1

21st CCLC State Coordinator Interview for States

Interviewer – review the state’s RFP (if available), website and any other available sources to prefill information 

whenever possible. Customize the protocol to reflect the state’s stage in their RFP process—whether, for example, they 

have released their RFP, reviewed applications, or awarded grants. Only ask questions for which we lack information 

or need to verify our understanding.

Interviewer: 

Thank you for taking the time to talk with me about your state’s use of the ESEA flexibility waiver 

to support Expanded Learning Time (ELT) programs with 21st Century Community Learning 

Center (21st CCLC) funds. In preparation for this discussion, we have reviewed your state’s ESEA 

flexibility waiver application, the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) website, 

and (if available) your most recent Request for Proposals (RFP) for 21st CCLC, as well as XXX that 

you indicated we should review in preparation for this call. Our intent was to gather as much 

information as possible from these documents so that we can keep the length of this interview to a 

minimum. This interview should take about an hour, and will help us to understand how ELT is 

being implemented with 21st CCLC funds in waiver states around the country. We also hope that the 

interview will help us better understand the process states use to support the districts that will be

implementing ELT. The information collected through this interview as well as the interviews with 

other states will be synthesized in a report and shared with 21st CCLC state coordinators around the 

country and with the federal 21st CCLC program. 

Your participation is voluntary and you can end your participation at any time. With your approval, I 

will be recording our interview for transcription and analysis. I’ll be asking questions about why 

your state decided to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT, the structure of your 21st CCLC 

competition and particularly, how the state may support ELT, the requirements or preference (if 

any) for proposed ELT programs, and how you will monitor ELT activities. Is it OK for us to 

record this conversation? 

Do you have any questions before we begin? Okay, let’s get started.

Background

First we’d like to know a bit of background on ELT in your state.

1. What prompted your state to pursue the ESEA flexibility waiver for Expanded Learning Time? 

Probe: Why did the state want to participate? Is the ELT program related to a larger state vision or goals for 

low-performing schools?

2. We would like to find out if your state has or is working towards an explicit goal to create 

and/or expand ELT or if you simply want to provide flexibility to districts to develop an ELT 

program if they are interested. Did your state have an ELT initiative in place or have plans for 

such an initiative prior to the waiver request? If so, probe: Please tell us about your existing ELT 
2

initiative. How have you defined ELT? How will it be coordinated or integrated with the 21st CCLC flexibility 

waiver? 

21st CCLC Competition Plans for FY 2013

Next, we’d like to find out some additional detail about your 21st CCLC competition this year –

specifically its structure, funding, and supports you provided (or will provide) to applicants prior to 

the deadline. 

3. (For states that have not released their RFPs). First, when will you release your Request for Proposals 

(RFP) to the public?

4. Can you explain how your competition was (or will be) structured with respect to ELT? For 

example, did you (or will you) operate a separate grant competition for ELT? Probe: If separate 

competitions – how many funds were allocated for each competition? If one competition, any guidelines on how 

much of the total could support ELT programs? Are there any funding caps for ELT? Are there any incentives 

in the competition for proposals that involve ELT? Did you decide not to fund ELT initiatives at this time, and 

if so, why?

5. What was the rationale for structuring the competition in this manner? What were some of the 

alternatives considered? 

6. Did you (will you) provide guidance on how 21st CCLC funds may or may not be used to 

support ELT? What was the rationale for this guidance? Probe: Could funds support classroom teachers’ 

salaries? ...textbooks? Does a portion of the funds have to be allocated to support CBO staff involvement?

7. During your application process, did you receive any feedback, positive or negative, from 

traditional 21st CCLC recipients about setting aside or using funds for ELT? 

8. How would you describe, from the state’s perspective, the emphasis given to the expanded 

learning time versus traditional 21st CCLC programs that support out-of-school learning?

9. Did your state (or will your state) provide technical assistance or support to bidders prior to the 

application deadline? What was (or will be) the nature of this assistance? Was the technical 

assistance provided specifically about ELT? Probes: Did you (will you) offer a bidders conference to 

describe ELT options or to offer guidance on ELT in areas such as negotiating union issues, revising the school 

schedule, working with CBOs, or how applicants may search for other sources of funding to support ELT?

10. Do you plan to offer grantees any technical assistance or support after the competition? If yes, 

what supports will be available for implementation of ELT? Probes: revising the school schedule, 

working with CBOs, or how applicants may search for other sources of funding to support ELT, etc?
3

Features of Expanded Learning Time

Now we’d like to learn a bit more about the features of ELT as supported with 21st CCLC funds in 

your state, including how you describe some of the key components, how you addressed community 

partnerships, and what you anticipate are some of the key challenges.

11. Definition of ELT

a. (For states that have released their RFP) Based on your RFP, it appears that you 

defined/described ELT as XXXXX for the purpose of the competition. Do you have 

anything to add to that definition/description? What parameters or features (if any) did 

you suggest or require of districts interested in implementing ELT? 

b. (For states that have not released their RFP) How might you define or describe ELT for 

purposes of the competition in your RFP? What parameters or features (if any) will you 

suggest or require of districts interested in implementing ELT? 

c. (For everyone – potential probes for ELT features, as appropriate). Did you (will you) provide 

guidance on or include requirements for:

i. How instructional time should be expanded. Probe: For example, expand the school 

day, week or year by a certain number of hours? 

ii. How the additional time should be used. Probe: For example, to include enrichment 

activities, improve literacy, or career and college readiness, science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics (STEM), or to provide data-driven instruction or individualized instruction. Do 

you expect the introduction of ELT will lead to broader changes across the school day, and if 

so, how?

iii. Teachers’ activities. Probe: Is time for professional development or collaboration with other 

teachers or CBO staff required?

iv. Participation. Probe: Will the expanded time be mandatory for all students? What about 

teachers? CBOs?)

12. Thinking of the components we just spoke about, are there certain components of ELT that 

your state administration preferred (may prefer) in a district’s or school’s ELT plans, even if they 

were not explicitly required or articulated in the RFP? Probe: What features of ELT were viewed 

(may be viewed) most favorably if they appear in a district’s subgrant proposal? 

13. One feature of traditional 21st CCLC program are partnerships with community-based 

organizations (CBOs) to staff the program or offer additional enrichment, cultural, or other 

opportunities for students. Did you (will you) provide any guidance for applicants on the role of 

CBOs within a 21st CCLC program that includes ELT? Please explain.

14. What are the benefits associated with implementing ELT when the 21st CCLC grantee is an 

entity outside the LEA such as a community-based organization (CBO) or faith-based 

organization (FBO)? What are the challenges?
4

15. What do you think might be the biggest challenges facing a grantee as they plan and implement 

ELT? These can include any aspect of planning for or implementing ELT.

Information on Application and Award Dates

According to information we obtained previously, we believe that applications were (are) due XXX, 

and awards will be made (were made) by YYY. Is that correct?

Will all awards be announced at the same time and cover the same period? Probe: If not, ask about the 

timeline and award periods.

Information on Applicants (for states whose deadline for applications has 

passed)

If possible, we would be interested in learning a little about the status of the applications.

16. What is the current status of the competition? Probe: Are you reviewing applications, or have you made 

awards? 

17. (If appropriate) How many applicants applied for 21st CCLC funds? How many applicants applied 

to use funds to support ELT? Probe (if applicable): 

a. Did those that applied for funds to support ELT need technical assistance prior to the 

deadline for proposals? What types of TA did they tend to need/request? 

b. How many districts/schools tended to be included in a typical application for funds to 

support ELT? 

18. Did you receive feedback during the process that suggests why applicants did or did not apply 

for funds to support ELT?

Competition Results (for states that have completed their competitions and 

made awards)

We’d like to know what happened as a result of your competition. 

19. Do you feel that including ELT as an option for 21st CCLC funds this year worked well? Why 

or why not? Probe for separate competition or one competition, funding issues, issues with structuring or 

implementing ELT. 

If did not award any subgrants to support ELT, ask following questions in general. 

If did award subgrants to support ELT, ask following questions first only for subgrants that will not support ELT 

and again for subgrants that will support ELT.
5

20. How many subgrants were awarded? 

21. On average, how many schools were covered by a subgrant?

22. On average, what was the dollar value of these subgrants?

For States That Awarded a Subgrant to Support ELT 

23. Can you describe the features of the ELT programs supported? Probe on the following as appropriate: 

a. How instructional time will be expanded. Probe: For example, expand the school day, week or 

year by a certain number of hours? 

b. How the additional time will be used. Probe: For example, to include enrichment activities, 

improve literacy, or career and college readiness, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 

(STEM), or to provide data-driven instruction or individualized instruction.

c. Teachers’ activities. Probe: Is their time for professional development or collaboration with other 

teachers or CBO staff?

d. Participation. Probe: Is the expanded time mandatory for all students? What about teachers? CBOs?

24. Have award winners requested technical assistance, and if so, in what areas?

Accountability and Monitoring Activities

Last, we’d like to determine your next steps in terms of monitoring and accountability.

25. What is your process for ensuring that state-level ELT policies under 21st CCLC are 

implemented effectively at the LEA? Is there a mechanism in place for collecting and 

incorporating feedback from LEAs, schools, and ELT providers to improve ELT programming?

26. Tell us what steps you will take if your monitoring activities indicate that the ELT program is 

not being implemented as planned. What specific circumstances would trigger the state taking 

these measures?

27. Thinking ahead to three years from now, how will your state define success in implementing the 

ELT flexibility waiver? Is there anything else that is important about this program or your 

experience that we haven’t discussed?

***************************************************************************************

Thank you for your time to discuss the use of 21st CCLC funds to support expanded learning time 

activities in your state. After these interviews are completed with all states, we will be providing the 

U.S. Department of Education with a report documenting our findings, with the intent that it be 

released to all states involved in the initiative.