[NLA] a proposal to "save" the NIFL

[Tricia Donovan]

Christy -
Looks like we need a Mathematics Excellency Act as well to support numeracy
development for all, especially adults and parents.
Tricia


----------
From: "Gullion, Christy" <Christy.Gullion at ed.gov>
To: "'nla at lists.literacytent.org'" <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Subject: RE: [NLA] a proposal to "save" the NIFL
Date: Thu, Jul 11, 2002, 3:53 PM


Very long post with info on the Institute's various Congressional mandates
and funding streams --

This is in response to the many requests to "hear from NIFL" on this topic.
I was surprised by Andy's proposal to "give back" the $5 million
appropriation we now receive under the No Child Left Behind Act.  My first
reaction was to contact some staffers on Capitol Hill and ask them
(confidentially) what they thought of such a proposal.  Their reactions were
mixed -- some thought the Institute should never have received the money and
should focus solely on adult (not family) literacy issues while others felt
strongly that we should focus on literacy across the lifespan.  Several
asked me what problem this proposal was intending to solve.  I think that is
a good question and we should think more about that.  But before we go down
this road, I want to remind people of our various Congressional mandates and
funding streams.

First, we receive a base appropriation of $6.56 million to fulfill our
Congressional mandate under the Title II (Adult Education and Family
Literacy Act) of the Workforce Investment Act (P.L. 105-220).  In section
242 of the Act, the purpose of the National Institute for Literacy is to:

"(1) provide national leadership regarding literacy;
(2) coordinate literacy services and policy; and
(3) serve as a national resource for adult education and literacy programs
by--
    (A) providing the best and most current information available, including
the work of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in
the area of phonemic awareness, systematic phonics, fluency, and reading
comprehension, to all recipients of federal assistance that focuses on
reading, including programs under Titles I and VII of the Elementary and
Secondary Act of 1965, the Head Start Act, the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act, and this Act; and
    (B) supporting the creation of new ways to offer services of proven
effectiveness."

It is interesting to note that back in 1998 when the the Adult Education and
Family Literacy Act was enacted, the mandate for the Institute was to act as
a national resource not only for adult education and family literacy
programs, but ALSO for other programs that receive federal financial
assistance (grants/funding).  Those other programs listed above are almost
exclusively focused on children.

Starting in 1999, the Institute has also received $5 million per year under
the Reading Excellence Act and now the new Reading First initiative as
authorized through the No Child Left Behind Act (P.L. 107-110).  In section
1207 of that Act, the National Institute for Literacy, in collaboration with
the Secretary of Education, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and
the Director of the National Institute for Child Health and Human
Development, shall:

"(1) disseminate information on scientifically based reading research
pertaining to children, youth, and adults;
(2) identify and disseminate information about schools, local educational
agencies, and state educational agencies that have effectively developed and
implemented classroom reading programs that meet the requirements of this
subpart, including those state educational agencies, local educational
agencies, and schools that have been identified as effective through the
evaluation and peer review provisions of this subpart; and
(3) support the continued identification and dissemination of information on
reading programs that contain the essential components of reading
instruction as supported by scientifically based reading research, that can
lead to improved reading outcomes for children, youth, and adults."

Just for a point of reference as to how far we've come, the Reading
Excellence Act, which preceded the Reading First section of the No Child
Left Behind Act, required the Institute to disseminate information to the
same entities listed above.  However, the Reading Excellence Act ONLY
allowed for a focus on child literacy efforts.  The new legislation, Reading
First, actually expands our authority to disseminate information and support
research on reading instruction for children, YOUTH, and ADULTS.  Andy was
instrumental in getting this language included in the No Child Left Behind
Act before he left the Institute so that we could legitimately use some of
the $5 million to focus on reading across the lifespan.

In addition to the $6.56 million and the $5 million appropriations, the
Institute also receives $2 million annually through the Literacy Involves
Families Together (LIFT) Act (P.L. 106-554).  This language, which can be
found in Title I, Part B, Subpart 2, Section 1224 of the No Child Left
Behind Act, authorizes the Institute, in consultation with the Secretary of
Education, to:

"carry out research that (A) is scientifically based reading research; and
(B) determines the most effective ways of improving the literacy skills of
adults with reading difficulties, and how family literacy services can best
provide parents with the knowledge and skills the parents need to support
their children's literacy development."

My point here is that the Institute currently receives a total appropriation
of $13.56 million to fulfill three mandates, all of which are interrelated
and focus on adult, family, and child literacy.  Of that $13.56 million,
more than half goes almost exclusively toward adult and family literacy
efforts.  I strongly believe that the $5 million we receive under REA/No
Child Left Behind allows us to do MORE for adult and family literacy rather
than less.

Now I have a few questions for the list...  Can people please explain why
they feel the Institute has lost or ignored it's focus on adult literacy?
What exactly has the Institute done/not done that precipitates these
feelings?  Or, does this concern stem from the Administration's board
nominees and/or the field's impression that this Administration doesn't care
about adult literacy?  In other words, what problem are we trying to solve
with Andy's proposal?

Andy wrote, "With the announcement of the nominees for the Board and other
information I have received about what is coming next, I now think that the
future of the NIFL as a place with a major focus on adult and family
literacy and a place that provides serious leadership in those areas is in
serious jeopardy."  What is this "other information" that Andy has heard?
What's coming next?  Are we trying to solve something yet undefined?

I'm not suggesting that Andy's proposal shouldn't be considered, but I am
suggesting we do some more homework before we charge ahead.
Christy Gullion
Associate Director for Federal Policy
National Institute for Literacy
1775 I Street, NW, Suite 730
Washington, DC  20006-2417
ph. (202) 233-2033
fax (202) 233-2050 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.literacytent.org/pipermail/nla/attachments/20040711/d6765c45/attachment.htm