Enacted Legislation Summary
Federal Education Programs that Serve Private School Students and Teachers in The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110
January 31, 2002
Following is an outline of where federal education programs that provide benefits to private school students and teachers are located in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as reauthorized by The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. President Bush signed The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 into law on January 8, 2002, following passage of the bill by the House and Senate in December 2001.
All of these programs require the equitable participation of private school students, and/or their teachers and other educational personnel. Programs marked with an asterisk (*) contain language for equitable participation within their own titles. For other programs, the requirements for equitable participation are found in Title IX of P.L. 107-110.
Title I – Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged
•Improving Basic Programs Operated by LEAs* [Part A]
•Reading First [Part B, Subpart 1]
•Even Start Family Literacy [Part B, Subpart 3]
•Education of Migratory Children [Part C]
Title II – Preparing, Training and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals
•Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund [Part A] (Equitable participation required to the extent that the LEA uses the funds to provide professional development)
•Mathematics and Science Partnerships [Part B]
•Enhancing Education Through Technology [Part D]
Title III – Language Instruction for LEP and Immigrant Students
•English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, & Academic Achievement Act [Part A]
Title IV – 21st Century Schools
•Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities [Part A]
•21st Century Community Learning Centers [Part B]
Title V – Promoting Informed Parental Choice and Innovative Programs
•Innovative Programs* [Part A]
•Gifted and Talented Students* [Part D, Subpart 6] (more limited language on equitable participation)
The provisions requiring timely and meaningful consultation with private school officials have been strengthened. H.R. 1 continues current consultation requirements and adds provisions on:
o The size and scope of the services to be provided; and
o How and when the agency will make decisions about the delivery of services.
•Thorough consideration and analysis of the views of the private school officials on the provision of contract services through potential third-party providers.
•Where the LEA disagrees with the views of the private school officials on the provision of services through a contract, the LEA must provide a written explanation of the reasons why the LEA has chosen not to use a contractor.
•Consultation must continue throughout the implementation and assessment of activities
Although H.R. 1 continues to authorize funding that is specifically designated for capital expenses until October 1, 2003, the Fiscal Year 2002 Labor-HHS-ED appropriations bill that Congress passed does not fund that authorization for capital expenses. Thus, unless Congress enacts another appropriation, there will be no specifically designated capital expenses allocated by the Department of Education, starting with the 2002-03 school year.
Despite the elimination of appropriations specifically designated for capital expenses, Title I funds may still pay for capital expense type items such as leasing space, transportation, and mobile vans if those costs are reasonable and necessary for serving private (or public) school children. The costs would come out of the regular Title I allocation and be taken off the top as administrative expenses.
•Other New Provisions
o Requires participation, on an equitable basis, of private school teachers and families in activities developed under sections 1118 (parental involvement) and 1119 (qualifications for teachers and paraprofessionals);
o Makes clear that a factor in equitable services is that they be provided “in a timely manner”;
o Counts of poor private school children may be determined every 2 years;
o Makes clear that “proportionality” is an acceptable way to calculate poverty of private school children;
o Consultation must now include meetings between the LEA and private school officials, which must continue throughout implementation and assessment of services;
o LEA must maintain and provide to the SEA a written affirmation signed by officials for each participating private school that the required consultation has occurred; and
o Makes clear some of the factors, such as program quality, that are considered in making a determination that an LEA has substantially failed to provide equitable services.
For more information on the No Child Left Behind Act:
For a summary of the No Child Left Behind Act, go to . For a copy of H.R. 1, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, go to :