<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [NLA] a proposal to "save" the NIFL</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF">
Christy -<BR>
Looks like we need a Mathematics Excellency Act as well to support numeracy development for all, especially adults and parents.<BR>
Tricia<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
----------<BR>
From: "Gullion, Christy" <Christy.Gullion@ed.gov><BR>
To: "'nla@lists.literacytent.org'" <nla@lists.literacytent.org><BR>
Subject: RE: [NLA] a proposal to "save" the NIFL<BR>
Date: Thu, Jul 11, 2002, 3:53 PM<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">Very long post with info on the Institute's various Congressional mandates and funding streams --<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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. <BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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:<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">"(1) provide national leadership regarding literacy;<BR>
(2) coordinate literacy services and policy; and<BR>
(3) serve as a national resource for adult education and literacy programs by--<BR>
(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<BR>
(B) supporting the creation of new ways to offer services of proven effectiveness."<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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.<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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:<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">"(1) disseminate information on scientifically based reading research pertaining to children, youth, and adults; <BR>
(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 <BR>
(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."<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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.<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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:<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">"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."<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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.<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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?<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">Andy wrote, "</FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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." <FONT COLOR="#0000FF">What is this "other information" that Andy has heard? What's coming next? Are we trying to solve something yet undefined?<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial">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.<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT><B><I>Christy Gullion</I></B> <BR>
<FONT SIZE="2"><I>Associate Director for Federal Policy</I></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE="2"><I>National Institute for Literacy</I></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE="2"><I>1775 I Street, NW, Suite 730</I></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE="2"><I>Washington, DC 20006-2417</I></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE="2"><I>ph. (202) 233-2033 <BR>
fax (202) 233-2050</I></FONT> <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>