[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 85 (Wednesday, June 16, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7128-S7131]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Burns, 
        Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Hagel, and Mr. Hutchinson):
  S. 1225. A bill to provide for a rural education initiative, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.


                     rural education initiative act

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Rural 
Education Initiative Act. I am very pleased to be joined by my 
colleagues Senators Gregg, Conrad, Kerrey, Burns, Hutchinson, and Hagel 
as original cosponsors of this commonsense, bipartisan proposal to help 
rural schools make better use of Federal education dollars. I also want 
to acknowledge the valuable assistance provided by the American 
Association of School Administrators in the drafting of this 
legislation.
  The Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorizes formula and 
competitive grants that allow many of our local school districts to 
improve the education of their students. These Federal grants support 
efforts to promote such laudable goals as the professional development 
of teachers, the incorporation of technology into the classroom, gifted 
and talented programs and class-size reduction. Schools receive several 
categorical grants supporting these programs, each with its own 
authorized activities and regulations and each with its own redtape and 
paperwork. Unfortunately, as valuable as these programs may be for 
thousands of predominantly urban and suburban school districts, they 
simply do not work well in rural areas.
  The Rural Education Initiative Act will make these Federal grant 
programs more flexible in order to help school districts in rural 
communities with fewer than 600 students. Six hundred may not sound 
like many students to some of my colleagues from more populous or urban 
States, but they may be surprised to learn that more than 35 percent of 
all school districts in the United States have 600 or fewer students. 
In my State of Maine, 56 percent, or 158 of its 284 school districts, 
have fewer than 600 students. The two education initiatives contained 
in our legislation will overcome some of the most challenging obstacles 
that these districts face in participating in Federal education 
programs.
  The first rural education initiative deals with four formula grants. 
Formula-driven grants from some education programs simply do not reach 
small rural schools in amounts that are sufficient to improve 
curriculum and teaching in the same way that they do for larger 
suburban or urban schools.
  This is because the grants are based on school district enrollment. 
Unfortunately, these individual grants confront smaller schools with a 
dilemma; namely, they simply may not receive enough funding from any 
single grant to carry out meaningful activity. Our legislation will 
allow a district to combine the funds from four categorical programs.
  Under the Rural Education Initiative Act, rural districts will be 
permitted to combine the funds from these programs and use the money to 
support reform efforts of their own choice to improve the achievement 
of their students and the quality of the instruction. Instead of 
receiving grants from four independent programs, each insufficient to 
accomplish the program's objectives, these rural districts will have 
the flexibility to combine the grants and the

[[Page S7129]]

dollars to support locally chosen educational goals.
  I want to emphasize that the rural initiative I have just described 
does not change the level of funding a district receives under these 
formula grant programs. It simply gives these rural districts the 
flexibility they need to use the funds far more effectively.
  The second rural initiative in our legislation involves several 
competitive grant programs that present small rural schools with a 
different problem. Because many rural school districts simply do not 
have the resources required to hire grant writers and to manage a 
grant, they are essentially shut out of those programs where grants are 
competitively awarded.
  The Rural Education Initiative Act will give small, rural districts a 
formula grant in lieu of eligibility for the competitive programs of 
the ESEA. A district will be able to combine this new formula grant 
with the funds from the regular formula grants and use the combined 
moneys for any purpose that will improve student achievement or 
teaching quality.
  Districts might use these funds, for example, to hire a new reading 
or math teacher, to fund important professional development, to offer a 
program for gifted and talented students, to purchase high technology, 
or to upgrade a science lab, or to pay for any other activity that 
meets the district's priorities and needs.
  Let me give you a specific example of what these two initiatives will 
mean for one Maine school district, School Administrative District 33. 
This district serves two northern Maine communities, Frenchville and 
St. Agatha. Each of these communities has about 200 school-age 
children. SAD 33 receives four separate formula grants ranging from 
about $1,900 from the Safe and Drug Free Schools Program to $9,500 
under the Class Size Reduction Act.
  You can see the problem right there. The amounts of the grants under 
these programs are so small that they really are not useful in 
accomplishing the goals of the program. The total received by this 
small school district for all four of the programs is just under 
$16,000. But each grant must be applied for separately, used for 
different--and federally mandated--purposes, and accounted for 
independently.
  Under our legislation, this school district will be freed from the 
multiple applications and reports, and it will have $16,000 to use for 
locally identified education priorities. In addition, since SAD 33 does 
not have the resources needed to apply for the current competitively 
awarded grant programs, our legislation will allow this school district 
to receive a supplemental formula grant of $34,000. The bottom line is, 
under my legislation this district will have about $50,000 and the 
flexibility to use these Federal funds to address its most pressing 
educational needs.

  But with this flexibility and additional funding comes 
responsibility. In return for the advantages and flexibility that our 
legislation provides, participating districts will be held accountable 
for demonstrating improved student performance. Each participating 
school district will be required to administer the same test of its 
choice annually during the 5-year period of this program. Based on the 
results of this test, a district will have to show that student 
achievement has improved in order to continue its participation beyond 
the 5-year period.
  Since Maine and many other States already administer annual education 
assessments, districts will not incur any significant administrative 
burden in accounting and complying with this accountability provision. 
More important, the schools will be held responsible for what is really 
important, and that is improved student achievement, rather than for 
time-consuming paperwork in the form of applications and reports.
  As one rural Maine superintendent told me: ``Give me the resources I 
need plus the flexibility to use them, and I am happy to be held 
accountable for improved student performance. It will happen.''
  The Federal Government has an important role to play in improving 
education in our schools. But it has a supporting role, whereas States 
and communities have the lead role. We must improve our education 
system, we must enhance student achievement, without requiring every 
school in this Nation to adopt a plan designed in Washington and 
without imposing burdensome and costly regulations in return for 
Federal assistance.
  The two initiatives contained in our bill will accomplish those 
goals. They will allow rural schools to use their own strategies for 
improvement without the encumbrance of onerous regulations and 
unnecessary paperwork. It is my hope that we will be able to enact this 
important and bipartisan legislation this year.
  I thank my colleagues for their attention.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, today, I join my esteemed colleagues 
Senator Collins and Conrad in introducing the Rural Education 
Initiative Act (REA). This Act represents a bipartisan approach to 
address the unique needs of 35% of school districts in the United 
States, specifically small, rural school districts. It does not 
authorize any new money. Rather, REA amends the Rural Education 
Demonstration Grants under Part J, of Title X, of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and retains the current ESEA 
authorization of up to $125 million for rural education programs.
  Rural school districts are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes 
to both receiving and using federal education funds. They either don't 
receive enough federal funds to run the program for which the funds are 
allocated or don't receive federal funds for programs for which they 
have to fill out applications. Small rural school districts rarely 
apply for federal competitive grants because they lack the resources 
and expertise required to fill out complicated and time intensive 
applications for federal education grants, which means that rural 
school districts lose out on millions of federal education dollars each 
year.
  The Rural Education Initiative Act addresses both the problem of 
rural school districts' inability to generate enough money under 
federal formula grants to run a program and the problem of rural school 
districts' inability to compete for federal discretionary grants.
  With regard to federal education formula grants, REA permits rural 
school districts to merge funds from the President's 100,000 New 
Teachers program and several Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
programs, specifically Eisenhower Professional Development, Safe and 
Drug Free Schools, Innovative Education Program Strategies. Under REA, 
school districts can pool funds from these federal education programs 
and use the money for a variety of activities that the district 
believes will contribute to improved student achievement.
  With regard to federal discretionary grants for which rural grants 
have to compete, the bill stipulates that small rural school districts 
who decline to apply for federal discretionary grants are eligible to 
receive money under a rural education formula grant. As a result, 
school districts would no longer have to go through the application 
process to receive federal funds. School districts that had to forgo 
applying for discretionary grants simply because they did not have the 
resources to do so, would no longer be penalized. As with their other 
federal grant money, a school district would have broad flexibility on 
how to use funds provided under this new grant to improve student 
achievement and the quality of instruction.
  A local school district can combine their other formula grant money 
with this new direct grant to create a large flexible grant at the 
school district level to: hire a new teacher, purchase a computer, 
provide professional development, offer advanced placement or 
vocational education courses or just about any other activity that 
would contribute to increased student achievement and higher quality of 
instruction.
  In addition to the aforementioned changes, REA has a strong 
accountability piece. The bill stipulates that rural school districts 
may only continue to receive the rural education initiative grant and 
have enormous flexibility over other federal education dollars if in 
fact they can show a marked improvement in student achievement.
  In conclusion, this bill not only builds momentum for driving more 
federal dollars directly down to rural school districts but marks an 
important sea change in federal education

[[Page S7130]]

policy in that it cedes unprecedented authority to school districts to 
use federal funds as they see fit, not as the federal government 
prescribes and it links increased flexibility and increased federal 
funds directly to student achievement.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my distinguished 
colleagues from Maine, New Hampshire, and Nebraska in introducing the 
Rural Education Initiative Act. Over the past five years, Congress and 
the Administration have significantly increased education funding for 
States and local school districts. They have also undertaken a number 
of new initiatives in response to educational concerns including Class 
Size Reduction and the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program.
  Unfortunately, rural schools are not benefiting from these new 
initiatives or from funding increases to the same degree as many urban 
and suburban schools. In fact, on the basis of discussions with 
educators in North Dakota, Federal education laws are discouraging many 
rural schools from making the best use of funds that are currently 
allocated by formula from the Department of Education.
  The formulas developed to allocate education funding, formulas which 
take into consideration a number of factors including student 
enrollment, in many cases do not result in sufficient funding to permit 
the smaller school to most effectively use the funds for local 
educational priorities.
  Many small, rural schools, for example, don't have the enrollment 
numbers or special categories of students that result in sufficient 
revenue under the education formulas to hire a new teacher under the 
Class Size Reduction initiative, or to participate in a more 
specialized education program like the 21st Century Community Learning 
Centers Program.
  Additionally, these schools are not able to compete as effectively as 
larger districts for funding under some Department of Education 
competitive grant programs. Limited resources do not permit smaller 
districts to hire specialists to prepare and submit grant applications. 
In some cases, the only option for a smaller school district is to form 
a consortium with other rural districts to qualify for sufficient 
funding.
  No more clearly are the concerns of rural school educators expressed 
than in a letter that I received from ElRoy Burkle, Superintendent for 
the Starkweather Public School District, in Starkweather, North Dakota, 
a school district with 131 students. In his letter, ElRoy expressed the 
difficulty that smaller, rural schools are having in accessing Federal 
education funds.
  ElRoy remarked, ``. . . school districts have lost their ability to 
access funds directly, and as a result of forming these consortiums in 
order to access these monies, it is my opinion, we have lost our 
individual ability to utilize these monies in an effective manner that 
would be conducive to promoting the educational needs of our individual 
schools.''
  Mr. President, the Rural Education Initiative Act responds to the 
unique needs of rural school districts by enabling these districts to 
more fully participate in Department of Education formula and 
competitive grant programs.
  Under Section 4 of the proposed legislation, school districts with 
less than 600 students would be eligible to pool resources from four 
DOE formula programs, and use the funding for quality of instruction or 
student achievement priorities determined by the local school district.
  These programs include the DOE's Class-Size Reduction, Eisenhower 
Professional Development, Title VI (Innovative Education Strategies), 
and Safe and Drug Free Schools, Title I GOALS 2000, Individuals With 
Disabilities Education, and Impact Aid are not included in this 
legislation.
  Additionally, to qualify for funding under the Rural Education 
Initiative Act, a school district would elect not to apply for 
competitive grant funding from seven programs including Gifted and 
Talented Children Grants; State and Local Programs for Technology 
Resources; 21st Century Community Learning Centers; Grants under the 
Fund for the Improvement of Education; Bilingual Education Professional 
Development Grants; Bilingual Education Capacity and Demonstration 
Grants; and Bilingual Education Research, Evaluation, and Dissemination 
Grants.
  In opting out of these competitive grant programs, the rural school 
district would be entitled to a formula grant, based on student 
enrollment, to use for education reform efforts to improve class 
instruction and student achievements. The grant amount would be reduced 
by the level of funding received by the School district under the 
formula grant programs outlined in Section 4.
  To remain in the Rural Education Initiative, school districts, after 
five years, would be required to assess the academic achievement of 
students using a statewide test, or in the case where there is no 
statewide test, a test selected by the local education agency.
  Additionally, the Rural Education Initiative Act will not abolish or 
reduce funding for any DOE education program including the eleven grant 
programs discussed in this initiative.
  Mr. President, It's very important that we consider the Rural 
Education Initiative Act as part of the re-authorization of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act during the 106th Congress. No 
issue is more important for rural America than the future of our 
schools. In North Dakota 86 percent of school districts, 198 schools, 
have less than 600 students.
  Additionally, many of these school districts are facing declining 
enrollments. According to the Report Card for North Dakota's Future 
(1998) prepared by the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction, 
over the past two decades school districts in the State have declined 
from 364 to 214, almost 40 percent.
  This decline in student population is not unique to North Dakota. 
Many other states have a significant percentage of rural school 
districts, and many are also experiencing a decline in rural student 
population. While the quality of education, including smaller classes, 
in many of these smaller communities remains excellent, the more 
limited resources of smaller, rural schools, coupled with the declining 
student enrollments, pose extraordinarily challenges for rural schools 
across America.
  These factors along with current Federal education formulas have 
limited the ability of smaller districts to take full advantage of 
federal education grants. In some instances, they have limited 
educational opportunities for students such as distance learning, or 
advanced academic and vocational courses. Rural schools are unique and 
have educational needs that are not being met.
  Mr. President, I want to commend the American Association of School 
Administrators (AASA) for the key role they have played in the 
development of this rural schools initiative. AASA has a remarkable 
record of achievement on behalf of the education community, parents, 
and students. For several years, they have been examining the 
difficulties that rural schools were experiencing in applying and 
qualifying for Federal education funding. The proposal developed by 
AASA would have a significant impact on almost 200 school districts in 
North Dakota.
  I also want to commend the Organizations Concerned About Rural 
Education for their efforts on behalf of this initiative, and the 
exemplary work on behalf of other educational issues for rural America.
  Again, I congratulate Senator Collins for taking the lead on this 
important education initiative, and I strongly urge the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions to carefully consider this 
legislation and the educational needs of rural schools during the 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from Mr. 
Burkle, a summary of the bill, and a description of the rural schools 
formula under the Rural Education Initiative Act, prepared by the 
American Association of School Administrators be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     Rural Education Initiative Act


                          qualifying districts

       A district eligible to elect to receive its funding through 
     this initiative must have 599 students or fewer and have a 
     Beale Code rating of 6, 7, 8, or 9. The Beale Codes are used

[[Page S7131]]

     by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to determine how 
     relatively rural or urban a county is. Beale Codes range from 
     0 to 9, with 0 being most urban and 9 being most rural. A 
     county-by-county listing may be found at: http://
www.econ.ag.gov/epubs/other/typolog/index.html.


                     flexible use of formula grants

       If a district qualifies and elects to participate in this 
     initiative, it will have flexibility with regard to Titles II 
     (Eisenhower professional development), IV (Safe and Drug-Free 
     Schools), and VI (Innovative Education Program Strategies) of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Class Size 
     Reduction Act. Districts would be able to combine the funds 
     from these programs and use the money to support reform 
     efforts intended to improve the achievement of students and 
     the quality of instruction provided.


               alternative to competitive grant programs

       If an eligible district elects not to compete the 
     discretionary grants programs listed below, it will receive a 
     formula grant based on student enrollment (see following 
     table), less the amount they received from the formula grant 
     programs included in the flexible use of formula grants 
     program (Titles II, IV and Vi of ESEA and the Class Size 
     Reduction Act). This alternative formula grant may be 
     combined with the funds from the flexible formula grant 
     program and used for the same purposes.
       State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources 
     (Subpart 2 of part A of title III of ESEA);
       Bilingual Education Capacity and Demonstration Grants 
     (Subpart 1 of part A of title VII of ESEA);
       Bilingual Education Research, Evaluation, and Dissemination 
     Grants (Subpart 2 of part A of title VII of ESEA);
       Bilingual Education Professional Development Grants 
     (Subpart 3, Section 7142 of part A of title VII of ESEA);
       Fund for the Improvement of Education (Part A of Title X of 
     ESEA);
       Gifted and Talented Grants (Part B of Title X of ESEA);


  21st Century Community Learning Centers (Part I of title X of ESEA)


        Number of K-12 Students                                  Amount
        in District:                                           of grant
1 to 49.....................................................\1\ $20,000
50 to 149....................................................\1\ 30,000
150 to 299...................................................\1\ 40,000
300 to 449...................................................\1\ 50,000
450 to 599...................................................\1\ 60,000
\1\ Reduced by the amount the district receives from the listed formula 
grants.


                             accountability

       School districts participating in this initiative would 
     have to meet high accountability standards. They would have 
     to show significant statistical improvement in assessment 
     test scores based on state and/or local assessments. Schools 
     failing to show demonstrable progress will not be eligible 
     for continued participation in the initiative.
                                  ____

                                        Starkweather Public School


                                              District No. 44,

                                 Starkweather, ND, April 15, 1999.
     Hon. Kent Conrad,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Conrad: The purpose of this letter is to voice 
     several concerns that are facing rural districts in North 
     Dakota and ask for your assistance as the reauthorization 
     process for various educational legislation is currently 
     being addressed by congress. I currently serve as a shared 
     superintendent for both the Starkweather and Munich Public 
     School Districts. At this particular time these two districts 
     are two independent districts, with the Starkweather District 
     serving 131 students and Munich serving 154 students. Each 
     district covers in excess of 200 square miles.
       The first issue that I have deals with the recently 
     approved Class-Size Reduction Program. I support the primary 
     legislative intent of this legislation, however, this office 
     disagrees with the way in which the funds can be accessed. 
     Please allow me to explain.
       This office received information at a recent regional 
     meeting that the allocation for the Starkweather District is 
     $5,003, and $6,020 for Munich. It was also shared that in 
     order to access these funds our individual district 
     allocations must be equal to or greater than the cost of 
     hiring a first-year teacher at our schools. This equates to 
     approximately $23,000. If a school allocation is less than 
     that, the school district can create or join a consortium to 
     access these dollars, so long as the aggregate amount equals 
     or exceeds that cost of a first-year teacher. Therefore, as 
     you can see, the two school districts that I serve would be 
     forced to enter into another consortium in order to obtain 
     these allocated funds through this program.
       Currently, both the Munich and Starkweather School 
     Districts are members of various consortiums in order to 
     access our federal allocated monies. These consortiums 
     include Title II, Lake Area Carl-Perkins, and Goals 2000. 
     This is in addition to having consortiums for special 
     education and school improvement. My point is that each of my 
     respective school districts have lost their individual 
     ability to access funds directly, and as a direct result of 
     forming these consortiums in order to access our entitled 
     monies, it is of my opinion, we have lost our individual 
     ability to utilize these monies in an effective manner that 
     would be conducive to promoting the educational needs of our 
     individual schools. Let me cite an example of how this loss 
     of effectiveness has occurred for my districts.
       3. Legislation for rural school districts. Something needs 
     to be done for us. Rural districts with low student 
     enrollments and high square miles have to form consortiums to 
     access federal funds. If legislation were created as cited 
     above, my two districts could better utilize allocated funds 
     and still be in-line with federal education goals.
       In closing, I understand that it is difficult to write 
     legislation to meet everyone's needs. However, I do believe 
     that we need to address our educational needs as our children 
     deserve the same opportunity as those in larger districts. 
     Our issues may be different, but we all hold the common 
     thread of providing the best education for each child.
       Thank you for your time and consideration regarding the 
     issues shared. Your office has my permission to share this 
     letter with any individual who may need to review the 
     concerns voiced. Your office may feel free to contact me at 
     the address and telephone provided, or e-mail messages to me 
     at [email protected] (work) or my home e-mail 
     [email protected].
           Respectfully,
                                                     ElRoy Burkle,
                                                   Superintendent.

  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Rural Education 
Initiative introduced by Senator Collins today, and I am pleased to be 
a cosponsor of this important piece of legislation.
  The Rural Education Initiative takes a significant step toward 
ensuring that all young people have a shot at the American Dream. It 
addresses an important problem that many rural schools face: Often they 
receive small amounts of funding for a variety of programs, but they 
don't have the budget and personnel to develop and sustain multiple 
programs. Yet they still have students who need our help to raise their 
achievement levels and become productive, successful citizens.
  The Rural Education Initiative asks us to make a $125 million 
investment in rural schools. And it allows small rural districts to 
pool funds from a handful of federal programs and target funding in 
those areas where they see the greatest need and where the funding will 
have the greatest impact.
  But this legislation also ensures that districts remain accountable--
in exchange for increased flexibility, they must demonstrate improved 
performance.
  Over 70 percent of Nebraska's school districts are small, rural 
districts, as defined by this legislation. Currently Nebraska receives 
approximately $92 million in federal funds for elementary and secondary 
education. The Rural Education Initiative would increase that 
contribution by more than $10 million.
  Mr. President, recently I contacted Jim Havelka, superintendent of 
both Dodge and Howells Public Schools in Nebraska. Dodge has 175 
students K-12, and Howells has 225 students K-12. I said, ``Jim, what 
do you need to do a better job of educating your kids?''
  Jim said, ``You know, it's awfully hard to start a new initiative on 
$900. But if I could pool funds from a few programs, I could hire an 
experienced instructional technology teacher to help us make even 
better use of computer hardware and software that is so crucial in 
improving learning opportunities for our students. And I could share 
that instructor with 2 or 3 other schools. Keep Title I, special 
education, and other major programs intact, but give me a little 
flexibility with a few other programs, and I'll give you results.''
  Mr. President, I intend to do what I can to help Jim and his students 
produce results. I believe that in addition to this initiative, we 
should increase our investment in Title I and in education technology, 
both of which are especially important to rural schools. I look forward 
to working with Senator Collins and the other cosponsors of this 
legislation to accomplish these goals as we move this legislation 
through Congress.
                                 ______