[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S391-S392]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 242. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 to specify the purposes for which funds provided under part A of 
title I of that Act may be used; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President. I rise today with Senator Ensign to 
introduce legislation to ensure that Federal Title I education funds 
are targeted to help our Nation's neediest students learn.
  Title I provides assistance to virtually every school district in the 
country, serving over 12.5 million children in low-income schools, 
including about 3 million California school children.
  Although it has always been the intent of Congress for Title I funds 
to be used for academic instruction and instructional services, the 
Federal Government has never provided clear guidelines for how these 
important dollars should be used.
  This lack of Federal guidance has become especially clear now, as 
States are struggling to comply with the Title I accountability 
standards established under ``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 as possible to States and school districts.
  This legislation would define Title I direct and indirect 
instructional services.
  It would set a standard for the amount of Title I funds that can be 
used to achieve the academic and administrative objectives of this 
program.
  It would ensure that the majority, 90 percent, of Title I funds are 
used to improve academic achievement by stipulating that a school 
district may not use more than 10 percent of these funds for 
administrative or indirect instructional services.
  By setting a standard for the amount of funds that school districts 
can spend on administrative or indirect services, we ensure that the 
majority of Title I dollars are used by districts to help improve 
student academic achievement.
  Furthermore, by defining direct and indirect services, all States can 
apply

[[Page S392]]

the same standards for how Title I funds are used 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; 
purchasing instructional resources such as books, materials, computers, 
and other instructional equipment; developing and administering 
curriculum, educational materials and assessments.
  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 or 
janitorial, gardening, or landscaping services or the payment of 
utility costs; buying food and paying for travel to and attendance at 
conferences or meetings, except if 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.'' This is too ambiguous.
  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: construction or acquisition of real property; and payment 
to parents to attend a meeting or training session or to reimburse a 
parent for a salary lost due to attendance at a ``parental 
involvement'' meeting.
  We should give the Department, States, and school districts clearer 
guidance in law.
  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, that language was 
stripped out and in its place language was inserted directing the 
General Accounting Office to report on how States use their Title I 
funds.
  In April 2003, GAO released the report that Congress directed them to 
submit on Title I Administrative Expenditures.
  What GAO found is that while districts spent no more than 13 percent 
of Title I funds on administrative services, these findings were based 
on their own definition ``because there is no common definition on what 
constitutes administrative expenditures.''
  Therefore, the accounting office could not precisely measure how much 
of schools' Title I funds were used for administration.
  Because uses of Title I funds are not defined consistently throughout 
the States, the accounting office created its own definition by 
compiling aspects of State priorities to complete the report.
  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 
to their report.
  The report highlights two concerns that I have with the lack of 
universal definitions in the Title I program: the lack of Federal 
guidance on effective uses of Title I funds; and the government's 
inability to accurately measure whether the academic needs of low-
income students are being met.
  This 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 reasons for introducing this bill are two-fold: First, I believe 
that States must use their limited Federal Title I dollars for the 
fundamental purpose of providing academic instruction to help students 
learn.
  Second, I believe that it is nearly impossible to achieve this 
fundamental purpose without providing a clear definition of what is 
considered an instructional service.
  Federal funding is only about 8 percent of the total funding for 
elementary and secondary education and Title I is even a smaller 
percentage of total support for public schools.
  That is why it is imperative to better focus Title I funds on 
academic instruction, teaching the fundamentals and helping 
disadvantaged children achieve.
  It is critical that Federal guidance be provided to ensure that Title 
I funds go where they are needed most--improving the academic 
performance of low-income children.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Recod.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 242

       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 Education Funding 
     Integrity Act of 2009''.

     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 part only for direct instructional services and 
     indirect instructional services.
       ``(2) Limitation on indirect instructional services.--A 
     local educational agency may use not more than 10 percent of 
     funds received under this part 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.''.
                                 ______