Legislative Affairs

• Legislative text - Full text of the Senate L-HHS-ED proposal.
• Report language - Includes intent/rationale behind the funding figures proposed in the bill (ED funding starts on page 183, and there is a funding table on page 263).
• 302(b) allocations - Shows allocations for all 12 appropriations bills, including L-HHS-ED. (Note: The L-HHS-ED bill has an effective increase of almost $2.8 billion if you count a small increase in the discretionary funding and in CHIMPS [Changes in Mandatory Programs] that take unspent money from mandatory programs and use it for discretionary funding [essentially this is a budget gimmick]. The Department of Education actually only gets a $433 million net increase of available discretionary resources once you factor in rescissions of discretionary Pell grant funding.)
• Republican summary - Provides some highlights in the bill.
• Democratic press release - Provides Democrat appropriations leaders' commentary on the proposal (which says is it is "woefully inadequate" even if there was no pandemic, specifically critiquing the bill for underfunding education, child care, and other safety net programs.)

• Early education – Would increase funding for Head Start by $100 million (0.9%), freeze funding for Preschool Development Grants, and increase the Child Care and Development Block Grant by $50 million (0.9%). It also would freeze funding for the Child Care Access Means Parents in Schools program.
• Elementary and secondary education – The bill provides modest increases for a few programs, partially offset by cutting the Education Innovation and Research program by $60 million (32%). 

• Title I – Would increase funding by $125 million (0.8%) for the state grant program and freeze funding at FY20 levels for all other Title I programs.
• Impact Aid – Would increase funding by $20 million (1.3%), which is higher than in the House proposal.
• Title IV-A – Would provide $1.25 billion, an increase of $40 million (3.3%), which is more than in the House bill.
• IDEA/Special education – Would increase funding for all three state grant programs by a total of $125 million (0.9%). This is likely to lower the percentage of "full funding" that the federal government provides after adjusting for inflation and rising costs for educating students with special needs.
• Career Technical Education (CTE) –Would provide $1.358 billion for the CTE state grant program, an increase of $75 million (5.8%), which is more than in the House bill.
• Rural-serving programs – Would increase funding for Alaska Native Education (by $1 million) and Rural Education (by $4 million).
• Charter schools – Would provide $450 million, an increase of $10 million (2.3%), in contrast to the to the $40 million cut in the House bill.
• Statewide family engagement centers – Would provide a $5 million (50%) increase, which is more than the increase in the House bill.

Please also find attached tables from CEF that include information on the following:

1) Federal education funding details comparing final funding levels for FY 2018, FY 2019, FY 2020, and the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals for ED programs. This shows how current proposals compare to funding over time with prior fiscal years so you can easily see funding increases in blue, decreases in red, and flat funding in black. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - Senate Markup)

2) Details on ED programs that have had funding increases or cuts (flat-funded programs not included) for FY 2020 versus the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals. Note, for most programs, the House proposal has higher funding except for: for charter schools, Impact Aid, Rural Education, Alaska Native Education, CTE state grants, Title IV-A, and some smaller programs (the Senate proposal provides more funding for these). Funding increases are in blue, cuts are in red, and green highlights denote which proposal has higher funding levels for each respective program. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - House & Senate comparison).

This week, House and Senate appropriators are negotiating differences between their respective appropriations proposals, including the L-HHS-ED bill. Appropriators aim to reconcile any differences and pass all 12 appropriations bills by combining them into a large omnibus spending package before the government shutdown deadline of December 11. Stay tuned for more information as we learn more about FY21 appropriations in the coming weeks.

• Legislative text - Full text of the Senate L-HHS-ED proposal.
• Report language - Includes intent/rationale behind the funding figures proposed in the bill (ED funding starts on page 183, and there is a funding table on page 263).
• 302(b) allocations - Shows allocations for all 12 appropriations bills, including L-HHS-ED. (Note: The L-HHS-ED bill has an effective increase of almost $2.8 billion if you count a small increase in the discretionary funding and in CHIMPS [Changes in Mandatory Programs] that take unspent money from mandatory programs and use it for discretionary funding [essentially this is a budget gimmick]. The Department of Education actually only gets a $433 million net increase of available discretionary resources once you factor in rescissions of discretionary Pell grant funding.)
• Republican summary - Provides some highlights in the bill.
• Democratic press release - Provides Democrat appropriations leaders' commentary on the proposal (which says is it is "woefully inadequate" even if there was no pandemic, specifically critiquing the bill for underfunding education, child care, and other safety net programs.)

• Early education – Would increase funding for Head Start by $100 million (0.9%), freeze funding for Preschool Development Grants, and increase the Child Care and Development Block Grant by $50 million (0.9%). It also would freeze funding for the Child Care Access Means Parents in Schools program.
• Elementary and secondary education – The bill provides modest increases for a few programs, partially offset by cutting the Education Innovation and Research program by $60 million (32%). 

• Title I – Would increase funding by $125 million (0.8%) for the state grant program and freeze funding at FY20 levels for all other Title I programs.
• Impact Aid – Would increase funding by $20 million (1.3%), which is higher than in the House proposal.
• Title IV-A – Would provide $1.25 billion, an increase of $40 million (3.3%), which is more than in the House bill.
• IDEA/Special education – Would increase funding for all three state grant programs by a total of $125 million (0.9%). This is likely to lower the percentage of "full funding" that the federal government provides after adjusting for inflation and rising costs for educating students with special needs.
• Career Technical Education (CTE) –Would provide $1.358 billion for the CTE state grant program, an increase of $75 million (5.8%), which is more than in the House bill.
• Rural-serving programs – Would increase funding for Alaska Native Education (by $1 million) and Rural Education (by $4 million).
• Charter schools – Would provide $450 million, an increase of $10 million (2.3%), in contrast to the to the $40 million cut in the House bill.
• Statewide family engagement centers – Would provide a $5 million (50%) increase, which is more than the increase in the House bill.

Please also find attached tables from CEF that include information on the following:

1) Federal education funding details comparing final funding levels for FY 2018, FY 2019, FY 2020, and the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals for ED programs. This shows how current proposals compare to funding over time with prior fiscal years so you can easily see funding increases in blue, decreases in red, and flat funding in black. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - Senate Markup)

2) Details on ED programs that have had funding increases or cuts (flat-funded programs not included) for FY 2020 versus the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals. Note, for most programs, the House proposal has higher funding except for: for charter schools, Impact Aid, Rural Education, Alaska Native Education, CTE state grants, Title IV-A, and some smaller programs (the Senate proposal provides more funding for these). Funding increases are in blue, cuts are in red, and green highlights denote which proposal has higher funding levels for each respective program. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - House & Senate comparison).

This week, House and Senate appropriators are negotiating differences between their respective appropriations proposals, including the L-HHS-ED bill. Appropriators aim to reconcile any differences and pass all 12 appropriations bills by combining them into a large omnibus spending package before the government shutdown deadline of December 11. Stay tuned for more information as we learn more about FY21 appropriations in the coming weeks.

• Legislative text - Full text of the Senate L-HHS-ED proposal.
• Report language - Includes intent/rationale behind the funding figures proposed in the bill (ED funding starts on page 183, and there is a funding table on page 263).
• 302(b) allocations - Shows allocations for all 12 appropriations bills, including L-HHS-ED. (Note: The L-HHS-ED bill has an effective increase of almost $2.8 billion if you count a small increase in the discretionary funding and in CHIMPS [Changes in Mandatory Programs] that take unspent money from mandatory programs and use it for discretionary funding [essentially this is a budget gimmick]. The Department of Education actually only gets a $433 million net increase of available discretionary resources once you factor in rescissions of discretionary Pell grant funding.)
• Republican summary - Provides some highlights in the bill.
• Democratic press release - Provides Democrat appropriations leaders' commentary on the proposal (which says is it is "woefully inadequate" even if there was no pandemic, specifically critiquing the bill for underfunding education, child care, and other safety net programs.)

• Early education – Would increase funding for Head Start by $100 million (0.9%), freeze funding for Preschool Development Grants, and increase the Child Care and Development Block Grant by $50 million (0.9%). It also would freeze funding for the Child Care Access Means Parents in Schools program.
• Elementary and secondary education – The bill provides modest increases for a few programs, partially offset by cutting the Education Innovation and Research program by $60 million (32%). 

• Title I – Would increase funding by $125 million (0.8%) for the state grant program and freeze funding at FY20 levels for all other Title I programs.
• Impact Aid – Would increase funding by $20 million (1.3%), which is higher than in the House proposal.
• Title IV-A – Would provide $1.25 billion, an increase of $40 million (3.3%), which is more than in the House bill.
• IDEA/Special education – Would increase funding for all three state grant programs by a total of $125 million (0.9%). This is likely to lower the percentage of "full funding" that the federal government provides after adjusting for inflation and rising costs for educating students with special needs.
• Career Technical Education (CTE) –Would provide $1.358 billion for the CTE state grant program, an increase of $75 million (5.8%), which is more than in the House bill.
• Rural-serving programs – Would increase funding for Alaska Native Education (by $1 million) and Rural Education (by $4 million).
• Charter schools – Would provide $450 million, an increase of $10 million (2.3%), in contrast to the to the $40 million cut in the House bill.
• Statewide family engagement centers – Would provide a $5 million (50%) increase, which is more than the increase in the House bill.

Please also find attached tables from CEF that include information on the following:

1) Federal education funding details comparing final funding levels for FY 2018, FY 2019, FY 2020, and the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals for ED programs. This shows how current proposals compare to funding over time with prior fiscal years so you can easily see funding increases in blue, decreases in red, and flat funding in black. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - Senate Markup)

2) Details on ED programs that have had funding increases or cuts (flat-funded programs not included) for FY 2020 versus the FY 2021 President, House, and Senate proposals. Note, for most programs, the House proposal has higher funding except for: for charter schools, Impact Aid, Rural Education, Alaska Native Education, CTE state grants, Title IV-A, and some smaller programs (the Senate proposal provides more funding for these). Funding increases are in blue, cuts are in red, and green highlights denote which proposal has higher funding levels for each respective program. (File: 11/20 CEF FY21 Funding Table - House & Senate comparison).

This week, House and Senate appropriators are negotiating differences between their respective appropriations proposals, including the L-HHS-ED bill. Appropriators aim to reconcile any differences and pass all 12 appropriations bills by combining them into a large omnibus spending package before the government shutdown deadline of December 11. Stay tuned for more information as we learn more about FY21 appropriations in the coming weeks.