Amend the State Grant Funding Formula Under WIA Title II to Include English Language Learners With a High School Diploma or Equivalent

Date: July 20, 2010

. . . along with a hold harmless provision so that no state sees any reduction in its current funding level as a result of this change.

—An NCL WIA Reauthorization Priority

Article by John Segota

The demand for adult ESL programs has been growing dramatically in the U.S. for many years, however the funds distributed under WIA Title II – the largest federal funding program for adult ESL – are calculated based on the number of adults without a high school diploma. Although all adult English learners are eligible for WIA Title II programs, according to the following report from the Migration Policy Institute’s National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy, the funding formula excluded 11.2 million English learner adults with at least a high school education in fiscal year 2009:

Taking Limited English Proficient Adults into Account in the Federal Adult Education Funding Formula

Although improving one’s English skills is definitely a part of integration into the U.S., providing greater access to ESL has a definite economic outcome as well. The Migration Policy Institute looked at the issue of immigrant labor, and found that limited English language proficiency does serve as a barrier for immigrants to meaningful employment in the U.S., and that English language proficiency is critical to obtaining jobs commensurate with immigrants’ competencies.

Uneven Progress: The Employment Pathways of Skilled Immigrants in the United States

The Asian Pacific American Legal Center in California has put together a powerful video that illustrates this, and lets many learners speak for themselves:

Post your comments or questions on this issue below.

» Why the NCL Priorities for Reauthorizing WIA Are Important: Views From the Field

» Tips for Using Blog Discussions to Advance WIA Reauthorization Issues

» What are YOUR Priorities for Reauthorizing the Workforce Investment Act?

» Use A Consistent Definition of Adult Education and Allowable Local Adult Education Activities

Tags: adult English language acquisition, appropriations, funding formula

Comments RSS TrackBack 9 comments

Susan Pachikara

in July 20th, 2010 @ 09:20

Dear John,

I am trying to better understand how ESL instruction is funded and whether funding levels are adequate.

Susan Pachikara

Project Director, Midwest Works
Heartland Alliance for Human Needs and Human Rights
Chicago, IL

[Reply]
John Segota Reply:
July 20th, 2010 at 10:49 am
Susan,

At the federal level, there are a number of federal programs that provide resources for adult ESL instruction, however the main funding program is the state grants for adult education under Title II of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.

Under this funding formula, states are to provide some level of matching funds. This varies greatly from state to state, with some states only providing a minimum, while others (such as CA) providing much more.

Regardless of the funding source, the demand for public adult ESL programs far outweighs the supply. Here are links to two reports from the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials and the Migration Policy Institute that address the funding issue in greater detail.

EADULT ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES: Determining Need and Investing Wisely
http://bit.ly/9R7c61

The ESL Logjam: Waiting Times for Adult ESL Classes and the Impact on English Learners
http://www.naleo.org/downloads/ESLReportLoRes.pdf

I hope this information helps.

Regards,

John Segota

Susan Pachikara Reply:
July 20th, 2010 at 10:56 am
John, my understanding is that the other federal agencies that provide significant funding for ESL are the Department of State and HHS through TANF. Does that sound correct?

Best,

Susan

John Segota Reply:
July 20th, 2010 at 11:06 am
Susan,

Yes, I believe those agencies also provide some adult ESL funding. The GAO issued a report last year that provided a comprehensive overview of the government agencies that provide adult ESL funding. Here is a copy of it:

English Language Learning: Diverse Federal and State Efforts to Support Adult English Language Learning Could Benefit from More Coordination
http://bit.ly/aGVQDj

Regards,

John

mltait Reply:
July 20th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
Hi Susan and John. I am replying to Susan’s question about HLS and HHS funding for immigrants. I think what you may be referring to is funding for resettlement of refugees. Interestingly, the current calculation for state grant formulas under WIA Title II does not take into account how many refugees are settled in a particular state, nor how many may already be living there. When a refugee arrives in the US, HLS assigns them to an agency in a particular community according to a number of factors (all of which are not totally clear to me) whose job it then is to provide a number of services, including ensuring that basic needs are met. On this list of services is English language instruction and job placement — but because refugees arrive here with varying degrees of native language literacy as well as English proficiency, some percentage of them don’t actually access English language instruction during the resettlement period. If the refugee is not employed when the resettlement period expires (four to eight months depending on various criteria), they are then able to access TANF through the Department of Social Services ( this is where HHS comes in). Clients are eligible for TANF funding for a maximum of five years, assuming that they meet all the eligibility requirements, including job training. Adult education/ESL is not an allowable job training activity under TANF — but I think it is safe to assume that many refugees find their way into ESL classes while they are collecting TANF, even though there is no WIA Title II money specifically added to the state formula for this purpose. In Central NY (where I live and work), this is a pressing issue because we have a disproportionately high percentage of refugees assigned to the community, but jobs are few and far between. All local programs that provide ESL instruction are serving refugees, and most of these programs have long waiting lists! If you think this is murky from a public policy perspective, I would have to agree!
Marsha Tait, NCL Public Policy Committee Co-Chair

Art Ellison Reply:
July 21st, 2010 at 8:24 am
Marsha offers a good outline of the various routes that adults in the refugee resettlement program might take in trying to connect to adult education programs.
While adult education is an allowable training activity under TANF it is classified as a secondary, rather than a core activity, making it difficult for a TANF recepient to find the time for significant hours of instruction after they have met all of the core (required activities).
Art Ellison, Policy Committee Chair, National Council of State Directors of Adult Education
Jackie Taylor

in July 20th, 2010 @ 16:16

Hi John,

If the funding formula were changed to include these adult English learners, states with large populations of English language learners would see more funding, and states with small populations of adult English learners would not lose funding. So what we’re really asking for here is an increase in appropriations to cover the additional 11+ million adults currently not being calculated into the formula.

How easy or difficult of a change do you think this will be to make in terms of getting this into the next draft WIA reauthorization bill?

Thanks,

Jackie Taylor

[Reply]
John Segota Reply:
July 20th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
Jackie -

Although the argument to change the funding formula is straight-forward – have the formula reflect the population it serves – changing the formula itself is far from a done deal.

Many of the discussions around reauthorization are focusing on how WIA relates to jobs and workforce development, and unfortunately the role of language in that equation is often not understood by policy makers. Rather, English language acquisition is viewed simply as an end onto itself, rather than a means to end. Both the video above and the “Uneven Progress” report from MPI provide compelling arguments as to why the English language acquisition is very often a means to greater job opportunities, and thus provides a strong justification for the formula change.

Also, generally speaking, Congress is very cautious when it comes to changing funding formulas, so a lot of advocacy will be needed by the field to make this happen. This cannot be understated, and without it will make this proposed change – and many of others – much harder to realize in a revised WIA.

John
Michael Hunter

in August 4th, 2010 @ 16:15

One of the major problems with the current discussion is the emphasis on workforce outcomes and trying to make English language acquisition align with that. In a program like mine where the majority of our students are moms who have a 6th grade education from China, the primary reason they are in our program is to learn English while their children are in our Early Head Start and Haed Start programs. Education gains and should be a focus since work isn’t yet a priority.We do though have a portion of our participants who were college educated in China, but there isn’t enough funding to provide classes for the need. New York also is another state that has provided more matching funding for adult literacy than some other states, though not nearly enough.

[Reply]

National Coalition for Literacy

Get Alerts and Updates

Polls

Facebook

Categories

Links

Meta

Amend the State Grant Funding Formula Under WIA Title II to Include English Language Learners With a High School Diploma or Equivalent

Leave a comment

Comments RSS TrackBack 9 comments

Susan Pachikara

Jackie Taylor

Michael Hunter