Community School Funding

A RESOURCE GUIDE FOR
UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
Community School Funding

October 2012

Prepared by:

Iris Hemmerich
Urban Strategies Council

Community School Funding

Table of Contents
A Resource Guide for Understanding Community Schools .......................................................................... 2
Updating the Resource Guide ................................................................................................................... 4
Additional Community School Resources ................................................................................................. 4
Our Community School work with Oakland Unified School District ............................................................. 5
Community School Funding: Literature Review............................................................................................ 6
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Review ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
1. Identifying and Integrating Revenue Streams .............................................................................. 6
2. Types of Funding and Revenue Streams (with a focus on Federal)............................................... 7
3. Resource Allocation ....................................................................................................................... 8
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 8
1. Challenges ..................................................................................................................................... 8
2. Promising Practices ....................................................................................................................... 9
3. Concluding Remarks ...................................................................................................................... 9
Community School Funding: Annotated Bibliography ................................................................................ 10
1. Strategic Organization and Financing ............................................................................................. 10
2. Federal Funding Programs .............................................................................................................. 14
3. State Funding Programs.................................................................................................................. 21

1
©Urban Strategies Council, October 2012

A Resource Guide for Understanding Community Schools
INTRODUCTION

Urban Strategies Council has collected and reviewed more than 175 evaluations, case studies,
briefs and reports for use by those considering or planning a community school or community
school district. Our intention is to provide interested individuals and stakeholders the
resources they need to better understand the unique structure and core components of
community schools. The promising practices, recommendations, tools and information shared
in this document have been culled from documents representing the last 20 years of research
and documentation of community schools across the United States.

We highlighted 11 content areas that we believe to be the most foundational for understanding
community schools. Within each of the content areas, you will find:

1. A literature review: The literature reviews for each content area are organized
around core questions and provide a synthesis of the most commonly identified
solutions and responses to each question, as well as highlights, promising practices,
challenges and recommendations.

2. An annotated bibliography: We gathered and annotated literature in each of the
content areas to underscore key themes, some of which include: best practices,
exemplary sites, models and tools. The annotations vary by content area in order to
draw attention to the most pertinent information. For example, the Evaluations content
area includes annotations of the evaluation methodology and indicators of success.

The 11 content areas include the following:

1. Community School Characteristics
Provides a general overview of the structure, function, core elements, programs and
services of a community school.

2. Planning and Design
Explores the general planning and design structures for community schools, and
discusses the initial steps and central components of the planning and design process, as
well as strategies for scaling up community schools.

3. Equity Frameworks and Tools
Examines literature and tools that can be adapted to an equity framework for
community schools. We included equity frameworks and tools that explore
disproportionality and the monitoring of disparities and demographic shifts.

4. Collaborative Leadership
2

Addresses how to build, strengthen and expand the collaborative leadership structure at
community schools. Collaborative leadership is a unique governance structure that
brings together community partners and stakeholders to coordinate a range of services
and opportunities for youth, families and the community.

5. Family and Community Engagement
Explores how community and family engagement operates as well as the challenges for
actualizing it at the site level. Family and community engagement is a unique
component of community schools in which the school, families, and community actively
work together to create networks of shared responsibility for student success.

6. Data Collection and Analysis
Addresses the outcomes measured at community schools, methods for collecting data
at community schools, and short and long term indicators.

7. Assessment Tools
Includes tools used to measure outcomes at community schools.

8. Community School Evaluations
Provides evaluations of community school initiatives with special attention paid to
methodology, indicators of success, findings and challenges.

9. Community School Funding
Explores how to leverage revenue streams and allocate resources at community schools.

10. Budget Tools
Includes tools that support the process of budgeting and fiscal mapping.

11. Community School Sustainability
Explores promising practices for creating sustainability plans, partnership development
and leveraging resources for the future.

3

UPDATING THE RESOURCE GUIDE

Urban Strategies Council will continue its efforts to update the Resource Guide with the most
current information as it becomes available. If you know of topics or resources that are not
currently included in this guide, please contact Alison Feldman, Education Excellence Program,
at alisonf@urbanstrategies.org. We welcome your ideas and feedback for A Resource Guide for
Understanding Community Schools.

ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY SCHOOL RESOURCES

National:

The Coalition for Community Schools
http://www.communityschools.org/

The National Center for Community Schools (Children’s Aid Society)
http://nationalcenterforcommunityschools.childrensaidsociety.org/

Yale University Center in Child Development and Social Policy
http://www.yale.edu/21c/training.html

Regional:

The Center for Community School Partnerships, UC Davis
http://education.ucdavis.edu/community-school-partnerships

Center for Strategic Community Innovation
http://cscinnovation.org/community-schools-project/about-cscis-community-schools-
project/community-school-initiative-services-coaching-and-ta/’

4

Our Community School work with
Oakland Unified School District
Urban Strategies Council has a long history of working with the Oakland Unified School District
(OUSD) to support planning for improved academic achievement. Most recently, we helped
develop and support the implementation of OUSD’s five-year strategic plan, Community
Schools, Thriving Students. Adopted by the Board of Education in June 2011, the plan calls for
building community schools across the district that ensure high-quality instruction; develop
social, emotional and physical health; and create equitable opportunities for learning. Urban
Strategies Council has worked with the school district, community members and other
stakeholders to support this system reform in several ways:

Community Schools Strategic Planning: Urban Strategies Council facilitated six School
Board retreats over a 14-month period to help develop the strategic plan. As part of that
process, the District created 14 task forces to produce recommendations for the plan, with
Urban Strategies Council facilitating one task force and sitting on several others.
Full Service Community Schools Task Force: Urban Strategies Council convened and co-
facilitated the Full Service Community Schools and District Task Force, which created a
structural framework and tools for planning and implementation, and produced a report
with a set of recommendations that formed the foundation of the strategic plan.
Community Engagement in Planning: Urban Strategies Council partnered with the district
to educate and engage more than 900 school and community stakeholders on how
community schools could best serve them.
Planning for Community Schools Leadership Council: Urban Strategies Council has been
working with OUSD’s Department of Family, School and Community Partnerships to lay the
groundwork for building an interagency, cross-sector partnership body that will provide
high-level system oversight and support, and ensure shared responsibility and coordination
of resources towards the vision of healthy, thriving children supported through community
schools.
Convening Workgroups: Urban Strategies Council continues to partner with the District to
convene and facilitate several workgroups developing specific structures, processes, and
practices supporting community school implementation, as well as informing the eventual
work of the Community Schools Leadership Council.
African American Male Achievement Initiative: Urban Strategies Council is a partner in
OUSD’s African American Male Achievement Initiative (AAMAI), a collaboration supporting
efforts to close the achievement gap and improve other key outcomes for African American
males in OUSD. Urban Strategies Council has developed data-based research; explored
promising practices, programs and policies inside and outside the school district; analyzed
the impact of existing system-wide policies; and developed policy recommendations to
improve outcomes in various areas identified by the AAMAI Task Force.
Boys and Men of Color: Urban Strategies Council is the Regional Convener for the Oakland
Boys and Men of Color site, which adopted community schools as a vehicle to improve
health, education and employment outcomes for boys and men of color.
5

Community School Funding: Literature Review
Introduction

Securing funding is the only way to actualize the program, service and operational elements
that comprise a community school initiative. Unfortunately, securing funding for community
school initiatives also proves to be one of the most difficult components of the planning,
implementation and scaling up process. It is critical to understand how to leverage funding and
resources in order to not only fulfill, but to sustain the community school mission. We used
three central research questions to guide the literature review of community school funding:

1. How do community schools identify and integrate revenue streams?
2. What types of revenue streams have been utilized and leveraged at community
schools?
3. How are these resources allocated?

Published research on funding community school and other related initiatives from 1998 to
2011 has been included as part of this literature review. The research thoroughly addresses the
need for a diversified pool of resources and discusses various federal, state and local funding
programs as well as grant application processes. However, what appears to be lacking in the
research is an explicit plan for sustaining funding levels during periods of financial volatility.

Review

1. Identifying and Integrating Revenue Streams

The most commonly identified avenue to integrate funding was outreach to community
partners, public agencies and philanthropists. Local Education Agencies (LEAs) were identified
as a means to integrate multiple federal funding sources to support a single project. LEAs can
utilize federal funding if they can demonstrate the costs charged to each federal program are
allocable to a particular community school program. This can be proved through: time and
effort records to demonstrate employees paid with federal funds benefitted the federal
programs that paid their salaries; inventory management records to demonstrate items
purchased with federal funds benefitted the federal programs that paid for the item; and
financial management records that permit the tracing of costs to specific funding sources1.

1
Pastorek, Paul G. “Use of Funds Manual.” Louisiana Department of Education, February 2011. Web. 20 March
2012.
<http://www.louisianaschools.net/lde/uploads/16546.pdf>.
6

2. Types of Funding and Revenue Streams (with a focus on Federal)

Community schools can receive funding from a multitude of federal government programs if
they align the eligibility requirements with specific community school program areas. Title I is
one of the most commonly leveraged federal funding programs for improving student
achievement so that schools make adequate yearly progress (AYP) and meet exit improvement
status. It has the potential to be leveraged for community school extended learning programs
and enrichment activities2.

Title II Part A can be used toward professional development at community schools and
implementing mechanisms that help schools effectively recruit and retain highly qualified
teachers, principals, and specialists in core academic areas and professional development. Title
II Part D can be used to improve student academic achievement through the access of high-
need schools to technology3.

Furthermore, Title III can be leveraged for community school programs that help ensure that
English Learners, including immigrant children and youth, attain English proficiency, develop
high levels of academic attainment in English, and meet the same state standards expected of
all children. Title IV, 21st Century Community Learning Centers, is currently leveraged at
community school initiatives and can be applied toward programs that establish or expand
enrichment activities in community learning centers, such as youth development activities and
recreation programs4.

Title X has potential to be leveraged in communities with concentrations of homeless children
and youth. The purpose of the program is to provide additional educational services and
training programs for youth and parents. Additionally, the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) is a significant federal source of funding that can be used for special
education and related services designed to meet the needs of children with disabilities5.

Promise Neighborhood funding can also be leveraged toward community school planning and
implementation. Successful applicants can receive federal grants for up to $500,000 for

2
Pearson, Sarah S. and Martin J. Blank. “Title 1 Dollars Support Community Schools.” Coalition for Community
Schools, January 2010. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/Title_I_Dollars_Support_CS.pdf>.
3
2012.
4 rd
Children’s Aid Society. “Building a Community School, 3 Edition.” Children’s Aid Society, September 2001. Pages
87-97. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.childrensaidsociety.org/publications/building-community-school-complete-manual>.
5
2012.
7

planning and $4-$6 million for implementation if the plan aligns with Promise Neighborhood
focus areas6. On a more local level, communities can leverage resources through grants and
agreements with community partners, public agencies and philanthropists. In some cases, local
resources such as the Community Development Block Grant can be leveraged for a wide range
of community needs that many community schools aim to address.

3. Resource Allocation

Research suggests that most community schools use the bulk of their financial resources for
core instructional purposes. In a particular Coalition for Community Schools study, they found
that developing learning competencies (through academic enrichment and after-school
activities, early childhood education, service learning and civic engagement, life skills, and
sports and recreation) accounted for 57% of targeted spending at most community schools7.
The same study found that 19% of funding was allocated to providing health and mental health
services, 12% allocated toward centers supporting families and another 12% allocated toward
staffing the sites.

In the majority of cases, the ratio of diversified funding to district dollars was around 3:18. This
finding underscores the importance of leveraging funding from multiple sectors. Categorical
grants, federal and state programs should be leveraged along with support from community-
based organizations, businesses and philanthropists.

Conclusion
1. Challenges

Tailoring community school components (such as programs, services and staff) so that they
closely align with the eligibility requirements for different program applications may present a
significant challenge for securing funding. Furthermore, the uncertainty of securing a consistent
amount of grant funding each year poses a challenge for community schools. A volatile political
and financial climate could impact the availability of grants for education program areas and
subsequently affect the overall success of a community school initiative. In order to remain

6
Padgette, Heather Clapp. “Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community
School Initiatives.” The Finance Project, January 2003. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/FundingGuide2003.pdf>.
7
Blank, Martin J., Reuben Jacobson , Atelia Melaville, and Sarah S. Pearson. “Financing Community Schools:
Leveraging Resources to Support Student Success.” Coalition for Community Schools, November 2010. Web. 19
December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/finance-paper.pdf>.
8
Blank, Martin J., Reuben Jacobson , Atelia Melaville, and Sarah S. Pearson. “Financing Community Schools:
Leveraging Resources to Support Student Success.” Coalition for Community Schools, November 2010. Web. 19
December 2011.

8

competitive and take full advantage of opportunities, community schools should consider
employing a strong resource development team dedicated to exploring and securing federal,
state and local funding.

2. Promising Practices

The most underscored promising practice in the area of community school funding was a
flexible funding strategy. The literature suggests that community schools are better prepared to
survive fluctuating resources by developing various avenues of support. Public funds appear to
be categorical and inconsistent; therefore, community schools need to generate additional
resources from other sectors. A mix of public and private sector partners was frequently called
out as a promising practice to expand technical and political capacity. Finally, a collaborative
leadership structure at the site and system level was identified as critical to building capacity at
minimal cost.

3. Concluding Remarks

Overall, securing diverse funding appears to be the most concrete way to build a stable
foundation for the community school strategy. Myriad federal, state and other categorical
funding programs can be leveraged to actualize an array of wrap-around services at community
school initiatives. It could be useful for community school initiatives across the U.S. to create
publicly accessible, shared networks in order to learn from the experiences of one another. In
the case of identifying and leveraging funding, sharing grant formulas or tools that have worked
for some community school sites could help streamline the process of resource development at
others.

9

Community School Funding: Annotated Bibliography
1. Strategic Organization and Financing

Building a Community School, 3rd Edition
Children’s Aid Society, September 2001. Pages 87-97. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.childrensaidsociety.org/publications/building-community-school-complete-
manual>.

The section, “Paying for Your Community School”, explores how to maximize service efficiency
through strategic partnerships. It also discusses how community schools allow for funding and
saving opportunities that enable more spending for children and family services. Ten key
lessons and principles for funding and sustaining community schools are provided, including:

1. Assess your existing resources (financial, capital and human) to see how they can
support community schools;
2. For external fundraising, especially seed money, start with your friends;
3. Assess and share your successes regularly and always share the credit for them;
4. In fundraising, there is no substitute for hard work;
5. Be aggressive, but realistic in fundraising;
6. Be persistent if the fit is a good one;
7. Consult with education colleagues to co-construct your sustainability plan, making
sure that you tap into available education as well as human services dollars;
8. In doing your funding research, look broadly;
9. Because public funds are often categorical and spotty, make sure you generate some
flexible, private resources; and
10. Always have contingency plans.

Additionally, a case study of sustaining Children’s Aid Society schools is provided along with lists
of federal resources for community schools.

Best practices: See 10 key lessons and principles above
Exemplary sites: Children’s Aid Society community schools, Washington Heights, NY

Learning Together: The Developing Field of School-Community Initiatives
Atelia Melaville. The Mott Foundation, September 1998. Pages 108-109. Web. 19 December
2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED427105.pdf>.

Appendix D of “Learning Together: The Developing Field of School-Community Initiatives”
provides a matrix of community school initiatives and the breakdown of their financing. It
serves as an example for those interested in financing and sustaining community schools.
10

Categories of the matrix include: primary source of cash funding; fiscal agent; cash provided by
initiative to average site annually; percentage of sites raising a portion of operating costs;
percentage of operating costs covered by redirected resources; do the schools help with
afterhours and utility costs; do the schools charge fees for some services; and do the schools
have a long-range funding strategy.

Exemplary sites:
1. Alliance School Initiative, TX
2. Beacons Schools, NY
3. Birmingham Community Education, AL
4. Bridges to Success, IN
5. Caring Communities, MO
6. Children’s Aid Society Community Schools, NY
7. Communities in Schools, inc., VA
8. Community Education Centers, MO
9. Community Education Program, MN
10. CoZi Project, CT
11. Family Resource and Youth Services Centers, KT
12. Family Resource Schools, CO
13. Full Service Schools, FL
14. Healthy Start, CA
15. New Beginnings, CA
16. Readiness-to-Learn Initiative, WA
17. School-Based Youth Services Program, NJ
18. Vaughn Family Center-Pacoima Urban Village, CA
19. West Philadelphia Improvement Corps, PA

Making the Difference: Research and Practice in Community Schools
Blank, Martin J., Atelia Melaville, and Bela P. Shaw. Coalition for Community Schools, Institute
for Educational Leadership, May 2003. Pages 49-61. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/Page/CCSFullReport.pdf>.

Under the subsection “Strategic organization and financing” in Chapter Four, five elements are
identified as part of effective organization and financing strategies. The five elements are:

1. Flexible funding;
2. A community schools coordinator;
3. Schools and all community partners who are willing to share resources;
4. A source of technical assistance; and
5. Adequate and accessible facilities.

11

Chapter five details the nine aforementioned elements and their role in sustaining successful
community school initiatives.

Best practices: See nine elements above
Exemplary sites:
1. Howe Elementary School, Green Bay, WI
2. North Middle School, Aurora, CO
3. East Hartford High School, East Hartford, CT
4. Northeast Elementary School, Ankeny, IA
5. Elliot Elementary School, Lincoln, NE
6. Schools Uniting Neighborhoods Initiative, Multnomah County, OR
7. Webster Open Magnet School, Minneapolis, MN
8. Marquette Elementary School, Chicago, IL
9. East Elementary School, Kings Mountain, NC
10. Carson High School, Carson, CA
11. Parkway Heights Middle School, South San Francisco, CA

Financing Community Schools: Leveraging Resources to Support Student Success
Blank, Martin J., Reuben Jacobson , Atelia Melaville, and Sarah S. Pearson. Coalition for
Community Schools, November 2010. Web. 19 December 2011.

The report describes how community schools generate resources, partnerships and activities.
Moreover, the “Financing Community Schools: Findings and Lessons” section details five best
practice findings from community school initiatives, including:

1. Community schools use the bulk of their resources to directly assist schools in
meeting their core instructional mission, while also strengthening the health and
well-being of students, families and neighborhoods;
2. Diversified funding in community schools leverages district dollars 3:1;
3. Collaborative leadership structures support finance and other key functions at the
site and system level;
4. A mix of public and private sector partners expands financial, as well as technical
and political capacity; and
5. Full-time site coordination contributes essential site level capacity at minimal cost.

Six recommendations are made based upon the findings, including:

1. Define and support a community school strategy through laws, regulations and
guidelines;
2. Provide incentives in ESEA and other legislation that move schools and community
partners toward results-driven public/private partnerships;

12

3. Fund site coordination and site coordinators in support of community schools;
4. Support the work of intermediary organizations that help align and leverage
resources and integrate funding streams to get results;
5. Promote interdepartmental coordination in support of community schools at the
federal, state, community and district levels; and
6. Fund professional development that enables people working in schools, with
community partners, and in federal and state agencies to learn how community
schools work and how policy can support them.

Best practices: See six recommendations above
Exemplary sites:
1. Community Schools Collaboration, Tukwila, WA
2. Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation, Evansville, IN
3. Chicago Public Schools Community Schools Initiative, Chicago, IL
4. Children’s Aid Society Community Schools, New York, NY
5. Sayre University-Assisted Community School, PA
6. SUN Community Schools, Multnomah County, OR
7. Redwood City 2020, Redwood City, CA

Models:
1. Figure 1: How Resources Are Used (IV)
2. Figure 2: Where Resources Come From—Combined Initiatives and Individual Sites
(IV)
3. Figure 3: Communities Where Learning Happens (pg. 3)
4. Community Schools Logic Model (pg. 5)
5. Figure 7: Rationale for Diversification (pg. 10)
6. Figure 8: Community School Collaborative Leadership Framework (pg. 12)
Tools:
1. Appendix B: Data Collection Matrix (pg. 38)
2. Appendix C: Fundraising Framework (pgs. 39-40)

Funding Stream Integration to Promote Development and Sustainability of a Comprehensive
System of Learning Supports
Center for Mental Health in Schools at UCLA. Center for Mental Health in Schools at UCLA. Web.
13 March 2012.
<http://smhp.psych.ucla.edu/pdfdocs/fundingstream.pdf>.

The Louisiana Department of Education developed a comprehensive system of learning
supports that unifies various intervention fragments by reworking the operational
infrastructure at schools, districts, regional units and the state department. The intention is to
clarify ways that federal, state, and local funding sources can be braided to effectively
implement and sustain the initiatives. The department presents templates that offer a

13

framework for district and school review of current and future planning for improving their
integration of resources.

Tools: Comprehensive Learning Supports System Sample Funding sheet
2. Federal Funding Programs

Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community School
Initiatives
Padgette, Heather Clapp. The Finance Project, January 2003. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/FundingGuide2003.pdf>.

The guide provides an overview of strategies for gaining access to and using federal funds. It
also provides a comprehensive catalog with information on 116 funding sources that can
potentially provide support for out–of–school time and community school initiatives. The guide
explores well–known sources of federal funding for child care, education and health efforts.

Section I looks at the changing context for financing out–of–school time and community school
programs. Section II describes the various federal funding mechanisms, their structures and
requirements. Section III highlights strategies for maximizing federal funds and building
partnerships. There are five broad categories of financing strategies highlighted in this section
that support programs and services for children, youth and families, including:

1. Making Better Use of Existing Resources;
2. Maximizing Federal Revenue;
3. Creating More Flexibility in Existing Categorical Funding;
4. Building Partnerships; and
5. Creating New Dedicated Revenue Streams.

Section IV contains a catalog of federal funding sources that can support out–of–school time
and community school services. Further resources are provided in the appendices.

Best practices: See five strategies above

Federal Education Resources for High-Poverty Community Schools: A Guide for Communities
Brown, Cynthia G. The Annie E. Casey Foundation, December 2003. Web. 19 December 2011.
<http://tarc.aecf.org/initiatives/mc/sf/strschools_fededresources_generic.pdf>.

The report is a financial resource guide detailing the federal education program resources that
apply to high poverty schools. High poverty schools are defined as schools with large
concentrations of low income students (generally from 35% to 100% of the school). The report
describes the requirements for the operation of the following 11 federal education programs:

14

1. NCLB Act Title I , Part A: Improving Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged;
2. IDEA Part B;
3. NCLB Act Title II, Part A: Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund;
4. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act;
5. NCLB Act Title I, Part B, Subpart 1: Reading First;
6. NCLB Act Title IV Part B: 21st Century Community Learning Centers;
7. NCLB Act Title II, Part D, Subpart 1: Education Technology;
8. NCLB Act Title III: Language Instruction for LEP and Immigrant Students;
9. Adult Education and Family Literacy Act;
10. NCLB Act Tile IV, Part A: Safe and Drug Free School; and
11. NCLB Act Title I, Part F: Comprehensive School Reform Program.

Each section explores the total amount of federal funds available and how funds are allocated
to states, school districts and schools. The sections end with a brief discussion of potential
controversies, a series of questions for advocates to ask local education officials and links to
various resources.

Using Title I to Support Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives Strategy Brief
Deich, Sharon, Victoria Wegener and Elisabeth Wright. The Finance Project, January 2002. Web.
19 December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/titleIbrief1.pdf>.

The Finance Project brief details the various uses of Title I funding for extended learning
programs and community school activities. The brief explores recent changes to Title I
allocation purposes, the allocation of Title I for program areas and strategies for using Title I to
support out-of-school time and community initiatives. Additionally, case studies of community
schools are provided to illustrate how schools have successfully leveraged Title I funding.

Best practices: see “Strategies for Using Title I to Support Out-of-School Time and
Community School Initiatives” (pgs. 9-13)
Exemplary sites (case studies):
1. Marquette Elementary School, Chicago, IL
2. Oklahoma City Public Schools, Oklahoma City, OK
3. Rose Park Together, Salt Lake City, UT
4. Missoula County School District Family Resource Centers, Missoula, MT
5. Elk Grove Unified School District, Sacramento, CA

Federal Guidance that Supports Community Schools Coordination
Coalition for Community Schools. Coalition for Community Schools, 2012. Web. 13 March 2012.
<http://www.communityschools.org/policy_advocacy/federal_funding.aspx>.

15

The Federal Funding web page details two federal funds that could be used toward site
coordination at community schools. The two federal funds detailed are Title I, Part A ARRA
Funds and the School Improvement Grant. Title I, Part A can be leveraged for hiring a
community school coordinator to facilitate health, nutrition and social services as well as
professional development, the provision of basic medical equipment, and even literacy classes
for adults in order to support children’s learning. The School Improvement Grant can cover
safety programs, community stability programs, family and community engagement, and family
literacy programs to help improve student academic achievement.

Programs and Funding Levels by Policy Area for Children and Youth
The Finance Project. Web. The Finance Project. 20 May 2012.
<http://www.financeproject.org/publications/Handout-ProgramsbyPolicyArea.pdf>.

The Finance Project provides a charted list of 111 federal programs for children and youth and
their aggregate funding levels by category. Children and youth program categories include:
Education and Early Care; Physical Health; Mental Health; Family Support; and Basic Needs,
Economic Security, and Child Safety.

Funding Note: U.S. Department of Justice Funding Opportunities for Afterschool
Dobbins, Diane. The Finance Project, June 2005. Web. 11 June 2012.
<http://76.12.61.196/publications/FN-DOJ.pdf>.

The Finance Project Funding Note provides an overview of the Department of Justice (DOJ)
funding opportunities that can support afterschool programs. It also provides examples of
programs that accessed DOJ funds in 2005 and tips for programs interested in accessing DOJ
funds in the future. The funding note emphasizes the potential to access funds for afterschool
programs to support violence prevention through strategic partnerships with the law
enforcement community. The following nine funding sources were identified:

1. Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants (JAG)
2. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) Formula Grants Program
3. The Title V Incentive Grants for Local Delinquency Prevention Program (Community
Prevention Grants)
4. The Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG)
5. The Weed and Seed Initiative
6. Safe start demonstration grants
7. Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Grants (COPS grants)
8. Safe Schools/Healthy Students (SS/HS) is a comprehensive violence prevention initiative
9. The Tribal Youth Program (TYP)
10. The Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program

16

*Funding sources and amounts may vary due to changing funding priorities and
appropriations since 2005.

Exemplary sites:
1. “Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Contract Supports Youth Development
Initiative” in Boston, MA (pg. 6)
2. “Blended Funds Create New Afterschool Grant” in Detroit, MI (pg. 6)
Strategy Brief: Using CCDF to Finance Improved Access to Child Care During Nontraditional
Hours
Elk Szekely, Amanda. The Finance Project, October 2004. Web. 12 June 2012.
<http://76.12.61.196/publications/usingccdftofinanceSB.pdf>.

The Finance Project strategy brief examines the need for child care for nontraditional-hour
employees. Although not directly related to full service community schools, nontraditional child
care aligns with and supports the goals of full service community schools. In the brief, several
state and local policy options to leverage federal child care funds for nontraditional-hour child
care are explored. It primarily explores the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF), the largest
federal child care subsidy program, as a strategy to broadly support nontraditional-hour child
care. The CCDF has two main purposes: to provide child care subsidies for low-income children
below age 13 and to enhance the quality of child care for all children.


Exemplary sites:
1. “Massachusetts: Direct Contracts Awarded To Providers of Nonstandard-Hour Care”
(pg. 8)
2. “Delaware: Child Care Capacity Grants Support Nontraditional-Hour Providers” (pg.
9)
3. “Colorado: Local Mentoring Program Serves Family-Based Providers in Weld County,
Colorado” (pg. 9)
4. “Washington: Public-Private Initiative Supports Seattle’s Kith-and-Kin Providers” (pg.
10)

Title 1 Dollars Support Community Schools
Pearson, Sarah S. and Martin J. Blank. Coalition for Community Schools, January 2010. Web. 19
December 2011.
<http://www.communityschools.org/assets/1/AssetManager/Title_I_Dollars_Support_CS.pdf>.

The brief provides state and local Title I Directors with a better understanding of the allowable
uses of Title I funding for community schools. It explains how Title I funds fit within the
definition of a community school and discusses the specific components of community school

17

programs that align with and have been approved for Title I funding. Additionally, the brief
provides profiles of community schools that have strategically used Title I funding.

Exemplary sites:
1. Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation, Evansville, IN
2. Lincoln Community Learning Centers, Lincoln, NE
3. Indianapolis Public Schools, Indianapolis, IN
4. SUN Community Schools, Multnomah County, OR
Use of Funds Manual
Pastorek, Paul G. Louisiana Department of Education, February 2011. Web. 20 March 2012.

The purpose of the manual is to provide a general overview of the various uses of funds under
major state administered federal education programs. It provides information about:

1. The general considerations Local Education Agencies (LEAs) should take into account when
determining whether a cost may be charged to a particular program;
2. The supplement, not supplant, provision that applies to most state-administered federal
education programs;
3. The administrative considerations LEAs should take into account when integrating federal
funds; and
4. Program specific information about various state-administered federal education programs,
their eligibility requirements, use of funds requirements and unique fiscal requirements.

Making the Most of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: A Guide for Full-
Service School Leaders and Community Partners
Gaughen, Katherine, Nichole H. Stewart, Robert LaVallee and Alexandra Zvara. The Finance
Project, May 2009. Web. 20 May 2012.
<http://www.financeproject.org/publications/MakingtheMostARRA.pdf>.

The Finance Project brief provides full-service community school leaders and their community
partners with information on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). It
details ARRA funding sources most closely aligned with the goals of full-service schools, such as
education-related programs, which constitute one of the largest ARRA investments. The
information is broken down into four sections, which are: (1) Considerations for Accessing
Funding; (2) Investments for Full-Service Schools; (3) Assessing Funding Opportunities; and (4)
Preparing to Secure ARRA Funds.

Ten funding sources are highlighted based on their applicability to full-service community
schools and their relevance to funding family supports, healthcare, education and out-of school
time initiatives. Moreover, a framework is provided for full-service community school leaders

18

and community partners to identify, assess, access and leverage the various funding
opportunities.

The Race to the Top District Competition
Duncan, Arne. U.S. Department of Education, 22 May 2012. Web. 3 July 2012.
<http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/race-top-district-competition>.

The web page provides an overview of the Race to the Top District Competition, including its
purpose, eligibility and funding. The competition provides funding to states that raise
standards, build better data systems, evaluate and support principals and teachers, and
dramatically transform their lowest-performing schools. It can be leveraged to support the
development of new and better assessments aligned with high standards, which is an integral
part of evaluating community schools. The grant allows school districts the flexibility to
individualize and target educational practices in their district for specific student populations.
All school districts are eligible to apply and there is nearly $400 million to fund about 20 grants
in the range of $15 to $25 million dollars.

Initiatives: Teacher Incentive Fund
U.S. Department of Education. U.S. Department of Education, 15 June 2012.
<http://www2.ed.gov/programs/teacherincentive/index.html>.

The web page provides a program description of the Teacher Incentive Fund, which supports
efforts to develop and implement performance-based teacher and principal compensation
systems in high-need schools. This grant can potentially be leveraged for teacher professional
development to improve student outcomes at community schools.

Funding Note: SAMHSA Funding Opportunities for Afterschool
Dobbins, Diane. The Finance Project, June 2005. Web. 11 June 2012.
<http://76.12.61.196/publications/FN-mental-health.pdf>.

The Finance Project funding note focuses on leveraging afterschool resources from the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), a federal agency within
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Although not directly related to community
schools, the SAMHSA mental health and substance abuse prevention services through
afterschool programming can be leveraged at community school sites. The following 12 grants
were identified:

1. The Community Mental Health Services Block Grant;
2. The Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant;
3. Services Grants;
4. Infrastructure Grants;
19

5. Best Practices Planning and Implementation Grants;
6. Service-to-Science Grants;
7. State Incentive Grants;
8. Child and Adolescent Mental Health and Substance Abuse State Infrastructure Grants;
9. Drug Free Communities;
10. Youth Transition into the Workplace Grants (YIW);
11. Community Collaborations to Prevent Youth Violence and Promote Youth Development
program (Youth Violence Prevention Grants);
12. State Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Coordination; and
13. The Targeted Capacity Expansion (TCE) Program.


Exemplary sites:
1. “County Coalition Receives SAMHSA Funds for Afterschool Planning” in Santa Clara
County, CA (pg. 5)
2. “Wyoming Blends Funds to Create New Grant Program” in Wyoming (pg. 5)

Funding Note: Using Institute of Museum and Library Services Grants to Support Out-of-
School Time Programs
Stellow-Griffin, Shawn. The Finance Project, May 2010. Web. 20 May 2012.
<http://www.financeproject.org/publications/UsingInstituteOfMuseum-FN.pdf>.

The Finance Project funding note explores the current Institute of Museum and Library Services
funding opportunities that can be used to support art and cultural out-of-school time
programs. It offers strategies and considerations for accessing and leveraging IMLS funds, best
practices for engaging youth in museum and library activities and descriptions of successful
programs and funding sources available to support out-of-school time programs. The majority
of grants were described as ranging from $5,000 to $150,000 per year for up to two to three
years, requiring a match or cost sharing from grantees. The types of federal museum grants
listed include the following:

1. National Leadership Grants;
2. Museums for America Grants;
3. 21st Century Museum Professionals;
4. Museum Grants for African American History and Culture; and
5. Native American Library Services Grants and Native American/Native Hawaiian Museum
Services Grants.

20

Federal grants for libraries include the Laura Bush 21st Century Librarian Program and the
National Leadership Grants for Libraries. The funding note also identified the Coming Up Taller
Awards and National Medal for Museum and Library Service as federal prizes.

Best Practices:
Identified best practices employed by museum and library programs:
1. Ensure continuity of program staff
2. Conduct needs assessments and evaluations to strengthen the programs
3. Provide on-going training and support to staff
4. Incorporate new sources of funding as programs evolve
5. Embed programs within the institution’s mission
6. Commit leadership
7. Connect deeply with community-wide local efforts
8. Partner with community-based organizations and other cultural institutions
9. Identify and cover gaps in available programs
10. Build awareness of the program and its impact on participants and the community
Exemplary sites:
1. A 21st Century Museum Professionals Grant to the Exploratorium in San Francisco
2. The Huntington Museum of Art in West Virginia providing arts instruction for eight
out-of-school time programs
3. Torres Martinez Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians conducting a spring vacation
science camp in its community library

3. State Funding Programs

Making the Match: Finding Funding for After School Education and Safety Programs
Sandel, Kate, Cheryl Hayes, Brittany Anuszkiewicz, Carol Cohen and Sharon Deich. The Finance
Project, August 2007. Web. 20 May 2012.
<http://www.financeproject.org/publications/MakingTheMatch.pdf>.

The Finance Project guide helps California leaders in schools, school districts, and community-
based organizations meet the After School Education and Safety (ASES) Program matching
requirement. ASES provides California State funding for schools partnering with community
organizations to offer kindergarten through ninth grade students safe and educationally
enriching opportunities before and after school. The guide helps prospective and current
grantees identify potential opportunities to raise the cash and in-kind resources necessary to
qualify for a program grant. It also provides a detailed summary of the ASES program, clarifies
the ASES matching requirement, provides advice on strategic ﬁnancing and sustaining after
school programs into the future, and offers four strategies for generating matching funds.

The four strategies include:

21

1. Accessing school and community resources;
2. Accessing business and foundation support;
3. Accessing local government resources; and
4. Accessing state and federal funding.

Each strategy details how to engage potential partners and resources and provides tools and
examples of financing strategies used in California.

Exemplary sites:
1. San Juan Unified School District, CA
2. Boys and Girls Club of North Lake Tahoe, CA
3. Mount Diablo Unified School District, CA
4. The Lawndale ASES program, CA
5. Oakland SUCCESS – Oakland Unified School District, CA
6. Del Norte County Unified School District, CA
7. National School District , CA– ASES Mariachi Music program
8. After-School All-Stars–Los Angeles, CA
9. Homework, Enrichment, Acceleration, Recreation and Teamwork (HEART) After
School Program of rural Tulare County
10. Sacramento’s Students Achieving Results for Tomorrow (START)
11. Tehama County, CA
12. The Oakland Fund for Children and Youth (OFCY)
13. Siskiyou County Office of Education ASES program, CA
14. Examples of state and federal program funding helps support ASES programs
Tools:
1. Worksheet 3.1: Financing for What? (pg. 19)
2. Worksheet 3.2: Estimating Your Funding Needs (pg. 22)
3. Worksheet 3.3: Cataloguing Existing Resources (pg. 24)
4. Worksheet 3.4: Assessing Your Funding Gaps (pg. 26)
5. Worksheet 3.5: Evaluating Potential Funding Sources and Financing Strategies (pg.
30)
6. Table 3.1: Potential Partners and Resources for Four ASES Financing Strategies (pg.
32)
7. Community Fundraiser Calculations (pg. 48)
8. Table 7.1: Highlights of State and Federal Funding Sources (pg. 85-86)
9. Table 8.1: Characteristics of Funding Sources and Financing Strategies (pgs.104-107)
10. Worksheet 8.1: Partnership Assessment (pg. 109)
11. Worksheet 8.2: ASES Services and Activities Inventory (pg. 110)
12. Worksheet 8.3: ASES Funding Source Assessment (pg. 111)
13. Appendix 1-A: Sample In-Kind Donation Tracking Form (pg. 116)
14. Appendix 1-C: Sample Request Letter for Community Support (pg. 122)
15. Appendix 4-A: Funding Sources by Services and Activities (pg. 132)
16. Appendix 4-C: Funding Sources by Eligible Applicant (pg. 134)

22

Getting the Grant: A Guide to Securing Additional Funds for Afterschool Education and Safety
Programs
Jones, Michelle Ganow. The Finance Project, August 2007. Web. 20 May 2012.
<http://76.12.61.196/publications/FINA_GrantwritingGuide.pdf>.

The Finance Project guide aims to help grantees and program site leaders develop effective
grant proposals for the After School Education and Safety Program (ASES – California
Proposition 49). ASES provides California State funding for schools that partner with community
organizations to offer kindergarten through ninth grade students safe and educationally
enriching opportunities before and after school. The ASES program offers three-year renewable
grants that provide $7.50 per pupil per day.

In the first section of the guide, the fundamentals of grant-writing are explored and advice on
how to develop effective grant proposals for after school programs is provided. The second
section of the guide summarizes strategies for generating program support from an array of
funders. The last two sections of the guide help ASES grantees and program site leaders
develop an effective grant proposal and offer tips on how to avoid common grant-writing
pitfalls. Appendix B and C provide useful connections to grant-writing and ASES resources.

Models: Appendix A: Sample Afterschool Program Logic Model (pg. 39)

State Administered CDBG
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2012. Web. 22 August 2012.
<http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/communitydev
elopment/programs/stateadmin>.

The web page provides information on the administration of the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG). The primary objective of the CDBG program is to develop viable
communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and by expanding
economic opportunities for persons of low- and moderate-income. The State must ensure that
at least 70 percent of its CDBG grant funds are used for activities that benefit low- and
moderate-income persons over a one-, two-, or three-year time period. Some of the activities
within the CDBG parameters have the potential to be leveraged for community school
purposes. Examples of some broadly defined community development activities funded by
CDBG include:

1. Acquisition of property for public purposes;
2. Construction or reconstruction of streets, water and sewer facilities, neighborhood
centers, recreation facilities, and other public works;
3. Public services; and

23

4. Planning activities.

24

Community School Funding

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (10)

Destaque

Destaque (6)

Semelhante a Community School Funding

Semelhante a Community School Funding (20)

Mais de Urban Strategies Council

Mais de Urban Strategies Council (13)

Último

Último (20)

Community School Funding