--NONE OF THIS--would have been possible without the foundation
built by caring parents, coaches and other adults early in my life.
Because of my experience, I had every reason to believe that what I
had been told all my life was true: America is the land of opportunity,
the place where dreams come true. I always said, ``If a farm boy from
Austria can make it, anyone can make it in this country.''
Then I had an experience that would change my point of view
forever. In 1990, I was appointed by President George Bush as Chairman
of the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports.
I visited schools in all fifty states, pumping up the kids to get
them off the couch and get them into sports and fitness all the time
spreading the word that winners stay away from drugs, alcohol and
tobacco. Our fitness program was a huge success, but I saw something
that was very disturbing to me.
I saw too many children who seemed to have no aspirations, no
dreams and no hope. They were involved with gangs and drugs, spending
their afternoons hanging around on the street corner, shopping malls
and video arcades, often getting into trouble.
I realized how wrong I was when I said everyone in America can turn
their dream into reality.
In fact, I used to say, ``Everybody should pull themselves up by
their bootstraps just like I did.'' What I learned is not everybody has
boots. Many of our children are not getting the same foundation I did
as a child.
Half of America's children come from a working single parent or
from a family where both parents work outside the home.
Millions of children are left unsupervised when the bell rings
ending the school day. This takes its toll on our children, our
neighborhoods and on the moral fabric of our Country. If our children
are our future, our future is in jeopardy every afternoon between 3 and
6 p.m. when unsupervised children roam the streets.
But it doesn't have to be this way. After school programs can
reduce crime, make our streets safer and improve the lives of our most
vulnerable children. I have seen it work all over this country.
I don't believe in talk, I believe in action and with the help of
Danny Hernandez and the Los Angeles Hollenbeck Center we started
providing after school programs for thousands of children in Los
Angeles.
The program was so successful that nearly 10 years ago, I decided
to take it national and we created the ``Inner City Games Foundation''
which has reached almost 200,000 children in 15 cities nationwide.
A couple of years ago we decided to target at risk junior high
students and I started ``Arnold's All Stars'', a model after school
program co-chaired by Los Angeles Mayor Jim Hahn and City Attorney
Rocky Delgadillo that is operating successfully in some of the most
disadvantaged middle schools in Los Angeles County.
But, as Columbine and other school shootings across the nation have
shown us, troubled children come from all socio-economic backgrounds.
Every public school that chooses should have the resources to offer
their unsupervised students, a safe, educationally enriching place to
go after school.
With that goal in mind, last year I sponsored Proposition 49, a
California statewide ballot initiative that the voters passed
overwhelmingly. I am proud to report to you today that California is
the first state in the nation to make it possible for every public
elementary and middle school to provide a comprehensive after school
program.
The support we received for the initiative was unprecedented! We
received tremendous support from across the political spectrum.
Hundreds of elected officials endorsed our initiative including
Republicans such as Former Governor, and United States Senator Pete
Wilson and Senate Republican Leader Jim Brulte, to Democrats such as
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and Attorney General Bill Lockyer.
Over 80 organizations, representing nearly 6 million members joined
together to support California's children; groups as diverse as the
Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, the National Tax Limitation
Committee and the California Taxpayers Association, as well as the
California Teachers Association, the California AARP and the California
PTA and nearly every law enforcement organization in the state endorsed
our proposition.
Which just goes to show you: When it comes to children, there is no
room for partisan politics. I agree with, President Kennedy who said,
``Children are the world's most valuable resource and its best hope for
the future.''
There are many studies from across the country, which I have
footnoted in my comments. These reports sponsored by universities and
organizations looked at various after school programs and clearly
demonstrate that children that participate in after school programs are
more likely to stay in school and graduate, get higher grades and go on
to higher education, improve their test scores, avoid gang membership
as well as stay away from violent and dangerous behavior.
For example, studies show that students who did not join an after
school program were six times more likely to get a criminal conviction
than kids in the same school who participated in an after school
program.
According to a study by the University of Southern California,
being unsupervised after school doubles the risk an eight grader will
smoke, drink or abuse drugs.
But crime prevention is only one benefit. Studies show that
students who participate in after school programs were half as likely
to drop out of high school, and two and a half times more likely to go
on to further education.
After school programs are cost effective, if run correctly, they
actually save taxpayer dollars. I consider myself a fiscal
conservative. Simply throwing taxpayer dollars at a problem is not the
solution. The facts show that investing in after school programs makes
good financial common sense.
A recent study by the Rose Institute on State and Local Government
at California's Claremont McKenna College, found that for every $1
invested in after school programs by the State of California, taxpayers
save $3 by reducing juvenile arrests, incarceration, grade repetition,
and other costs to society.
It costs the State of California under $1,000 a year to provide a
comprehensive after school program for a child, but over $49,000 a year
to incarcerate a juvenile offender in the California Youth Authority
and over a million dollars in direct and indirect costs if juveniles
become career criminals. Simply put, we can invest in our children now,
or we can pay a much higher price later on.
The benefits of after school programs are clear--and frankly, you
don't need a stack of academic studies to come to that conclusion. Just
ask any parent, teacher, or police officer in your state and they will
tell you that children who participate in after school programs do
better in school and stay out of trouble.
I know that for most of you here today, I am repeating what you
already know and believe about after school programs. President Bush
and you in Congress showed your tremendous commitment to children by
passing the ``No Child Left Behind Act'' and for making a significant
investment in the ``21st Century Community Learning Centers'' and other
federally funded after school programs over the last several years.
Clearly, you and your colleagues have recognized the benefits of after
school programs.
I am confident that your recognition of this opportunity and your
continued commitment to providing federal funding for after school
programs will, in the full light of history, prove to be a pivotal
decision for our nation.
Current funding for 21st Century Learning Centers programs provide
over 1.2 million kids in 6,800 centers with educational enrichment and
youth development activities. And thanks to changes made by the ``No
Child Left Behind'' act, after school programs have even greater
flexibility because community-based organizations can now run programs.
Recently, some of you may have heard about the first installment of
a three-year study on the progress of the 21st Century Community
Learning Centers Program. The study found that some after school
programs need improvement. I, and others in the after school community,
would agree with some of those findings.
But it would be a mistake to use that study as justification to
reduce current funding levels for after school programs. Instead of
cutting back the funding for after school programs, we should begin to
work together to focus on finding ways to improve them, such as:
Participation.--We need to make sure kids want to join, and want to
stay in an after school program. These programs are not mandatory, so
kids are reluctant to join an after school program they perceive as an
extension of the school day.
My experience is that we must offer programs that interest kids,
not just give them study hall or government-sponsored babysitting. If
we hope to have after school programs help with grades and behavior, we
must first get the child to participate in the program.
We must also train after school program providers to include the
children in the decision making process so that they feel some
ownership. At my ``Arnolds All Stars'' after school program for
instance, the kids chose the name of the program, designed their logo
and t-shirts, and played a role in deciding what types of activities we
offer. To date, we have had almost no dropouts and a have a waiting
list for children who would like to join.
Content.--A comprehensive after school program should include
academics; homework assistance, reading, computer classes, and language
skills, etc. But a quality program must include much more. It should
also offer enriching activities such as drama, music, physical fitness,
computer classes, and other experiences that build self-esteem,
maturity, and social responsibility. Offering a variety of activities
and experiences might give a child that one spark that excites them
about learning and encourages them to do better in their studies.
Accountability.--How do you judge if an after school program is a
success? Today, there are only vague standards of measurement. The ``No
Child Left Behind Act'' directs states to develop ``performance
indicators'' by which an after school program can be evaluated. But
many states have not yet developed them or use vague standards and need
some additional guidance.
21st Century after school program providers are eager for clear
standards so they can judge the success of their programs. Therefore,
we must work together to institute standards by which a successful
after school program can be evaluated.
I for one believe that after school programs should be judged not
just on how they impact the child, but also how they impact parents,
our schools, our neighborhoods, our workforce, and our society.
Without such standards, we cannot truly judge the success of the
21st Century Program, or any after school program, and it is
understandable that the federal government is having trouble
determining if our tax dollars are being spent wisely.
The good news is that there are a large number of people and
organizations in this country with a great deal of expertise on how to
create and run a successful after school program. And I can tell you
that those people and organizations are eager to share their
experiences with anyone that will listen.
In that regard, I am pleased to announce to you today that I am
joining with the United States Department of Education to organize a
``No Child Left Behind, 21st Century After School Summit'' to be held
at the Department of Education on June 5 and 6.
At that Summit, we will bring together the nation's leading
experts, after school program providers, teachers, principals, parents,
law enforcement officials, and professional evaluators to share their
experiences and knowledge on how to build a comprehensive, fun, and
academically enriching after school program that encourages student
participation. In addition, we will establish performance and
accountability standards.
For many Americans the family dynamic has changed dramatically
since I was a child. Having a mom or dad at home every afternoon
working on homework with their children or kicking the soccer ball
around is just not a possibility.
The one thing that has not changed in the past forty years are the
benefits adult supervision can bring to a child's life, whether at home
or at a well run after school program.
In many ways, I embody the American dream: an immigrant farm boy
who came to this country with no money and speaking very little
English. Yet, I realized every dream I dared reach for. My new dream is
that every child in America has the same chance I had.
After school programs work. Test scores go up, crime rates go down
and taxpayers save money. Most importantly, after school programs offer
America's children the chance to realize their dreams in this land of
opportunity.
Thank you once again Mr. Chairman and members of the committee for
the vision and support you have provided for after school programs and
for this opportunity to testify before your Subcommittee. I look
forward to our continued work together to make certain that no child in
America is left behind. And remember, when it's time for the Committee
to consider funding for after school programs in the next budget cycle
you can count on one thing--I'll be back.
I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
EVALUATIONS OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Policy Studies Associates, Inc. ``What Have We Learned From TASC's
First Three Years: An Evaluation of the TASC After-School Program''
December 2002
Pennsylvania State University Prevention Research Center
``Generacion Diez: After-school Learning Program for Migrant Children
Upper Adams School District'' Evaluation Report: September 17, 2002
SCISN (School Community Integrated Services Network) Evaluation
Committee ``Milwaukee Public Schools 21st Century Community Learning
Centers 2001-02''
UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation ``A Decade of Results: The
Impact of the LA's BEST After School Enrichment Program on Subsequent
Student Achievement and Performance'' June 2000
St. John's University ``Outcomes Assessment Report of the 2001
Summer NY ICG Camp-US Program''
Educational Research Services, Inc. ``South Florida Inner-City
Games (SGICG) After-School Program Evaluation'' Final Report for the
2001-2002 School Year, July, 2002
FORMER SENATOR RUSSELL LONG
Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Mr. Schwarzenegger,
for those very passionate and profound remarks.
We do not have some Senators here today because they are
attending the funeral of former Senator Russell Long, which is
being held this morning.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SHRIVER FAMILY
With Mr. Schwarzenegger's testimony, I would like to
recognize the presence of his wife, Ms. Maria Shriver, and her
mother, Mrs. Eunice Shriver, and Sargent Shriver, former
director of the Peace Corps and nominee for the vice presidency
in 1972 on the Democratic ticket. Thank you for joining us.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN DeSTEFANO, JR., MAYOR, NEW
HAVEN, CT
Senator Specter. Our next witness is Mayor John DeStefano,
in his fifth term as mayor of New Haven, CT, and president of
the National League of Cities. He has a master's degree in
public administration from the University of Connecticut, where
he also earned his undergraduate degree in political science.
Thank you for joining us, Mayor DeStefano, and we look forward
to your testimony.
Mr. DeStefano. Mr. Chairman, thanks for doing this. Thanks
for what you have been doing and for giving kids the
opportunity to keep doing it.
I am proud to be here as mayor of New Haven, president of
the National League of Cities, representing 18,000 cities and
towns. More important to me, however, are 5,000 New Haven
public-school children who will be attending after-school
community learning centers later today, part of nearly 1.3
million children nationally.
Now, I am not just the mayor and president of the League; I
am also a member of the school board in New Haven. I appoint
the school board. It is part of my city budget. One of my boys
graduated from the school district last year. My other boy is a
junior in high school. Both participated in the public school's
after-school program.
Now, I learned something growing up in New Haven, and that
was to believe in a level playing field, the idea that we
should all get the chance to finish the race. But we all know,
those that have been around awhile, that not everybody starts
the race at the same place. The fact is, most of my poor
learners who graduate from one of my eight high schools were
poor learners in kindergarten. They started out behind, and we
spent the next 12 years trying to catch them out.
Another thing that I have seen that is clear is that when
kids' circles extend from their immediate family and from their
church to broader communities of neighborhood and schools,
lights begin to go out in some of their eyes, and there emerges
a certain predictability about what is going to happen in those
kids' lives, or, I should say, what is not going to happen.
After-school programming is a choice for America to make, whose
meaning in these lives of kids cannot be understated, and I see
it every day in my community.
ACCESS TO AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Federal after-school programming is only part of the story,
and I appreciated Mr. Whitehurst's points about motivation,
background, and interest of kids. In point of fact, the largest
issue is access for kids to these kinds of programs.
Most of us have rich environments. I have eight high
schools. Last Thursday, I was in a meeting, and the track team,
the girls' track team, from one of them arrived at my office
unannounced. And, of course, I interrupted what I was doing.
The issue there was, these were kids who believed in
themselves, in each other, and what they were doing, and they
felt something about themselves that was powerful and good.
Three years ago, the city started a Junior ROTC program,
something I thought never would have been possible, in our
northeastern city 10 years ago. To see 150 kids in their
colors, different colors than gang colors, standing up is truly
powerful.
COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS
Community learning centers are part of our landscape, as
well, whether it is the Davis Street 21st Century Marching
Band, third and fifth graders in Connecticut's only elementary-
school marching band, or really what we spend most of our time
doing, after-school tutorials. Seventy-six percent of our
programs focus directly on literacy and math skills, being able
to compete academically on State standardized testing. Forty
percent of our kids come from households where English is the
second language. Among our largest cohort of kids, 80 percent
report improvement in achievement, turning in their homework on
time, participating in class. Eighty-eight percent reported
improvement in attendance. Eight-five percent reported
improvement in behavior. I appreciate studies. I like studies.
I am telling you it has happened.
THE KNUCKLEHEAD-HARD HEAD PROGRAM
Now, there are other choices for after-school activity.
There is the Knucklehead-Hardhead Program. New Haven has
experienced, over the last decade, a 55 percent reduction in
crime. Last year, in 2002, we had the lowest number of murders
since 1960. However, last week, in one of my quietest
neighborhoods, teenagers were involved in a shooting. One of
them was a high school student. It happened, gee, guess at what
time? 3:15. You want to know what time high school lets out in
New Haven? 2:35. That is the Knucklehead-Hardhead choice that
we are presented in the absence of these kinds of programs. I
would also point out that recently New Haven was denied a 21st
Century grant due to a lack of funding.
I would say three things to you. I think America depends
upon a balance, and that balance is a set of obligations and
protections we extend to one another and that there is a
connection between the past and the present in this country,
and between the present and the future, and that we who are
Americans, in large measure, are shaping the future by what we
do today, what we believe today, and what we aspire to be for
tomorrow.
You know, every road I travel on in this country was paved
by someone else, not me. The flight I took to get here to
Washington was through facilities paid for by people I do not
know. I like to think that when I went to the University of
Connecticut, I paid for my own tuition. But you know what? So
did every other taxpayer in the State of Connecticut share in
paying that tuition for me. In my honest moments, I know where
I came from, I know whose shoulders I stand on, and I know that
any of us who ever got anywhere are standing on a lot of those
shoulders.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET SUPPORT FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING CENTERS
The second thing I know is that this is part of the Federal
Government's job, because it is everybody's job to care about
these kids and what they do. I am particularly concerned about
the part of this program that sends the money to the State, 45
of the 50 States, running about $80 billion in budget deficits,
doing things like Connecticut is doing, which is shifting the
burden of financing local education, and we all know lots of
other things, to localities, eliminating choices for these
kids.
Finally, I will say this is--on behalf of the National
League of Cities and the mayor and I want to say it clearly, I
urge the Congress to support the 21st Century Community
Learning Centers at the levels authorized in No Child Left
Behind. Many of us who run the school district are concerned
about the expectations of No Child Left Behind being unable to
be reconciled with the funding that is being provided. That is
the choice. Knuckleheads or academic warriors, hardheads or
musicians; talk or leadership.
prepared statement
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership and
the other members of the panel's leadership on this issue.
Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of John DeStefano
Good Morning Chairman Specter, Ranking Member Harkin and members of
the Subcommittee. I am John DeStefano, Mayor of New Haven, Connecticut.
Today, I am pleased to be here as the President of the National League
of Cities.
The National League of Cities represents 18,000 cities and towns
and over 140,000 local elected officials. NLC represents all cities
regardless of size from New York City to Bee Cave, Texas. I appreciate
the opportunity to speak to you today about the importance of
Afterschool programs to the overall success and growth of a community.
Let me begin by highlighting a few key points about our position on
and approach to afterschool programs:
--Local leaders play a critical role in coordinating afterschool
programs.
--The National League of Cities is committed to providing support and
guidance to city officials in carrying out that role through it
Institute on Youth, Education, and Families.
--All kids should have access to quality afterschool programming.
--A continued federal financial commitment to supporting quality
afterschool programs is essential.
afterschool programs in the community
Later this afternoon, 1.3 million students will leave their
academic classrooms to afterschool programs. The afterschool program
will provide these children with a safe, nurturing atmosphere with
adult supervision. Students will participate in a broad array of
activities all intended to advance the student's academic achievement,
enhance socialization skills and contribute to a positive lifestyle.
Mathematic and science education activities, tutoring services and
ESL education programs are predominant in communities struggling for
academic success. Communities with high drop-out rates and truancy
problems sponsor programs intended to keep kids in school, off-drugs
and motivated towards academic achievement. To enhance a student's self
esteem and stimulate his or her creativity and desire to learn,
afterschool programs offer cultural enrichment activities such as
drama, art and music lessons. Mentoring and parent involvement
activities are typical components of afterschool programs.
A solid, well-managed and sufficiently funded afterschool program
can provide numerous benefits to a city. Programs not only improve a
child's academic achievement, but also keep that child safe and off the
streets from 3-6 PM when most juvenile crime takes place. Afterschool
programs are essential to working families with child care needs.
According to a recent report by the Afterschool Alliance ``Closing the
Door on Afterschool Programs: An Analysis of How the Proposed Cut to
the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program Will Affect
Children and Families in Every State'' afterschool participants get
better grades, attend school more and behave better. The report also
notes that students who spend no time in extracurricular activities are
49 percent more likely to use drugs and 37 percent more likely to
become teen parents than those who spend one to four hours per week in
extracurricular activities.
The U.S. Department of Labor reports that the parents of more than
28 million school-age children work outside of the home. Often a low-
income, single parent struggling to make ends meet is the head of a
family in need of afterschool services. The National League of Cities
believes that all working parents deserve to have the piece of mind of
knowing their children are being cared for in a safe, nurturing and
motivating environment during afterschool hours.
Better-educated kids, hard-working parents and safe streets
contribute to a community's success and vitality. Funding for
afterschool programs is an investment in the city or town's future and
can assist in reducing local expenditures. Youngsters will be involved
in a productive activity that discourages risky behavior such as drug
abuse, sexual activity and petty crime. A city that is child friendly
will experience greater investment and growth. Businesses are more
likely to move into a community that has a track record of providing
exemplary services to all its citizens, especially the younger ones.
The cost savings to a city will make a difference as juvenile crime
rates plummet and demands on the local police force and the public
safety system are alleviated. Fewer teen girls will become moms and
therefore will complete high school and possibly go on to post-
secondary education. Savings will be realized in welfare and social
service programs and benefits will be derived from a more educated
workforce.
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES COMMITMENT TO CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES
The National League of Cities (NLC) recognizes that municipal
officials can and do play an integral role in local efforts to promote
and coordinate programs and services that benefit children and working
families. The NLC Institute for Youth, Education, and Families (YEF
Institute) was launched in January 2000 as a special place to
strengthen the capacity of municipal leaders to enhance the lives of
children, youth, and families.
The YEF Institute seeks to support and build upon the many roles
that local elected officials and municipal governments can play to
improve the outcomes for children and families. The YEF Institute
focuses on five core program areas:
--Education
--Youth Development
--Early Childhood Development
--Safety of Children and Youth
--Family Economic Security
One of the Institute's education projects focuses on the
afterschool time needs of children and youth. The goal of the Municipal
Leadership for Expanded Learning Opportunities project is to increase
the availability and improve the quality of expanded learning
opportunities for children and youth in urban communities. The
centerpiece of the project's activities is an intensive, 30-month
technical assistance effort to help eight cities develop and implement
strategies for expanding learning opportunities during the non-school
hours within their communities. The eight cities are: (1) Charlotte,
North Carolina; (2) Fort Worth, Texas; (3) Fresno, California; (4)
Grand Rapids, Michigan; (5) Indianapolis, Indiana; (6) Lincoln,
Nebraska; (7) Spokane, Washington; and (8) Washington, DC.
There are three objectives for this project:
--Provide support to cities to deepen and enhance the involvement of
municipal leaders around expanded learning opportunities during
the afterschool hours;
--Broaden awareness among municipal officials of the diverse roles
they can play to stimulate and support expanded learning
opportunities;
--Develop a range of publications and related materials to assist
municipal leaders as they seek to improve the afterschool
programs in their communities.
federal financial commitment to afterschool programs
The National League of Cities calls upon the Federal government to
continue its partnership with the states and local governments in
providing quality afterschool programs through the U.S. Department of
Education's 21st Century Community Learning Centers initiative (21st
CCLC). 21st Century funds provide communities a solid foundation to
build and expand successful afterschool programs.
As you know the No Child Left Behind Act authorized funding for
21st CCLC through 2007. However, the funding levels have remained
stagnant and have not been supported in the 2002 and 2003
appropriations bill. If Congress appropriated $1.5 billion as
authorized for 2003, an estimated 2.1 million children will have been
able to participate in afterschool. Unfortunately, only an estimated
1.4 million afterschool slots were available this year because Congress
provided only $993.5 million, leaving too many children without a
secure place to continue learning when the school bell rings.
Most devastating to states and cities is the Administration's
proposal to slash the funding for 21st Century Community Learning
Center program budget by 40 percent in the fiscal year 2004 budget. If
this proposal is enacted, approximately 550, 000 students nationwide
will lose access to afterschool programs. The authorized level for 2004
is $1.75 billion, which would provide afterschool slots for 2.5 million
kids.
Presently, in my State of Connecticut 14, 343 children are enrolled
in afterschool programs supported by 21st CCLC funds. If the
Administration's proposal goes into effect only 8481 students will be
able to participate, leaving 5862 Connecticut youngsters behind.
Recently, New Haven Public Schools were denied a 21st Century Grant due
to a lack of sufficient funding. Our current afterschool grant runs out
in May of 2004.
Due to the success and popularity of afterschool programs demand
has outpaced the supply. Among 32 states reporting 2002 grant data, 76
percent of applicants funding requests were denied. A total of $192.9
million in funds were allocated to these states, but there were a total
of $793.3 million in requests from communities that want afterschool
funding.
Mr. Chairman, along with the real need for quality afterschool
programs, there is widespread public support for funding of afterschool
programs. The 2002 Nationwide Poll of Registered Voters on Afterschool
Programs found that nine in ten voters (90 percent) believe that there
is a need for some type of organized activity where children can go
after school everyday that provides opportunities to learn. More than
70 percent of voters believe afterschool programs are an absolute
necessity for their communities.
It is clear that an overwhelming number of Americans support
funding for Afterschool.
CONCLUSION
A continued federal commitment to Afterschool programs will help
continue to build on current afterschool successes. This is a long-term
investment with long-term pay-offs. Local governments are committed to
provide quality afterschool services in their communities and we ask
the committee to fully fund 21st Century Community Learning Centers at
$1.75 billion as authorized in ``No Child Left Behind''.
Thank you.
Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Mayor. I might note
parenthetically that I spent 3 enjoyable years in your city.
STATEMENT OF HARVEY SPRAFKA, CHIEF OF POLICE,
KNOXVILLE, IA
Senator Specter. Our next witness is Chief Harvey Sprafka
of the Knoxville, IA, Police Department, held that position in
the department since 1975, and chief since 1995, bachelor's
degree from Moorhead State College in Minnesota, and a 1973
graduate of the Brown Institute, and a 1983 graduate of the
Iowa Law Enforcement Academy.
Thank you for joining us, Chief, and we look forward to
your testimony.
May I say to the students who are standing back there,
there are chairs here if you want to come up and sit along the
side. You get a better view of Mr. Schwarzenegger if you come
up here.
Those of you who run out of chairs along the side, can
sit--come on up, come on up--can sit in the Senator seats.
You may proceed, Chief.
Mr. Sprafka. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today about the important decision you must make in
determining the fiscal year 2004 appropriation level for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers after-school program.
Mr. Chairman, I will summarize my more lengthy written
statement and ask that it be included in the hearing record.
Senator Specter. Your full statement will be made a part of
the record, without objection.
Mr. Sprafka. My name is Harvey Sprafka. I have been in law
enforcement since 1975, and I have spent the past 8 years as
the chief of police in Knoxville, IA.
FIGHT CRIME: INVEST IN KIDS
I am here today on behalf of more than 2,000 police chiefs,
sheriffs, prosecutors, and victims of violence who are members
of the organization Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. Our mission is
to take a hard-nosed look at the research that shows what
really works to keep kids from becoming criminals.
First of all, we believe there is no substitute for tough
law enforcement. But those of us in the front line also know
that we will never be able to arrest and prosecute and imprison
our way out of the problem of crime. And once a crime has been
committed, we cannot undo the agony felt by the crime victim,
nor repair that victim's shattered life. We can save lives,
hardship, and money by investing in programs that give the kids
the right start in life.
When the school day ends, turning millions of kids out onto
the streets with neither constructive activities, nor adult
supervision, violent juvenile crime soars. Again, the prime
time for violent juvenile crime is from 3 to 6 p.m. These are
also the peak hours on school days for innocent kids to become
victims of crime and at-risk behaviors. In one study, high
school freshmen were randomly selected from welfare families to
participate in the Quantum Opportunities 4-year after-school
and graduation incentive program. Six years later, boys left
out of the program average six times more criminal convictions
than those in the program. Every $1 invested in this program
has produced $3 in benefits to Government and the recipients.
That does not even count the savings that result from a lowered
crime rate. Numerous other studies show similar reductions in
delinquency and cost savings, as well as improved academic
achievement.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 21ST CCLC PROGRAM BUDGET PROPOSAL
As you know, there is a proposal to cut the funding for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers Program by 40 percent
next year. The reason for this cut was a recent study of the
program's first few years showing it is in need of some
improvement. But it does not make sense to cut funding for
after-school programs after the findings of just one
preliminary study. The study, which did show academic
improvement for African American and Hispanic students, should
instead be used as a tool to help improve the quality and
accountability of after-school programs.
So what we need to do is look at the after-school models
that have had very positive research results, like Quantum
Opportunities, and work to replicate those models through the
21st Century Community Learning Centers program. Fight Crime:
Invest in Kids is ready and willing to work with this
subcommittee on any appropriations bill or report language for
fiscal year 2004 needed to make that happen.
BENEFITS OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
As I mentioned earlier, I have been in law enforcement for
28 years. Sixteen of those years, I served as Knoxville's
school liaison officer working with school children in grades K
through 12. Since 1993, the Knoxville VA Child Care Center and
the Knoxville Community District have jointly operated a
before- and after-school program.
Two of my three grandchildren participate in the after-
school program, and a third grandchild attends the VA Child
Care Center's daycare program.
It has been my experience that most children who commit
delinquent acts are left unsupervised during after-school
hours. That is frequently when we receive reports of vandalism,
thefts, and disorderly conduct.
That is not just my view. Polling shows law enforcement
leaders around the country understand that investments in
after-school programs really do make a difference, and national
and State law enforcement associations have passed resolutions
supporting investments in after-school activities.
In recent years, Congress has also realized the need for
after-school programs, increasing funding significantly. For
that, I thank you. But it is not enough. On a regular basis,
more than 10 million children and teens are unsupervised after
school. Last year, 75 percent of the funds requested for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers grants had to be turned
down due to a lack of funds. Instead of cutting funding for
after-school programs, Congress should be finding a way to
bring the 21st Century closer to the level of $1.75 billion
promised just last year in the No Child Left Behind Act. Every
day that we fail to invest adequately in quality after-school
programs, we increase the risk that you or someone you love
will fall victim to violence.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Our choice is quite simple. We can either send our children
to after-school programs that will teach them good values and
skills, or we can entrust them to the after-school teachings of
someone like Jerry Springer, violent video games, or, worse
yet, the streets.
Thank you, once again, for this opportunity.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Harvey Sprafka
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today about the important decision you must make
in determining the fiscal year 2004 Appropriations level for the 21st
Century Community Learning Centers after-school program.
My name is Harvey Sprafka. I've been in law enforcement since 1975,
and I've spent the past 8 years as the chief of police in Knoxville,
Iowa. I am also a member of the anti-crime group Fight Crime: Invest in
Kids, which is made up of more than 2,000 police chiefs, sheriffs,
prosecutors and victims of violence from across the country who have
come together to take a hard-nosed look at the research about what
really works to keep kids from becoming criminals.
There is no substitute for tough law enforcement. But once a crime
has been committed, we can't undo the agony felt by the crime victim or
repair that victim's shattered life. Those of us on the front line in
the fight against crime understand that we'll never be able to just
arrest, try and imprison our way out of the crime problem. We can save
lives, hardship--and money--by investing in programs that give kids the
right start in life.
The members of Fight Crime: Invest in Kids have come together to
issue a ``School and Youth Violence Prevention Plan'' that lays out
four types of programs that research proves--and law enforcement
knows--can greatly reduce crime. The plan calls for more investments in
quality after-school programs, quality preschool and child care
programs, services that effectively treat and prevent child abuse and
neglect, and activities that get troubled kids back on track before
it's too late.
I am here today to talk about the first of those points--after-
school programs.
In the hour after the school bell rings, violent juvenile crime
soars and the prime time for juvenile crime begins. The peak hours for
such crime are from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. These are also the weekday hours
during which children are most likely to become victims of crime, be in
an automobile accident, have sex, smoke, drink alcohol, or use drugs.
After-school programs can cut crime immediately by keeping kids
safe and out of trouble during these dangerous hours. They can also cut
later crime by helping participants develop the values and skills they
need to become good, contributing citizens. For example, in one study,
students whose families were on welfare were randomly divided into two
groups when they started high school. One group was enrolled in the
Quantum Opportunities after-school program, which provided tutoring,
mentoring, recreation, and community service programs and some monetary
incentives to keep attendance up. The second group was left out of the
program. When studied two years after the four-year program ended, the
group of boys left out of the program had six times more convictions
for crimes than those boys provided with the program.
In addition to saving lives, after-school programs save money. The
Quantum Opportunities Program produced benefits to the public of more
than $3 for every dollar spent on it, without even counting the savings
from reductions in crime. Numerous other studies show similar
reductions in delinquency and cost-savings, as well as improved
academic achievement.
The 21st Century Community Learning Centers program is critical to
helping communities across the country offer after-school activities to
young people. As you know, there is a proposal to cut funding for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers program by 40 percent next
year. The reason for this cut was a recent study of the program's first
few years showing it is in need of some improvement. But it doesn't
make sense to cut funding for after-school programs after the findings
of just one preliminary study. We know that quality after-school
programs can significantly reduce the chances that a child will commit
a crime now or in the future. The new 21st Century Community Learning
Centers study, which did show academic improvement for African-American
and Hispanic students, should be used as a tool to help improve the
quality and accountability of after-school programs.
One area for improvement highlighted by the study is the ability of
programs to attract and retain students for regular participation. It
seems that many of the programs were spending a large portion of the
afternoon in what is basically a study hall. Kids don't want to go to
more school at the end of the regular school day. Fun activities--not
study halls--can lure kids into a program and enable them to
participate in activities that will make them safer, healthier, more
academically successful, and less likely to become criminals.
So, what we need to do is look at the after-school models that have
had very positive research results (like Quantum Opportunities) and
work to replicate those models through the 21st Century Community
Learning Centers program. Fight Crime: Invest in Kids stands ready to
work with this Subcommittee on any appropriations bill or report
language for fiscal year 2004 needed to make that happen.
As mentioned earlier, I have been in law enforcement for 28 years.
Sixteen of those years I served as Knoxville's School Liaison Officer,
now commonly known as School Resource Officer. In that position I
worked with school children in grades K-12. Also during that time I
investigated all reported cases of child sex abuse and child abuse for
the Knoxville Police Department.
Since 1993 the Knoxville VA Child Care Center and the Knoxville
Community School District have jointly operated a Before and After
School Program. Two of my three grandchildren participate in the after-
school program and a third grandchild attends the VA Child Care
Center's day care program.
It has been my experience that most children who commit delinquent
acts are left unsupervised during after-school hours. That is
frequently when we receive reports of vandalism, thefts, and disorderly
conduct.
This is not just my view: Law enforcement understands that
investments in after-school programs really do make a difference.
Dozens of state and national law enforcement associations have adopted
resolutions highlighting the crime-fighting importance of after-school
programs, including the National Sheriffs Association, the Major Cities
Chiefs, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the
Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of Attorneys
General and the National District Attorneys Association, as well as the
Iowa Police Executive Forum, the Iowa State Sheriffs' and Deputies'
Association, and the Iowa County Attorneys Association.
This overwhelming support is demonstrated in polls of law
enforcement officials. A nationwide poll of police chiefs, sheriffs and
prosecutors conducted by George Mason University professors last year
showed that 85 percent of those polled believed that expanding after-
school programs and educational child care would greatly reduce youth
crime and violence.
The law enforcement leaders were also asked which of the following
strategies they thought was most effective in reducing youth violence:
(1) providing more after-school programs and educational child care;
(2) prosecuting more juveniles as adults; (3) hiring more police
officers to investigate juvenile crime; or (4) installing more metal
detectors and surveillance cameras in schools.
Expanding after-school and educational child care was picked as the
top choice by more than four to one over any other option. In fact,
more law enforcement leaders chose ``expanding after-school programs
and educational child care'' as ``most effective'' in reducing crime
than chose the other three strategies combined.
In recent years Congress has also realized the need for after-
school programs, increasing funding significantly. For that I thank
you. But it isn't enough. On a regular basis, more than 10 million
children and teens are unsupervised after school. Last year, 75 percent
of the funds requested for 21st Century Community Learning Centers
grants had to be turned down due to a lack of funds.
Instead of cutting funding for after-school programs, Congress
should be finding a way to bring the 21st Century Community Learning
Centers program closer to the level of $1.75 billion promised just last
year in the No Child Left Behind Act. Every day that we fail to invest
adequately in quality after-school programs, we increase the risk that
you or someone you love will fall victim to violence.
Our choice is simple: we can either send our children to after-
school programs that will teach them good values and skills, or we can
entrust them to the after-school teachings of Jerry Springer, violent
video games, or worse yet, the streets.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify today about the crime-
prevention benefits of after-school programs. I am happy to answer any
questions you may have.
Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Chief Sprafka, for
your testimony.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN KINLOCK, STUDENT, THE PREPARATORY
CHARTER SCHOOL FOR MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, AND CAREERS, PHILADELPHIA, PA
Senator Specter. We turn now to Mr. Steven Kinlock, a 12th-
grade student at Preparatory Charter School for Math, Science,
and Technology in Philadelphia. He has served on the yearbook
committee, was team manager for men's basketball, and vice
president of the student council.
Thank you for joining us, Mr. Kinlock, and we look forward
to your testimony.
Mr. Kinlock. Thank you for having me.
Good afternoon, Chairman Specter and subcommittee. My name
is Steven Kinlock. I am a senior at the Preparatory Charter
High School of Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Careers in
Philadelphia, PA.
My school has been the proud recipient of a 21st Century
Community Learning Centers grant. 21st Century grants funds
have allowed me numerous opportunities that I never could have
experienced at any other high school. As a senior, I attended
the Community College of Philadelphia and took four college-
credit courses. This proved to be an invaluable experience for
me, for I feel that I am now far better equipped to make the
transition from high school to college.
During my 4 years at Prep Charter, our 21st Century program
allowed me to receive SAT preparation and even paid the fees
for taking the test. I cannot begin to measure the value of the
after-school tutoring and mentoring programs I have enjoyed for
these past 4 years.
As of this date, I have been accepted to 10 colleges and
universities, including the Fashion Institute of Technology,
Morgan State University, Virginia State University, Widener
University, Virginia Union State University, Voorhees
University, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Paine
University, California University of Pennsylvania, and Penn
State University.
Years ago, I would never have dreamed I would actually have
the dilemma of choosing which college to attend. I truly
believe that I could not have achieved this level in my high
school academic career were it not for the after-school support
and nurturing environment provided to me by the 21st Century
Program sponsored by Foundations, Incorporated, and Prep
Charter High.
My grades and test scores saw a steady increase. I received
assistance with my homework and worked on academic content
crucial to my day-in-school success. High standards remained
the same, but the after-school hands-on approach was a great
style for enhancing my learning experiences.
These after-school programs have provided many of my
friends and me with meaningful academic cultural activities,
have kept us off the streets, and have given us a positive
direction in life. Through the support of these programs, we
have come to believe we can do it, we can succeed.
PREPARED STATEMENT
On behalf of Prep Charter students and all the children who
participate in the 21st Century Learning Program, I thank you
and ask for your continued support and funding. This is a
program that makes a difference.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Steven Kinlock
Good morning Senator Specter and Members of the Subcommittee on
After-School Programs.
My name is Steven Kinlock. I am a senior at the Preparatory Charter
High School of Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Careers in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. My school has been the proud recipient of a
21st Century Community Learning Centers grant. Twenty-first Century
grant funds have allowed me numerous opportunities that I never could
have experienced at any other school. As a senior, I attended the
Community College of Philadelphia and took four college credit courses.
This proved to be an invaluable experience for me for I feel that I am
far better equipped to make the transition from high school to college.
During my four years at Prep Charter, our 21st Century program
allowed me to receive S.A.T. preparation, and even paid my fees for
taking the test. I cannot begin to measure the value of the after-
school tutoring and mentoring programs I have enjoyed for these past
four years.
As of this date, I have been accepted to ten colleges and
universities, including the Fashion Institute of Technology, Morgan
State University, Virginia State University, Widener University,
Virginia Union State University, Voorhees University, Indiana
University of Pennsylvania, Paine University, California University of
Pennsylvania, and Penn State University.
Years ago, I would never have dreamed that I would actually have
the dilemma of choosing WHICH college to attend. I truly believe that I
could not have achieved this level in my high school academic career
were it not for the after-school support and nurturing environment
provided to me by the 21st Century program sponsored by FOUNDATIONS,
Inc. and Prep Charter High.
My grades and test scores saw a steady increase. I received
assistance with my homework and worked on academic content crucial to
my day-school success. High standards remained the same but the after-
school, hands-on approach was a great style for enhancing my learning
experiences.
These after-school programs have provided many of my friends and me
with meaningful academic and cultural activities, have kept us off the
streets, and have given us a positive direction in life. Through the
support of these programs, we have come to believe that WE CAN DO IT!!!
WE CAN SUCCEED!!
On behalf of all Prep Charter students and all of the children who
participate in 21st Century Learning Programs, I thank you and ask for
your continued support and funding. This IS a program that makes a
difference.
Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Mr. Kinlock, for
those very cogent words.
STATEMENT OF MADISON WHITE, STUDENT, MASSILLON PUBLIC
SCHOOLS, MASSILLON, OH
Senator Specter. Our final witness is Ms. Madison White,
fourth-grade student at York Elementary School in Massillon,
OH. She attends the Tigers Den 21st Century Community Learning
Center program every day after school.
Thank you for joining us, Ms. White, and we look forward to
your testimony.
Ms. White. Hello, my name is Madison White. I am 9 years
old, from Massillon, OH.
First, I would like to thank you for allowing me to come to
Washington, DC, to speak to you about my very important
everyday life.
I would like to tell you how important the 21st Century
after-school program has been to me, as a student. It allows me
to have many educational opportunities that I might not have.
For example, I get to go to Six Flags Amusement Park to learn
about physics. Last summer, I went to Stan Hywet Hall and
Gardens in Akron, Ohio, and learned about Stan Hywet and why he
was an important person in Akron's history. The program also
helps me with my homework. Whenever I have trouble, I know
there is always a teacher who will help me, and all I have to
do is ask.
The activities are fun, too. We tie dye T-shirts. We make
flubber, and we do experiments with dry ice.
I have made many friends in the after-school program, and I
know that a lot of them would be home alone if they did not
have the after-school program. If they were home alone, they
might get into trouble by doing things they were not supposed
to do. The after-school program gives them someplace to go
until their parents get home.
When we first moved to Massillon, my mother enrolled me and
my three brothers in the program so she could work extra hours
so we could have money for extra things. If my mom had to put
us in daycare, we would not be able to afford anything other
than bills.
The first summer we were in the program, Ms. Joseph, the
program coordinator, talked my mom into having me tested for
the gifted program. Now I can do work at the sixth-or seventh-
grade level. Because of this, I now get A's and B's and not
C's.
My brother, Chas, has also benefitted from this program. He
was going to fail first grade, because his reading and math
skills were so low. His teacher told my mom to enroll him in
the summer 21st Century program, because they would help him
with reading. Then the staff of the 21st Century program told
my mom about another reading program. Now Chas is in second
grade, and he can read as well as his classmates.
Another thing I like about the after-school program is we
eat dinner before we go home. Then my mom does not have to cook
and she can spend more time with me and my brothers.
PREPARED STATEMENT
The after-school program is very important to me and my
family. I am asking you not to cut the funding for after-school
programs, because other children should have the same
opportunities that I had. We are your future, so whatever we
put into our community now will help us all later.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Madison White
Hi, my name is Madison White and I am in the 4th grade at York
Elementary School in Massillon, Ohio.
I go to the Tiger's Den 21st Century Community Learning Center
program everyday afterschool. I like it because I get to do and learn
lots of fun stuff.
Everyday when we get there we get free time for thirty minutes, and
we get a snack. When we have free time we can do lots of different
things. We can play games, draw, or read quietly. My favorite thing to
do when I get there is play games with my friends.
After that we have homework time. That helps me a lot. Like the
other day when I was doing my multiplication problems for math, and the
teacher checked it over, and found out I forgot to put a zero on the
end. So the next day I got the question right because my afterschool
teacher checked my homework.
After homework time we either play games or get to learn about fun
things. Right now we're learning about what makes weather, like it
rains, because of all the gases and water in the air. And a few weeks
ago we were learning about our senses, and when we learned about taste
we got to taste lots of different kinds of food, and then when we
learned about touch, we put our hands in bags, and felt lots of
different materials.
We also get to do arts and crafts sometimes. We get to make cool
stuff. Like the other week, we made tie-dyed socks, and this week we're
making flowers out of coffee cans for our moms for Mother's Day.
My favorite part of afterschool is when they read us stories. I
like it because I can picture the stories in my head. Reading is my
favorite subject at school.
Also, I like it because I get to see my friend's afterschool, and
also the teachers are really nice.
We get to do Girls Scouts every Friday too, and my little brothers
do Boy Scouts. They go to Tiger's Den too.
I've been going to the afterschool program since I was in 2nd
grade, and it has helped me a lot. When I first got there I used to do
my homework faster than the other kids. The afterschool teacher told me
I was really smart, and told my mom to get me tested to see how smart I
was. And then after I got tested and it showed I was really smart, the
teachers at my regular school put me in the gifted program. They said I
might even get to graduate from high school early and go to college
early too.
Also, because my little brother goes to Tiger's Den 21st CCLC he
didn't have to stay back. He almost failed first grade, but since he
started going to afterschool, and the teachers helped him so much with
his reading he didn't have to stay back.
I like Tiger's Den because if me and my brothers and my friends
didn't have it, we would have to go home alone afterschool and we
wouldn't get to do all this fun stuff.
CLOSING REMARKS
Senator Specter. Well, thank you very much, Madison, for
that very eloquent statement, especially for someone who is 9
years old. I think you are a good advertisement for the quality
and efficiency and importance of after-school programs.
Thank you, Mr. Steven Kinlock, for your testimony. Very
impressive to be admitted to 10 universities. Have you made up
your mind as to which one you are going to choose?
Mr. Kinlock. No.
Senator Specter. Well, it sounds to me like you have great
choices.
Chief, thank you for coming. I know Senator Harkin would
have wanted to have been here to give you a special Iowa
welcome, but he simply could not be here. And it is very
important for the chiefs of police to be activists on crime-
prevention programs, big part of the job. I focused on that
very heavily when I was DA of Philadelphia. I think it is very,
very important.
Mayor, you come from a unique city. New Haven is one of the
great cities in America, and thank you for coming to testify on
behalf of the National League. And we hear what you have to
say, and your Knuckleheads-Hardheads are good focus points.
Mr. Schwarzenegger, you are a model, beyond any question.
You have a lot of fans. You have even added two new Senators to
the roles of the U.S. Senate.
Anybody have anything they would like to say in conclusion?
I think we have heard very, very impressive testimony. You
have very, very solid Committee support here. Our only
difficulty, candidly, is when the Administration comes in with
a lower figure, and the figures are somewhere else. It means,
that in order to reinstate the funds for this program, we have
to take monies from somewhere else. And that is hard on a
subcommittee which funds healthcare and other education
projects and worker safety.
But I think the points have been made very, very
emphatically here today, and we will give very, very careful
consideration to your testimony.
Mr. Schwarzenegger, when you attend the summit, I expect
you to have quite a few things to say to the Department of
Education.
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
Thank you all very much for being here. That concludes our
hearing.
[Whereupon, at 12 noon, Tuesday, May 13, the hearing was
concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]