Sneak Preview: ED Issues FAQ on Full-Service Community Schools
(The following was excerpted from a recent Thompson Grants 360 article.) The Department of Education (ED) recently issued a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document discussing potential uses for American Rescue Plan Act (Pub. L. 1117-2) Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) grant funds for expanding current evidence-based full-service community school activities, as well as implementing these activities in new schools.
ED has issued 63 awards under the Full-Service Community Schools program since federal fiscal year 2014. A full-service community school is a public elementary or secondary school that uses established partnerships between schools, families and community organizations to provide well-rounded educational opportunities and meet the social, emotional, physical, mental health and academic needs of students. Full-service community schools can be a useful strategy to help ensure that a child’s opportunities are not limited by ZIP code, family income, race/ethnicity, disability status or other factors, according to the FAQ.
The FAQ notes that full-service community schools are “particularly well-positioned to respond to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including by working closely with partner organizations to address community needs” through strategies such as summer programming, food and nutrition programs, tutoring, mentoring, mental and physical health services, COVID-19 vaccine access and family engagement strategies.
In March, ED provided $122 billion in ARP ESSER funding to state educational agencies (SEAs) for relief for K-12 schools. Among the allowable uses for these funds are efforts to support evidence-based approaches to advance full-service community schools. An “evidence-based activity,” when used with respect to an SEA, local educational agency (LEA) or school activity, includes several tiers of evidence and is defined as one that: (1) demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (tier 1); moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (tier 2); or promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (tier 3); or (2) demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of those efforts (tier 4).
(The full version of this story has now been made available to all for a limited time here.)
Join us for our following Thompson Grants events:
Federal Grants Forum For Tribal Nations | August 11 - 12, 2021
Thompson Grants Workshop: The American Rescue Plan Act | August 26, 2021
