GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

SESSION 1993

H	1 

HOUSE BILL 1616*

Short Title:  Alternative School Funds.	(Public)
─────────────────────────────────────── 
Sponsors: Representatives Barnes, Black, Rogers; Arnold, Russell, Hensley, Cromer, Colton, Bowman, Sexton, Wainwright, Jeffus, Grady, J. Preston, Jenkins, Ives, Warner, and Kennedy.
─────────────────────────────────────── 
Referred to:  Appropriations.
─────────────────────────────────────── 

May 25, 1994

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT TO EARMARK FUNDS FOR ALTERNATIVE LEARNING PROGRAMS UNDER THE INTERVENTION/PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.
Whereas, the Alternative Schools Committee of the Legislative Research Commission of the 1993 General Assembly has studied the issue of alternative schools and has reported to the Legislative Research Commission that it supports earmarking funds to continue or create alternative learning programs in all school systems; and
Whereas, the Alternative Schools Committee of the Legislative Research Commission of the 1993 General Assembly suggested that these programs should serve at-risk students at all levels; have a well-defined mission; use multiple strategies including serving children in the standard classroom and in separate facilities and programs; have strong community involvement; have high expectations for staff and students; and have a strong program evaluation component; and
Whereas, the 1994 Extra Session of the General Assembly created and funded the Intervention/Prevention Grant Program to target at-risk students in areas where there is a high incidence of juvenile crime; and
Whereas, the Intervention/Prevention Grant Program allows counties to apply to use funds under the Program to create alternative learning programs but does not especially earmark funds for alternative learning programs only; Now, therefore,
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
Section  1.  G.S. 115C-238.41(c) reads as rewritten:
"(c)	The application shall include the following information:
(1)	Data on the incidence of juvenile crime in the geographical area to be served by the grant.  Sources of data may include the chief juvenile court counselor in the judicial district, the clerk of superior court, and local law enforcement officials.
(2)	An assessment of local resources from all sources for, and local deficiencies with regard to, responding to the needs of children who live in conditions that place them at risk of school failure.  This assessment shall be prepared by the local task force.
(3)	A detailed plan for removing barriers to success in school that exist for these children and for minimizing disruptive and violent behavior among all students.  This plan shall include proposed goals and anticipated outcomes, prepared after consultation with the task force.  This plan shall provide for the establishment or expansion of programs that have components based on one or more of the following models or other collaborative models:
a.	School-based Resource Center Model. – A School-based Resource Center is a school-based center that coordinates the delivery of comprehensive and integrated services in or near a school to children from kindergarten through the eighth grade and their families.  Services are provided through broad-based collaboration among governmental and nongovernmental agencies and persons reflective of the racial and socioeconomic diversity in a community.  Services are designed to (i) prepare children to attain academic and social success, (ii) enhance the ability of families to become advocates for and supporters of education for the children in their families, (iii) provide parenting classes to the parents of children who are at risk of school failure, and (iv) otherwise enhance the ability of families to function as nurturing and effective family units.
b.	After School Program Model. – An After School Program is a program that provides high quality educationally appropriate and recreational activities to students after the regular school day.  The program may be targeted toward providing academic support for students who perform significantly below their age-level peers or for students with learning disabilities. Local boards of education may permit teachers to adjust their work schedules so they can work in the program.
c.	Cities in Schools Program Model. – A Cities in Schools Program is a community partnership among public agencies, private nonprofit agencies, volunteer organizations, and local businesses that delivers services to students who are at risk of dropping out of school or who display discipline problems.  Services offered are based on an assessment of local needs and resources.
d.	Alternative Learning Program Model. –Alternative Learning Programs may be designed to serve students at any level, may use multiple strategies including serving students in the standard classroom or by providing individualized programs outside of a standard classroom setting in a caring atmosphere in which students learn the skills necessary to redirect their lives and return to a standard classroom setting. A program should maintain State standards and may include smaller classes and lower student/teacher ratios, school-to-work transition activities, modification of curriculum and instruction to meet individual needs, flexible scheduling, and necessary academic, vocational, and support services for students and their families.  Services may also include appropriate measures to correct disruptive behavior, teach responsibility, good citizenship, and respect for rules and authority.
		An alternative learning program should have a well-defined mission and  high expectations for staff and students. The goals of the program should target  (i)	reducing school dropout rates through improved student attendance, behavior, and educational achievement. When appropriate, programs should increase successful school-to-work transitions for students through educationally linked job internships, mentored job shadowing experiences, and the development of personalized education and career plans for participating students.
e.	Safe Schools Program Model. – A Safe Schools Program is a locally designed program for making schools safe for students and school employees.  The program may involve peer mediation and conflict resolution activities.
(4)	A statement of whether and to what extent the local board of education intends to contract with local, private, nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporations to staff, operate, or otherwise provide services for one or more elements of the plan.  Local boards are encouraged to contract for services, when appropriate.
(5)	A statement of (i) how the grant funds would be used to address these local problems, (ii) what other resources, including Safe Schools Grants, Chapter 1 funds, Chapter 2 block grant funds, dropout prevention funds, Basic Education Program funds, remediation funds, small school system supplemental funds, and low-wealth counties supplemental funds, would be used to address the problems, and (iii) how all available community resources and the components of the proposed plan would be coordinated to enhance the effectiveness of existing services and of services proposed in the plan.
(6)	A statement of how the proposed plan would assist a local school administrative unit in implementing the local school improvement plan.
(7)	A process for assessing on an annual basis the success of the local plan in addressing problems."
Sec.  2.  There is appropriated from the General Fund to State Aid for Local School Administrative Units the sum of five million dollars ($5,000,000) to be used for the 1994-95 fiscal year to implement alternative learning programs only under the Intervention/Prevention Grant Program, Article 16 of Chapter 115C of the General Statutes, as amended by this act.  In awarding grants for alternative learning programs under this act, the State Board of Education shall give first consideration to high quality applications for alternative learning programs not selected for funding in the first round of funding under the Intervention/Prevention Grant Program because the area to be served by the applicant presented a lower incidence of juvenile crime than other applications. New applications for high quality alternative learning programs serving areas with varying incidences of juvenile crime may also be selected for funding under this act.
Sec. 3.  Of the funds appropriated under Section 42 of Chapter 24 of the 1994 Session Laws, up to two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) may be used by the Department of Public Instruction to implement that section as amended by this act and for program evaluation purposes.
Sec. 4.  This act becomes effective July 1, 1994.