Bill Overview
Title: Communities Serving Schools Act of 2021
Description: 2021 This bill directs the Department of Education to award four-year competitive grants to state and local educational agencies for implementing wraparound services in public elementary and secondary schools. Wraparound service refers to a school-based service that targets academic and non-academic barriers to student achievement, including assistance with academics and physical and mental health, provision of basic needs (e.g., food, housing, and clothing), and college and career preparation. A state educational agency that receives a grant must award subgrants to local educational agencies. A local educational agency that receives a grant or subgrant must use these funds for certain activities, such as hiring an on-site coordinator to ensure wraparound services are aligned with student needs and to connect students with those services.
Sponsors: Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3]
Target Audience
Population: Public school students worldwide
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill targets public elementary and secondary schools, which means all students in these schools are potential beneficiaries.
- Wraparound services include academic assistance, mental and physical health services, and basic needs provision, which are services necessary for student success.
- The inclusion of college and career preparation services means that older students, particularly in secondary schools, may see direct benefits.
- State and local educational agencies are involved, suggesting impacts on educational policy and administration.
Reasoning
- The policy targets public elementary and secondary school students across the United States, as it aims to address both academic and non-academic barriers to achievement. This suggests a relatively wide potential impact population, considering there are about 50 million public school students in the U.S.
- The limited budget, $125 million in the first year, implies prioritization might occur, possibly targeting schools in high-need areas first. This could mean varying levels of impact across different regions and socio-economic groups.
- The policy's benefits are multi-faceted, impacting students' academic scores, mental health, and physical wellbeing, as well as basic needs, making it highly relevant in underserved communities.
- While the policy suggests widespread potential impact, the scale of improvement in wellbeing will vary from person to person, depending on their initial conditions and specific needs.
Simulated Interviews
Student - 5th Grade (Chicago, IL)
Age: 10 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I like going to school but sometimes it's hard to concentrate because I'm tired or worried.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Student - 11th Grade (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 17 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I want to go to college but don't know where to start with applications and tests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
School Administrator (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could transform our school by addressing the gaps in student support services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Parent (Houston, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Help through school would ease my worries and give my child a better chance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Student - 9th Grade (Miami, FL)
Age: 14 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the school could get more help for kids like me who feel scared sometimes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Teacher - High School (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Funding could improve resources and student engagement in my classes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Student - 7th Grade (Rural Mississippi)
Age: 12 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish we had more things to help us learn after school.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Student - 12th Grade (New York, NY)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional support could help me strengthen my college applications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Social Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could improve collaboration and resources, helping more families and children effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Community Activist (Denver, CO)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this are what we need to level the playing field for all students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $125000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $125000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 3: $125000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $125000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The total number of students who will benefit from these services depends on the reach and effectiveness of the wraparound service implementations.
- Hiring and retaining qualified on-site coordinators and service providers could be a challenge, particularly in under-resourced areas.
- The indirect benefits, such as improved educational outcomes, could have far-reaching advantages for community and economic development, though these are not immediately quantifiable.