[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 99 (Tuesday, July 8, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9050-S9051]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 1372. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
of 1965 to specify the purposes for which funds provided under subpart 
1 of part A of title I may be used; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill with 
Senator Ensign to ensure that Title I funds are directed towards 
instructional services to teach low-income students.
  Title I provides assistance to virtually every school district in the 
country to serve children attending schools with high concentrations of 
low-income students, from preschool through high school.
  It has been the ``anchor'' of Federal assistance to schools, since 
its origin in 1965. And while it has always been Congresses intent for 
Title I funds to be used for instruction and instructional services, 
the Federal Government has never provided a clear definition of what 
instructional services should entail.
  This lack of Federal guidance has become especially clear now, as 
States scramble to comply with the new and expanded Title I 
accountability standards established in ``No Child Left Behind.''
  While State Administrators of Title I are directed by law to meet 
these specific requirements, they have been given little guidance as to 
how to ensure that they are in compliance with the law.
  I believe that the Federal Government is responsible for making this 
process as clear to States, as possible. In my own view, as it relates 
to Title I, we haven't lived up to our end of the bargain.
  During consideration of ``No Child Left Behind,'' I worked hard to 
get my bill defining appropriate Title I uses included in the Senate 
version of the bill.
  Unfortunately, during conference consideration, my bill was stripped 
out and in its place language directing the General Accounting Office, 
GAO, to report on how States use their Title I funds was inserted.
  In April, GAO released the report that Congress directed them to 
submit on Title I Administrative Expenditures.
  What GAO found is that while districts spent a relatively small 
amount--no more than 13 percent--of Title I funds on administration 
that ``because there is no common definition on what constitutes 
administrative, or indirect, expenditures'' the accounting office 
couldn't precisely measure how much of their Title I funds were used 
for administration.
  Because Title I funds are not defined consistently throughout the 
States, the accounting office created their own definition by compiling 
aspects of State priorities to complete the report.
  You see, the very reason I worked to define how Title I funds should 
be used--to create consistency and distribution priority nationwide--
became the definitive aspect preventing GAO from effectively drawing 
conclusions in their report.
  My bill takes some strong steps by balancing the needs for States to 
retain Title I flexibility and providing them with the guidance needed 
to administer the program uniformly throughout the country.
  My bill does two things: It defines Title I direct and indirect 
instructional services and sets a standard for the amount of Title I 
funds that can be used to achieve the academic and administrative 
objectives of this program.
  It ensures that the majority of Title I funds are used to improve 
academic achievement by stipulating that ``a local educational agency 
may not use more than 10 percent of [Title I] funds received. . . . for 
indirect instructional services .''
  By limiting the amount of funds that schools can spend on 
administrative or indirect services, school districts are restricted 
from shuffling the majority of Title I to pay for non-academic 
services, but it also gives the districts flexibility to use the 
remaining funds for the indirect costs of administering Title I 
distribution.

[[Page S9051]]

  The second component of my bill defines direct and indirect services 
so that all States apply the same standards for Title I use nationwide.
  Examples of permissible Direct Services are: Employing teachers and 
other instructional personnel (including employee benefits); 
intervening and taking corrective actions to improve student 
achievement; extending academic instruction beyond the normal school 
day and year, including summer school; providing instructional services 
to pre-kindergarten children for the transition to kindergarten; 
purchasing instructional resources such as books, materials, computers, 
and other instructional equipment and wiring to support instructional 
equipment; professional development; developing and administering 
curriculum, educational materials and assessments; transporting 
students to assist them in improving academic achievement.
  Examples of indirect services limited to no more than 10 percent of 
Title I expenditures are: business services relating to administering 
the program; purchasing or providing facilities maintenance, 
janitorial, gardening, or landscaping services or the payment of 
utility costs; and paying for travel to and attendance at conferences 
or meetings, except for travel and attendance necessary for 
professional development.

  Current law on Title I is much too vague.
  It says, ``A State or local educational agency shall use funds 
received under this part only to supplement the amount of funds that 
would, in the absence of such Federal funds, be made available from 
non-Federal sources for the education of pupils participating in 
programs assisted under this part, and not to supplant such funds.''
  Basically, it says that Title I funds are to be used for the 
``education of pupils.'' That is just too nebulous.
  The U.S. Department of Education has given States a guidance document 
that explains how Title I funds can be used.
  Under this guidance document, only two uses are specifically 
prohibited: 1. Construction or acquisition of real property; and 2. 
payment to parents to attend a meeting or training session or to 
reimburse a parent for salary lost due to attendance at ``parental 
involvement'' meeting.
  I believe we should give the Department, States and districts clearer 
guidance in law.
  My reasons for introducing this bill are two-fold: First, I believe 
that States must use their limited Federal dollars for the fundamental 
purpose of providing academic instruction to help students learn.
  Secondly, I believe that it is nearly impossible to do so without 
providing a clear definition of what is considered an instructional 
service.
  I am not suggesting that it is the fault of the school districts for 
not focusing their Title I funds on academic instruction. They are 
simply exercising the flexibility that Congress has given them.
  What I am saying is that if Congress also intended for those funds to 
educate our neediest children, Federal guidance must be given to ensure 
that it happens.
  It is my view that Title I cannot do everything. Federal funding 
accounts for a small percentage of total funding for elementary and 
secondary education and Title I is even a smaller percentage of total 
support for public schools.
  That is why I am trying to better focus Title I funds on academic 
instruction, teaching the fundamentals and helping disadvantaged 
children achieve success.
  Schools must focus their general education budget to pay for expenses 
that fall outside of the realm of direct educational services and 
retain the majority of Federal funds to improve academic achievement 
for poor children.
  It is time to better direct Title I funds to the true goal of 
education: to help students learn. This is one step toward that goal.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1372

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Title I Integrity Act of 
     2003''.

     SEC. 2. DIRECT AND INDIRECT INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES.

       Subpart 1 of part A of title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 1120C. DIRECT AND INDIRECT INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Use of funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, a local educational agency shall use funds received 
     under this subpart only for direct instructional services and 
     indirect instructional services.
       ``(2) Limitation on indirect instructional services.--A 
     local educational agency may not use more than 10 percent of 
     funds received under this subpart for indirect instructional 
     services.
       ``(b) Instructional Services.--
       ``(1) Direct instructional services.--In this section, the 
     term `direct instructional services' means--
       ``(A) the implementation of instructional interventions and 
     corrective actions to improve student achievement;
       ``(B) the extension of academic instruction beyond the 
     normal school day and year, including during summer school;
       ``(C) the employment of teachers and other instructional 
     personnel, including providing teachers and instructional 
     personnel with employee benefits;
       ``(D) the provision of instructional services to 
     prekindergarten children to prepare such children for the 
     transition to kindergarten;
       ``(E) the purchase of instructional resources, such as 
     books, materials, computers, other instructional equipment, 
     and wiring to support instructional equipment;
       ``(F) the development and administration of curricula, 
     educational materials, and assessments;
       ``(G) the transportation of students to assist the students 
     in improving academic achievement;
       ``(H) the employment of title I coordinators, including 
     providing title I coordinators with employee benefits; and
       ``(I) the provision of professional development for 
     teachers and other instructional personnel.
       ``(2) Indirect instructional services.--In this section, 
     the term `indirect instructional services' includes--
       ``(A) the purchase or provision of facilities maintenance, 
     gardening, landscaping, or janitorial services, or the 
     payment of utility costs;
       ``(B) the payment of travel and attendance costs at 
     conferences or other meetings;
       ``(C) the payment of legal services;
       ``(D) the payment of business services, including payroll, 
     purchasing, accounting, and data processing costs; and
       ``(E) any other services determined appropriate by the 
     Secretary that indirectly improve student achievement.''.
                                 ______