Overview
Title
To establish an Educational Equity Challenge Grant program administered by the Department of Education.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 10184 is a plan to give money to schools and organizations to help kids, especially in places with less money, feel better after the tough times from COVID-19. The government wants to make sure this money is used wisely and checks if it really helps the kids.
Summary AI
H. R. 10184 aims to create the Educational Equity Challenge Grant program, which will be managed by the Department of Education. The program intends to provide grants to eligible entities, such as local and state educational agencies and nonprofits, to support evidence-based strategies and interventions that address the academic and health needs of students, particularly those impacted by COVID-19. The bill emphasizes funding for proposals assisting students in rural and low-income areas and mandates independent evaluation of program effectiveness. Additionally, it authorizes significant funding from 2025 to 2034 to support these initiatives.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The Educational Equity Challenge Grant Act of 2024 aims to improve educational opportunities and address health and safety needs that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The bill proposes the creation of a grant program, administered by the Department of Education, to fund eligible entities in implementing strategies to support disadvantaged students and enhance educational equity. The program emphasizes evidence-based solutions and innovative proposals from educators and other stakeholders.
General Summary of the Bill
The legislation introduces a grant program intended to assist educational entities in addressing a range of student needs, including academic, social-emotional, mental, behavioral, and physical health, by encouraging the use of evidence-based approaches. It also considers initiatives that educators propose, provided they undergo independent evaluations. A substantial allocation of resources, up to $15 billion annually initially, is planned, with specific priorities for rural and low-income students. Various educational entities, including local education agencies, state education agencies, and nonprofit organizations, are eligible to apply.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several significant issues arise from this bill. First is the reliance on other legislative acts for defining key terms, which could create confusion for those unfamiliar with these documents. Another concern is the Secretary of Education's power to reduce funding to rural and low-income communities if the grant applications are deemed insufficient in quality. The potential challenge of managing large sums of money effectively to prevent misuse or waste is also noteworthy.
Additionally, the requirement for independent evaluations could deter smaller organizations with limited resources from participating, due to the financial burden such assessments might impose. The allocation strategy, which specifies significant shares of the funds for rural (25%) and low-income (50%) communities, raises questions about whether this approach may inadvertently neglect other needy populations.
Impact on the Public Broadly
Broadly speaking, the bill is designed to enhance educational outcomes and equity across the U.S., especially in addressing the challenges posed by the pandemic. By targeting evidence-based practices and fostering educator-driven innovations, the initiative could lead to significant improvements in educational quality and student well-being. However, the effectiveness of the program depends heavily on transparent management and the successful handling of grant allocations.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Rural and Low-Income Communities: These groups might benefit significantly from the dedicated funding, potentially reducing disparities in educational opportunities. However, the stipulation allowing for reduced funding if applications are inadequate could disadvantage these areas, counteracting the intended support.
Schools and Education Agencies: Schools and agencies have the chance to implement and innovate educational strategies thanks to the grants. However, smaller or financially constrained entities may struggle with the application requirements, particularly the necessity for independent evaluations.
Students and Families: For students, particularly those identified as high-need, the program could lead to enhanced educational access and support services, contributing to better academic and health outcomes. The involvement of families and community stakeholders in planning could ensure that solutions are culturally and contextually relevant.
Overall, while the Educational Equity Challenge Grant Act of 2024 has the potential to foster significant improvements in the educational landscape, careful consideration and cooperation among stakeholders are essential for addressing the complexities and maximizing the positive impacts of the legislation.
Financial Assessment
The proposed bill, H. R. 10184, aims to establish an Educational Equity Challenge Grant program, allocating significant financial resources to address student needs in education. Here's a breakdown of how the financial components are structured and their implications:
Financial Allocations
The bill authorizes substantial funding for the grant program, with $15 billion annually from 2025 through 2027, decreasing to $10 billion annually from 2028 through 2031, and $5 billion annually from 2032 through 2034. These funds are earmarked to support evidence-based and innovative educational interventions, particularly for students affected by challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic and those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Relation to Identified Issues
Potential Risks of Misuse or Waste: With such large sums allocated, the risk of potential misuse or waste becomes a concern. Prudent management and effective monitoring are essential to ensure the funds are used correctly to meet the bill's objectives. This concern aligns with Issues where allocating up to $15 billion annually could lead to inefficiencies if not carefully handled.
Allocation Restrictions: The bill specifies that at least 25% of funds should go to rural areas and 50% to low-income students. While this ensures targeted support for these groups, it may also lead to challenges in meeting needs of other deserving groups if the allocations are too restrictive. The priority criteria for funding could make distribution tricky, potentially leaving some needy students underfunded.
Authority to Reduce Funding: The Secretary of Education's power to reduce funds for rural and low-income areas if application quality is insufficient (as stated in the bill) raises issues of equitable support distribution. If applications do not meet standards, these areas might miss out on needed funds, potentially contravening the bill's intention to support the most disadvantaged students.
Emphasis on Evidence-based Proposals: The division between evidence-based (75%) and field-initiated (25%) proposals might limit opportunities for innovative solutions that have not yet been proven successful. This could discourage novel approaches that might otherwise benefit students but lack comprehensive supporting evidence at present.
Financial Burden of Independent Evaluations: The requirement for independent evaluations might present a financial challenge for smaller entities applying for grants, as they could bear additional costs to comply. While evaluations are crucial for assessing program effectiveness, they could potentially dissuade participation from underfunded applicants who may struggle to manage these extra expenses.
Conclusion
In summary, while H. R. 10184 provides significant funding aimed at addressing educational inequities, careful consideration is necessary regarding how these funds are distributed and monitored. Ensuring effective use of resources while addressing potential challenges highlighted in the bill text can help maximize the program's impact, ultimately benefiting the students it aims to serve.
Issues
The reliance on definitions from other legislative acts, like the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, may make it difficult for individuals without access or knowledge of those acts to fully understand the context of this bill. This pertains to Section 2(a).
The Secretary's authority to reduce funding for rural and low-income students if applications are deemed insufficient could result in a lack of support for those areas in need. This is described in Section 2(c)(4) and 2(c)(5).
Allocating large sums—up to $15 billion annually initially—might lead to potential misuse or waste of funds if not carefully managed and monitored, as outlined in Section 2(k).
The requirement for independent evaluations might place a financial burden on smaller or underfunded entities, potentially discouraging them from applying for the grants. This concern is discussed in Section 2(b)(2) and Section 2(i).
While the bill specifies large portions of funds for rural (25%) and low-income (50%) students, this allocation might be too restrictive or generous depending on applicant characteristics, potentially neglecting other needy groups. This is highlighted in Section 2(c)(4) and 2(c)(5).
The division of grant funding between evidence-based and field-initiated proposals might limit innovative interventions that lack proven success due to the focus on evidence-based solutions in Section 2(c)(3).
The section mentioning the use of 'universally designed assessments' may lack clarity for some on how these assessments should be implemented effectively, as noted in Section 2(g)(1).
The priority given to high-need students that have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic highlights issues of equitable distribution, but it may be ambiguous how standardized assessment outcomes can be made comparable across various groups. Discussed in Section 2(f).
The broad range of eligible entities and lack of explicit prioritization criteria beyond high-need students may result in funds being spread too thinly, reducing their effectiveness, as seen in Section 2(b)(2) and Section 2(e).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides the short title for the legislation, which is called the "Educational Equity Challenge Grant Act of 2024".
2. Educational equity challenge grant program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Educational Equity Challenge Grant Program is created to provide grants for eligible educational entities to address academic and health needs enhanced by the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on evidence-based and educator-driven solutions. The program prioritizes funding for disadvantaged students and areas, ensuring funds improve access to quality education, while requiring evaluations, collaborations, and reports on usage and outcomes.
Money References
- (j) Reports.— (1) GRANTEES.—An eligible entity that receives a grant under this section shall submit an annual report to the Secretary describing— (A) the proposed and actual uses of funds, including a description of how much funding supported which evidence-based interventions; (B) how funds were used and their effect on student access to accelerated student learning and mastery of content and academic, social-emotional, mental, behavioral, and physical health outcomes, which may include success measures such as school culture surveys, workplace culture surveys, family feedback, and existing diagnostic or formative assessments, disaggregated by the specific groups identified in section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(B)(xi)), in a manner that protects personally identifiable information; (C) how the State educational agency or local educational agency distributed funds, including any formula or methodology that was used, to schools served by such agency to meet the academic, social-emotional, mental, behavioral, and physical health needs of students who have been disproportionately affected by the lasting impact of the COVID–19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, children with disabilities, English learners, students of color, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in foster care, migrant children, and students involved with the juvenile justice system; and (D) how the grant funds were supplemented with State and local funds targeted to disproportionately affected students as described in subparagraph (B), including funds appropriated through State formula grants to local educational agencies. (2) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—Beginning 1 year after the first grants are awarded under this section, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit and digitally publish a report to Congress detailing— (A) the basis on which grants were awarded; (B) eligible entities that received grants and amount of funding received by each grantee; (C) the proposed and, as available, actual uses of funds, including a description of how much funding supported which evidence-based interventions; (D) available outcomes of the grants related to student learning and social-emotional, mental, behavioral, and physical health, disaggregated by the specific groups identified in section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(B)(xi)), in a manner that protects personally identifiable information; and (E) the technical assistance activities of the Department of Education and costs of these activities, dissemination costs, and costs of other activities supported by the set-aside for the Department of Education. (k) Authorization of appropriations.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section— (1) $15,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2025 through 2027; (2) $10,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2028 through 2031; and (3) $5,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2032 through 2034. ---