Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006: An Overview
Released: 2016-06-20T00:00:00

Introduction

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV; P.L. 109-270 ) is the most recent federal law supporting career and technical education (CTE) services offered within the states at the secondary and postsecondary education levels. CTE, which has historically been known as vocational education, comprises organized educational activities that provide individuals with the knowledge and skills needed to prepare for the labor market in general and for careers in current or emerging professions in particular. Traditionally, CTE has also included preparation of students for roles outside the paid labor market.

The stated purpose of Perkins IV is to support the development of career and technical, as well as academic, skills among secondary and postsecondary education students enrolled in CTE programs. Perkins IV was authorized by statute through FY2012 and was automatically extended through FY2013 by the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA). Most recently, Perkins IV was funded at $1.1 billion for FY2016.

As of April 2016, the House has had one hearing on reauthorization of Perkins IV in the 114 th Congress. It was held by the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education of the Education and the Workforce Committee on October 27, 2015, and entitled "Improving Career and Technical Education to Help Students Succeed in the Workforce."

This report is divided into four major sections. The first section provides an overview of career and technical education, including student participation levels. This is followed by a brief legislative history of the federal government's involvement in CTE. The third section discusses Perkins IV in detail, including an overview of appropriations levels and state performance. The final section summarizes some of the more significant findings from the National Assessment of Career and Technical Education, which was completed in 2015.

Career and Technical Education under Perkins

For the purposes of Perkins IV, CTE includes organized educational activities that impart technical or occupational skills at the secondary and postsecondary levels and lead to an industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or an associate's degree. CTE courses are usually distinguished from courses in the liberal arts by being more directly tied to specific professions or occupational fields. CTE programs in a wide variety of occupations are offered at both the secondary and postsecondary levels of education. Practitioners of CTE have organized its occupations into career clusters and career pathways in order to help students understand potential sequences of academic and CTE courses they need to take in order to be best prepared for specific careers. Figure 1 shows the different career clusters and student participation in those clusters at the secondary and postsecondary levels.

Career and Technical Education at the Secondary Education Level

CTE at the secondary level has several main goals. One of these is preparing students for roles outside the paid labor market, such as family and consumer sciences education. Another is providing students with general employment skills, such as word processing and other basic computer skills, as well as so-called soft skills, which include communication, teamwork, and leadership. Finally, CTE at the secondary level also teaches skills that are specific to particular occupations or career clusters. Depending on the field, occupational CTE may prepare students for immediate entry into the workforce or for continuation of education at the postsecondary level.

Secondary CTE providers typically include

public and private high schools, including Bureau of Indian Education schools; CTE-specific schools, area CTE schools, and career academies within comprehensive high schools, which are all focused on providing occupational preparation; detention centers and correctional facilities; and cooperative programs with community or technical colleges.

CTE courses are widely available to high school students. Nearly all public high school students (95% of ninth graders in 2009) attended a school that offered CTE courses, either at the school itself or at a partnering institution. A vast majority (88.5%) of public high school graduates in 2009 attained at least one CTE credit, and 19% earned at least three CTE credits in a single occupational area, satisfying the Department of Education's (ED's) non-regulatory guidance for the definition of a CTE concentrator.

Career and Technical Education at the Postsecondary Education Level

CTE at the postsecondary level is largely made up of programs designed to prepare students for specific careers and occupational fields. Completing a postsecondary CTE program may lead to an associate's degree, an industry-recognized credential or certificate, noncredit courses to improve knowledge and skills, noncredit training customized for a particular employer, or continuing education credits required for maintaining a license or credential.

Postsecondary CTE providers typically include

community and technical colleges; private two-year colleges; public and private four-year universities; vocational schools; employers, labor organizations, and other industry organizations that provide apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs; adult workforce education centers; and correctional facilities.

In program year (PY) 2011-2012, over 75% of the 8.4 million undergraduate students seeking sub-baccalaureate CTE credentials were attending two-year institutions. In the same program year, 5,767 institutions of higher education (IHEs), or 80% of all postsecondary institutions, offered a postsecondary certificate or associate's degree in a CTE field.

History of Federal Involvement in CTE

The federal government has a long history of supporting workforce development, including CTE. At the secondary level, the historical goals of federal legislation included providing relevant skills for students in order to keep them enrolled in high schools, as well as attracting and retaining qualified CTE teachers with real-world professional experience. CTE at the postsecondary level has historically been aimed at providing students in sub-baccalaureate programs with skills relevant to the requirements of specific occupations or careers, and providing an alternative to a postsecondary education with a focus on liberal arts.

Morrill Acts (1862 and 1890)

The Morrill Act of 1862 (7 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) and the Second Morrill Act of 1890 (7 U.S.C. 312 et seq.) were the federal government's first legislative forays into workforce development. The acts provided for the donation of federal land and funds to help establish land-grant colleges, with the expressed goal of teaching the agricultural and mechanical arts to lower- and middle-class students.

Smith-Hughes Act (1917)

The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 (P.L. 64-347) provided for the development of vocational education programs in agriculture, trade, industry, and home economics. It also provided funding for the preparation and salaries of teachers in those fields.

Vocational Education Act of 1946

The Vocational Education Act of 1946 (P.L. 79-586) assigned specific allocations of funds to each subject within vocational education at the time. It specified that funds could be used for salaries, teacher training, development of training programs, counseling, and equipment and supplies. Under the act, states were required to match federal funds at the state and local levels.

Vocational Education Act of 1963 and Vocational Education Amendments of 1968

The Vocational Education Act of 1963 (VEA; P.L. 88-210), which is the precursor of Perkins IV, and the subsequent Vocational Education Amendments of 1968 (P.L. 90-576) greatly expanded the federal role in vocational education. The VEA created vocational programs to serve special populations and expanded postsecondary and adult vocational education programs. It also increased support for dedicated vocational education schools, including providing funds for their construction. Additionally, these laws provided funding for research and program development and for demonstration programs related to vocational education. Within a year of the enactment of VEA, federal appropriations for vocational education were five times greater than they had been prior to the act's passage.

The amendments also established a National Advisory Council on Vocational Education with the goals of advising the Commissioner of Education on administration and design of programs relating to vocational education and of collecting and disseminating information about the effectiveness of such programs.

Perkins I

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984 (Perkins I, P.L. 98-524 ) placed a focus on vocational education programs for special populations, including students with disabilities, economically disadvantaged students, adult students, single parents and homemakers, and students in correctional institutions. Specifically, Perkins I required each state to spend 57% of its basic grant funds on activities targeting the vocational education of special populations. The remainder was to be spent on improvement of vocational education programs.

Perkins II

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act Amendments of 1990 (Perkins II, P.L. 101-392 ) made several revisions to the Perkins program. Notably, the act created the Tech Prep program designed to coordinate secondary and postsecondary vocational education activities into a coherent sequence of courses. The law also required that at least 75% of state funds be allocated to local recipients and eliminated most of the set-asides for special populations from Perkins I. Additionally, Perkins II required states to develop and implement performance standards and measures, including measures of gains in learning and in program performance as measured, for example, by program completion or job placement rates.

Perkins III

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998 (Perkins III, P.L. 105-332 ) increased the share of state funds distributed to the local level to 85%, of which up to 8.5% could be reserved for programs in rural and other high-need areas. Perkins III also expanded state accountability, introducing core indicators of performance and adjusted levels of performance on each core indicator, to be negotiated between the state and the Secretary of Education. Sanctions based on states failing to meet performance levels were also introduced, as were incentive grants to states for exceeding performance levels.

Perkins IV

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV; P.L. 109-270 ) was signed into law by President George W. Bush on August 12, 2006. The act was authorized through FY2012, which ended on September 30, 2012. The authorization was extended through FY2013 under the General Education Provisions Act, although the act continues to receive appropriations in FY2016.

While maintaining the overall structure of its predecessors, Perkins IV introduced the following major changes:

The act was renamed "career and technical," replacing "vocational and technical," education; separate core indicators of performance for the Basic State Grants (BSG) program were introduced for the secondary and postsecondary levels, requiring grantees to meet at least 90% of their adjusted levels of performance on each core indicator; state improvement plans were required if the 90% target is not met on the BSG adjusted level of performance for at least one core indicator; CTE provisions were explicitly linked with the academic standards required under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as authorized by the No Child Left Behind Act ( P.L. 107-110 ); each state was required to develop and describe programs of study, or suggested nonduplicative sequences of secondary and postsecondary courses that lead to an industry recognized credential; each local BSG grantee was required to offer at least one state-recognized program of study; and states were able to consolidate funding under the Tech Prep program with their Basic State Grants funding.

Structure and Purpose of the Act

Perkins IV authorizes funding for five separate programs:

the Basic State Grants program; Tech Prep; National Programs; the Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions (TCPCTI) Program; and Occupational and Employment Information.

Perkins IV provides the main source of direct federal funding for CTE programs. The stated purpose of Perkins IV is to develop more fully the academic and career and technical skills of CTE students in secondary and postsecondary education.

Title I—Basic State Grants Program

The Basic State Grants (BSG) program is a formula grant program that typically makes up over 90% of the funds appropriated under Perkins IV. The uses of BSG funds are closely aligned with the stated purpose of Perkins IV and include, for example, developing students' CTE skills, developing and expanding CTE programs, providing professional development for CTE instructors, acquiring equipment and supplies, integrating academic and CTE standards, and linking CTE education at the secondary and postsecondary levels through nonduplicative programs of study and career pathways.

The following sections of this report describe the BSG program funding allocation formulas, planning activities at the state and local levels, uses of funds, and reporting and accountability requirements.

Reservations and State Allocations

After several set-asides for outlying territories and Native American and Native Hawaiian programs, funds are allocated to states according to a formula based primarily on states' average per capita incomes and populations of individuals aged between 15 and 65 years. Each state subsequently determines the portion of its allocation that goes to CTE programs at the secondary level and the portion that goes to postsecondary CTE programs. Additional formulas, discussed later in this report, determine the size of subgrants awarded to grantees at the local level.

Of the funds appropriated for the BSG program, the Secretary is required to make several reservations of funds before the rest is allocated to the states by formula.

Assistance to the Outlying Areas19

The total set-aside for outlying areas is 0.13% of the amount appropriated for BSG. Of these, Guam receives an initial allotment of $660,000; American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands receive $350,000 each; and the Republic of Palau receives $160,000. The remainder of the set-aside is divided equally among the outlying areas. Since FY2008, the levels of appropriations have been insufficient for meeting these initial allotments. When this is the case, a ratable reduction is triggered. The final, ratably reduced, allotments to the outlying areas are shown in the state allotment table in Appendix B .

Native American and Native Hawaiian Programs22

The Secretary is required to reserve 1.25% of BSG funds for the Native American Career and Technical Education Program (NACTEP). Eligible entities for NACTEP funds include federally organized Indian tribes, tribal organizations, Alaska Native entities, and consortia of such. NACTEP funds may be used to carry out CTE programs and services or to provide direct assistance to CTE students.

The Native Hawaiian Program, which receives a 0.25% reservation, requires the Secretary to award grants to community-based organizations serving Native Hawaiians to plan and administer CTE programs that benefit Native Hawaiians.

State Allocation Formula26

After reservations for outlying areas and the Native American and Native Hawaiian CTE Programs, Basic State Grants funds are awarded to the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The state allocation formula awards proportionally larger grants to states with larger populations in the age range traditionally targeted by CTE programs (15 to 19 years old) and to states with lower than average per capita incomes (PCI).

In the calculation of initial state allocations, 58.8% of the funds are distributed in proportion to each state's share of the national population of individuals aged 15 to 19; 23.5% in proportion to each state's share of individuals aged 20 to 24; and 17.6% in proportion to each state's share of individuals aged 25 to 65. These population-based allotments are adjusted based on states' PCI, with the allotment ratios bounded between 0.4 (for states with PCIs substantially higher than the national average) and 0.6 (for states with PCIs significantly lower than the national average). In accordance with statutory provisions, a state's PCI is defined as that state's average PCI over the most recent three years for which data are available.

Incorporated into the formula are certain features that guarantee minimum funding levels. The first one of these features is a FY1998 hold harmless provision, which ensures that states receive at least the amount they were awarded in FY1998. Additionally, each state grant must be no less than a minimum equal to 0.5% of the total amount available for state grants, subject to a special rule adjustment. The special rule calculates two quantities for each state:

1. 150% of its prior-year grant, and 2. the state population of 15- to 65-year-olds in the prior year multiplied by 150% of the national average per pupil payment (NAPPP) for the current year.

Based on these calculations, an adjusted 0.5% minimum is calculated for each state as the lesser of the 0.5% minimum or the smaller of the two amounts calculated under the special rule. The larger of a state's adjusted minimum or its FY1998 hold harmless amount becomes that state's minimum allocation. Because of this adjusted 0.5% minimum, some states receive allocations that are lower than 0.5% of the total amount available for state grants. See Appendix B for the FY2016 BSG state allocations.

Allocation of State and Local Funds

Perkins IV requires states to allocate

at least 85% to the local level, up to 10% for state leadership activities, and up to 5% or $250,000 (whichever is greater) for program administration.

Additionally, up to 10% of the funds distributed to the local level may be awarded to local CTE providers that are in rural areas, areas with high percentages of CTE students, and areas with high numbers of CTE students. The statute does not specify how the states are to allocate these reserve funds to eligible recipients.

Within-State Distribution

Under Perkins IV, states decide the split of local level funds between CTE providers at the secondary and postsecondary levels.

Distribution at the Secondary Education Level

Eligible recipients of funds at the secondary education level are LEAs, including public charter schools that operate as LEAs, Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)-funded schools, area CTE schools providing secondary education, educational service agencies, or consortia of such.

The formula for distributing money to the secondary level is

70% of the funds are allocated based on each local recipient's share of individuals aged 5 through 17 living below the poverty line, compared to the total population of individuals aged 5 through 17 living below the poverty line in the entire state, and 30% of the funds are allocated based on each local recipient's share of all individuals aged 5 through 17.

If a state chooses to distribute 15% or less of its total allocation to the secondary education level, that state may allocate funds on a competitive basis or using any alternative method.

If a secondary level local recipient's calculated allotment is less than $15,000, the recipient has to form a consortium with other eligible secondary level recipients in order to meet the minimum grant requirement. This requirement can be waived if the recipient is unable to enter into a consortium and is either located in a rural, sparsely populated area or is a public charter school operating a CTE program.

Distribution at the Postsecondary Education Level

Eligible recipients of funds at the postsecondary education level are public or nonprofit IHEs, LEAs providing postsecondary education, area CTE schools providing postsecondary education, tribally controlled colleges and universities, educational service agencies, and consortia of such.

Funds are distributed to eligible local recipients at the postsecondary level based on their share of recipients of Pell Grants and recipients of assistance from the BIE who are enrolled in CTE programs. The minimum grant amount is $50,000.

If a state chooses to distribute 15% or less of its total allocation to the postsecondary level, that state may allocate funds on a competitive basis or using any alternative method.

Activities at the State Level

State Plan

In order to receive funding, each state eligible agency must submit a six-year state plan to the Secretary of Education. The plan must be developed through public hearings and consultation with stakeholders, including CTE teachers, faculty, and administrators; career guidance and academic counselors; eligible recipients; parents and students; representatives of special populations; representatives of business and industry; and representatives of labor organizations in the state. The plan contents must include such information as the description of

supported CTE activities, and how these activities will help the state meet its performance targets; CTE programs of study to be offered by the state; professional development, recruitment, and retention strategies for CTE teachers, faculty, administrators, and career and guidance counselors; efforts to facilitate the successful transition of CTE students from sub-baccalaureate programs into baccalaureate degree programs at IHEs; the process for improving the academic skills of CTE students; how the state will annually evaluate the effectiveness of its CTE programs; and the state's CTE programs aimed at members of special populations.

As an alternative to the state plan described above, a state may submit a state plan as part of the combined plan submitted under Section 103 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA; P.L. 113-128 ). The state plan is approved by the Secretary unless it does not meet the requirements of Perkins IV or if the state's proposed levels of performance on the core indicators of performance are not approved.

State Leadership Activities

States may reserve up to 10% of their allotments for state leadership activities. Of these funds, up to 10% (or 1% of the total state allotment) must be used for individuals in state correctional institutions or institutions serving individuals with disabilities. Additionally, between $60,000 and $150,000 must be reserved for services preparing individuals for nontraditional fields.

There are nine required uses of state leadership funds:

provide assessment of CTE programs; improve and expand the use of technology in CTE; provide professional development opportunities for CTE teachers, administrators, and counselors; support programs that improve students' academic and technical skills through the integration of academics with CTE; provide preparation for nontraditional employment; support partnerships among local providers of CTE and others, such as employers and labor organizations, to enable students to achieve state academic standards and CTE skills, or to complete CTE programs of study; serve individuals in state institutions, such as correctional institutions and institutions for individuals with disabilities; support programs for special populations that lead to high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand occupations; and provide technical assistance to local providers.

In addition to these required activities, there are several permissible state leadership activities outlined in Section 124. These include support for academic and career guidance counseling, establishment of articulation agreements between secondary and postsecondary education providers, support for career and technical student organizations, incentive grants for local providers, and enhancing data collection systems to collect data on education and employment outcomes. State leadership funds may not be used for program administration. Another state leadership activity is the development of programs of study.

Activities at the Local Level

Local Plan

In order to receive Perkins funding, an eligible recipient at the local level must submit a local plan to the state eligible agency. The local plan contents must include such information as the description of

CTE programs that are to be carried out, and how these programs will support meeting the state and local adjusted levels of performance; at least one state-approved CTE program of study that will be adopted; the integration of academics with CTE courses in order to ensure improved student learning and attainment of technical skills and academic proficiency; professional development activities for CTE teachers, administrators, and career guidance and academic counselors; how students will gain experience in and knowledge of all aspects of an industry; efforts to improve CTE outcomes of members of special populations and individuals in nontraditional fields; and any other requirements established by the state eligible agency.

Local Uses of Funds

As they do at the state level, eligible grant recipients at the local level have a list of required uses of funds (outlined in Section 135). Funds must be used by eligible recipients to

strengthen academic and technical skills of CTE students; link CTE at the secondary and postsecondary levels, including by offering the relevant elements of at least one state-approved program of study; provide students with experience in and understanding of all aspects of an industry; develop, improve, or expand the use of technology in CTE; provide professional development programs for CTE personnel; develop and implement evaluations of CTE programs; and provide CTE activities for members of special populations to prepare them for high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand occupations.

In addition to required uses, Section 135 outlines a number of permissible uses for Perkins funds at the local level. These include the use of funds to support efforts to involve business and labor organizations and parents in the design, implementation, and evaluation of CTE programs; career guidance and academic counseling; work-related experiences for students, such as internships and job shadowing; career and technical student organizations; the purchase or upgrade of equipment; and dual and concurrent enrollment programs. Each eligible recipient may use up to 5% of its local funds for administrative costs.

Accountability, Data Reporting, and Sanctions

Under Perkins IV, states and local CTE providers that receive Perkins funds are required to satisfy certain accountability requirements based on student outcomes. The accountability requirements are intended to enhance the return on investment of federal CTE funds. The Perkins accountability system, first introduced in Perkins II and enhanced in Perkins III and IV, requires that states and local providers meet goals or targets on a set of core indicators of performance. There are six indicators at the secondary level and five at the postsecondary level listed in Section 113.

Core Indicators of Performance

The core indicators of performance at the secondary level are

student attainment of state academic performance standards on the mathematics, language arts, and science assessments, as determined by the state in accordance with Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); student attainment of career and technical skill proficiencies; rates of student attainment of secondary school diplomas; GED credentials or other state-recognized equivalents; and proficiency credentials, certificates, or degrees, in conjunction with a secondary school diploma; student graduation rates, as described in Title I of ESEA; student placement in postsecondary education or advanced training, in military service, or in employment; and student participation in, and completion of, CTE programs that lead to nontraditional fields.

The core indicators of performance at the postsecondary level are

student attainment of career and technical skill proficiencies; student attainment of an industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or a degree; student retention in postsecondary education or transfer to a baccalaureate degree program; student placement in military service, apprenticeship programs, or employment; and student participation in, and completion of, CTE programs that lead to nontraditional fields.

ED issued nonregulatory guidance describing suggested ways to calculate values for each of the core indicators of performance in order to help align definitions. In addition to these required indicators, states may use other indicators of performance as well.

Adjusted Levels of Performance

Local and state recipients of funds under Perkins IV have to establish annual targets or goals for each of the core indicators of performance. These goals are called adjusted levels of performance and are described in Section 113 of Perkins IV. At the state level, they are established through negotiations between the state and the Secretary of Education, with input from local recipients. The adjusted levels of performance are required to reflect continual progress toward improved performance by the state's CTE students. Initially, the state and the Secretary must reach agreement on adjusted levels of performance for the first two program years. New adjusted levels of performance are to be agreed upon prior to the third and fifth years of the program. The levels of performance on additional indicators do not require approval from the Secretary. In exceptional circumstances, such as extreme demographic shifts or economic hardship, a state may request a revision of its adjusted levels of performance.

Each eligible recipient at the local level may either accept the state adjusted levels of performance or negotiate with the state to establish new local adjusted levels of performance. Additionally, each local provider may establish local levels of performance for each of the state's additional indicators of performance.

Data Reporting and Disaggregation

States must annually report to the Secretary on the levels of performance achieved by their CTE students on each of the core indicators of performance, as well as on the additional indicators of performance. Each indicator must be disaggregated by special populations and by ESEA Title I subgroups. The annual state reports, known as Consolidated Annual Reports, are publicly disseminated by the Secretary. State performance data are also included in the annual report to Congress produced by the Secretary in accordance with Section 114 of Perkins IV. While state performance data are reported with disaggregation by subgroup, only the aggregate performance levels for each core indicator of performance are used for accountability purposes.

Sanctions

States that do not meet 90% of a state adjusted level of performance for any of the core indicators of performance in a given year are required to develop and implement a program improvement plan during the following program year. The plan is to be developed with input from various stakeholders. The Secretary must provide technical assistance to the state if it is determined that the state is not making substantial progress. The Secretary may withhold all, or a portion of, a state's leadership and administrative funds if any of the following occurs:

the state fails to implement a program improvement plan; the state fails to make any improvement in meeting any of the adjusted levels of performance for the core indicators in the first year of the implementation of the program improvement plan; or the state fails to meet at least 90% of an adjusted level of performance for the same core indicator of performance for three consecutive years.

The Secretary must use the withheld funds to provide technical assistance or other improvement assistance to the state. The Secretary may waive these sanctions due to exceptional or uncontrollable circumstances.

Similarly, a local provider that does not meet at least 90% of its adjusted performance levels on at least one core indicator of performance must also develop a program improvement plan. If no improvement occurs, the state may take away some or all of the local provider's funding and use it to provide CTE services for the affected students through alternative means.

Other Programs under Title I

National Programs52

Perkins IV authorizes the Secretary to carry out the following national activities:

collect performance information on the state of CTE and on the effectiveness of state and local CTE programs; provide an annual report to Congress on the state of CTE and on state and local performance of Perkins CTE programs; direct the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to collect information on CTE for a nationally representative sample of students as part of its regular assessments; carry out research, development, dissemination, evaluation, and assessment of CTE activities under Perkins IV based on a single plan developed by the Secretary; conduct an "independent evaluation and assessment" of programs under this act and submit a report to Congress summarizing all studies related to the assessment; appoint an independent advisory panel to conduct an analysis of the findings and recommendations resulting from the assessment described above; collect and disseminate information regarding state efforts to meet their performance standards; establish a national center for research on career and technical education; and carry out demonstration CTE programs and disseminate information about best practices for providing CTE programs under this act.

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions Program (TCPCTIP)59

Section 117 authorizes grants to provide support for the education and training of Indian students attending tribally controlled postsecondary career and technical institutions that are not eligible for assistance under Title I of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance Act of 1978 or the Navajo Community College Act. There are two IHEs that qualify for funding under TCPCTIP: the United Tribes Technical College in North Dakota and the Navajo Technical College in New Mexico. These two IHEs are also the only recipients of funds from the Department of Interior's Tribal Technical Colleges program.

Funds provided under TCPCTIP may be used by recipients for expenses associated with CTE programs for Indian students, including program development costs; operations and maintenance of facilities; equipment, transportation, daycare, and family support programs for students; and student stipends.

Occupational and Employment Information64

Section 118 of Perkins IV authorizes the Secretary to provide assistance to state-designated entities that collect and disseminate occupational and employment information. Funds under this section may be used to support career guidance and academic counseling and to improve access to information and resources related to career preparation, as well as information on occupational supply and demand. Funds may also be used to improve coordination and communication among administrators of Perkins IV programs and by Section 15 of the Wagner-Peyser Act to avoid duplication of efforts and promote the sharing of information and data. Section 118 has not been funded under Perkins IV.

Title II—Tech Prep

The Tech Prep program, originally introduced in Perkins II, is a separate formula grant program authorized in Title II of Perkins IV. Tech Prep aims to encourage collaborations between secondary and postsecondary institutions by awarding funds to consortia that include at least one participant from each level. Consortia use their Tech Prep funds to develop coherent sequences of CTE courses spanning the last two years of secondary education and two years of postsecondary education, known as the "2+2" model.

Secondary level institutions that are eligible to be members of consortia under Tech Prep are the same as eligible secondary level local providers under the Basic State Grants program. Eligible postsecondary level providers are nonprofit IHEs that offer a two-year associate's degree, two-year certificate, or two-year apprenticeship program; or proprietary IHEs that offer a two-year associate's degree program. A consortium may also include IHEs that grant baccalaureate degrees, employers and other members of the business community, and labor organizations.

The secondary and postsecondary consortium members have to participate in an articulation agreement that includes a credit transfer agreement. The "2+2" program developed by a consortium has to lead to an associate's degree or a postsecondary certificate in a specific occupational field and meet state academic standards. Additionally, Tech Prep programs are required to provide professional development programs for teachers, faculty, administrators, and counselors.

Tech Prep funds are allocated to the states using the same formula as that used by the Basic State Grants program in Title I, but without the minimum state grant provisions. States may choose to operate Tech Prep as a separate program, or to combine Tech Prep funds with their Basic State Grants funds. Tech Prep was last funded in FY2010.

Additional Provisions

Title III of Perkins IV specifies general provisions, including federal and state administrative provisions. The following subsections describe a few key provisions.

Supplement Not Supplant/Maintenance of Effort67

The Supplement Not Supplant provision requires states and local education providers to supplement, not supplant, non-federal funds to carry out CTE activities. Supplanting occurs if a state or an eligible recipient uses Perkins IV funds to provide services that the state or recipient

is required to provide under other federal, state, or local laws; provided with nonfederal funds in the prior year; or provides with nonfederal funds for non-CTE students but charges to Perkins IV funds.

These criteria may be rebutted if the state or eligible recipient can demonstrate that it would not have provided the services in question with nonfederal funds if the Perkins IV funds had not been available.

The Maintenance of Effort (MOE) provision states that, in order to receive Perkins funds, a state's CTE expenditures per student or aggregate CTE expenditures for the preceding fiscal year must be equal to or greater than the corresponding expenditures from the fiscal year before that. However, if total appropriations for Perkins IV decrease by a certain percentage, states may decrease their CTE expenditures by the same percentage. The Secretary may reduce the MOE requirement by at most 5% for one fiscal year in case of exceptional circumstances.

Limitation for Certain Students69

Section 315 prohibits Perkins IV funds from being used to provide CTE programs for students prior to the 7 th grade.

Private Schools Staff and Students70

This section requires state and local CTE providers to include, "to the extent practicable upon written request," teachers and other personnel at nonprofit private schools in local CTE professional development activities. Similarly, this section allows for the "meaningful participation" of students attending nonprofit private schools in local CTE programs funded by Perkins IV.

Authorizations and Appropriations

Perkins IV contains five separate authorizations of funds: Basic State Grants, National Programs, Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions (TCPCTIP), Occupational and Employment Information, and Tech Prep. The authorized appropriations level in Perkins IV for each of these activities is such sums as may be necessary for each of FY2007-FY2012.

As shown in Table 1 , total appropriations for Perkins IV have gradually decreased from a high of $1.304 billion in FY2007 to a low of $1.080 billion in FY2013, before rebounding slightly to $1.133 billion for FY2014 and FY2015.

The Basic State Grants receive two separate appropriation amounts:

an appropriation for the current fiscal year (funds that are to be obligated during FY2015 are appropriated in the FY2015 appropriations act); and an advance appropriation for the subsequent fiscal year (e.g., appropriated funds that are to be obligated in FY2015 are appropriated in the FY2014 appropriations act).

The Tech Prep program was funded at around $100 million through FY2010, but it has not been funded since. The Occupational and Employment Information program has not been funded under Perkins IV.

State Performance on Core Indicators

Table 2 shows state performance on the core indicators of performance for PY2011-2012. For the secondary education level core indicators of performance, 24 states met or exceeded 90% of their adjusted performance levels for all indicators. This means that 31 states needed to submit program improvement plans for the following program year for at least one secondary core indicator of performance. States were most successful on the core indicator for student graduation rates, with all 55 states that reported data achieving at least 90% of their adjusted performance levels, and 49% meeting or exceeding 100% of their adjusted performance levels on that indicator. States were least successful on nontraditional completion. Forty-two states reached 90% of their nontraditional completion adjusted performance levels.

At the postsecondary education level, 28 states met or exceeded 90% of their adjusted performance levels for all indicators, meaning that 27 states had to submit program improvement plans. All 55 states reached 90% of their adjusted performance levels for the technical skill attainment core indicator. States were least successful on the postsecondary core indicator for credential, certificate, or degree attainment, with only 41 states attaining 90% of their adjusted performance levels on that indicator.

National Assessment of Career and Technical Education

Section 114(d)(2) of Perkins IV authorized funds to conduct an independent evaluation and assessment of CTE programs under the act. Results of this study were published by the Department of Education in 2014 as the National Assessment of Career and Technical Education (NACTE). This section of the report provides a concise summary of some NACTE findings about the state of CTE in the United States and the implementation of Perkins IV. Several of these findings have received considerable attention in the CTE researcher and practitioner communities.

Federal appropriations for Perkins IV have fallen since the 2006 reauthorization. Adjusting for inflation, total Perkins funding declined by 24% from FY2007 to FY2014. Declines in allocations for individual states have ranged from 6% to 30%. In PY2008-2009, the most common uses of Perkins funds reported by local providers were purchasing equipment and providing career guidance and academic counseling to students. When surveyed about the implementation of programs of study (POS) in Perkins IV, nearly half of all state secondary and postsecondary CTE directors (23 of each) reported in PY2008-2009 that CTE teachers and faculty did not have a good understanding of POS, suggesting that the POS concept was unclear to the instructors of CTE. Flexibility in the Perkins IV definitions of core indicators of performance and the resulting variety of definitions used by the states precludes the ability to use performance data reported by the states for valid comparison of performance between states or for aggregating data across states to examine national progress and trends in CTE over time. The percentage of high school graduates completing four-year college preparatory coursework nearly doubled from 1990 to 2009, and CTE students showed larger increases than did non-CTE students. This trend can be interpreted to indicate that participating in CTE programs can increase students' chances of completing college preparatory coursework. However, this may reflect changes in who participated in CTE rather than the impact of CTE. College-going and completion rates varied considerably by CTE concentration field, as did continuation in the same CTE field at the postsecondary level. For example, as of 2006, college-attendance rates for 2004 high school graduates, examined by CTE concentration field, ranged from 84% for CTE students who had concentrated in computer and information sciences to 52% for concentrators in repair and transportation.

Appendix A. Basic State Grants Allocation Formula

This appendix provides a detailed description of the formula used for allocating Perkins IV Basic State Grant funds to the states after set-asides for the outlying areas, the Native American CTE Program, and the Native Hawaiian CTE Program have been reserved.

Initial Allocation

After reservations for outlying areas and the Native American and Native Hawaiian CTE Programs, Basic State Grants funds are award ed to the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The base formula for state allocations was historically designed to target funds toward states with higher proportions of aged 15 to 19. States with lower per capita incomes are also targeted by the initial allocation formula.

The base formula depends on three population groups in each state: persons aged 15 to 19, 20 to 24, and 25 to 65. Each of these populations is then weighted in the calculation of initial allocations. The largest weight (0.5) is assigned to the 15 to 19 age group. The 20 to 24 age group is weighted 0.2, while the 25 to 65 age group is weighted 0.15. Note that these weights differ from those stated in the body of the report, because this section provides a higher level of detail about the formula calculations.

The second factor for calculating the initial allocation is the state's allotment ratio. This is calculated by dividing a state's per capita income (PCI) by the national average PCI. That quotient is then multiplied by 0.5 and subtracted from 1.

This calculation results in higher allotment ratio values for states with low PCIs and lower allotment ratio values for states with high PCIs. No state may have an allotment ratio higher than 0.6 or lower than 0.4. Allotment ratios for states with higher or lower calculated ratios are set to either 0.6 or 0.4, respectively.

Each state's initial allocation is then calculated by adding four quantities based on weighted populations in the three age groups and allotment ratios.

The first three components of the sum are calculated by multiplying a state's allotment ratio by its population in the given age group, and then dividing the result by the sum of all such products across all the states. That number is then multiplied by the weight corresponding to the particular age group:

where 0.5 is the weight factor associated with the 15 to 19 population group.

Correspondingly, the allocations associated with the 20 to 24 and 25 to 65 population groups are calculated as follows:

where 0.2 is the weight factor associated with the age 20 to 24 population group, and

where 0.15 is the weight factor associated with the 25 to 65 population group.

The fourth component of a state's initial allocation, Allocationprop in the above formula, is calculated as that state's proportion of the total funding determined by the sum of the first three formulas. This last component is given a weight of 0.15. As a result, Allocationprop is calculated as follows:

To recap, the largest proportion (50%) of each state's initial allocation under the Basic State Grants formula is assigned based on the number of persons aged 15 to 19, which is the traditional target population for CTE programs. The inclusion of PCI in the formula helps states with lower PCIs receive a greater share of available funds. Thus, states with lower PCIs and higher numbers of persons aged 15 to 19 will get the highest initial allocations.

Perkins IV has two different formulas for adjusting state initial allocations. The determination of which formula is used is based on how the total amount of funding available for state grants compares with the amount available in FY2006, which was $1,115,902,206.

Formula for Funding at FY2006 Level or Lower

Under Perkins IV, there are actually two formulas that are authorized for use in making state grant allocations. The first formula applies if the total amount of funding available for Basic State Grants is equal to or less than the amount that was available in FY2006. This formula has been used to calculate state allocations each year from FY2007 to FY2016.

Under this formula, the initial state allocations can be altered to ensure that each state's allocation meets certain minimum state grant provisions. There are three separate possible minimum grant conditions calculated for each state:

1. 0.5% of the total allocated to states; 2. 150% of a state's prior-year grant; 3. 150% of a state's population aged 15 to 65 multiplied by the national average per pupil payment (NAPPP). The NAPPP is calculated by dividing the total amount allocated to all states by the total national population of persons aged 15 to 65.

The smallest of these three possible minimum grant amounts is then compared with the state's FY1998 allocation. The larger of these two amounts is then considered the state's minimum grant amount.

If a state's initial allocation is lower than its minimum grant amount, that state's allocation is increased to equal its minimum grant amount. For any state whose initial allocation exceeds its minimum grant amount, its initial allocation is ratably reduced to ensure that all states have met their minimum grant amounts. If the resulting allocations put some of the states whose allocations were ratably reduced below their minimum grant amounts, then additional ratable reductions can take place until every state has met its minimum grant amount. Figure A-1 summarizes the process of determining state allocations when appropriations are at the FY2006 level or lower.

Formula for Funding at Higher than FY2006 Level

A different formula for state allocations of Perkins IV Basic State Grants funds applies when total appropriations are greater than those from FY2006. Under that formula, initial allocations are calculated in the same way as in the formula described in the previous section of this report. Once initial allocations are calculated, state grants are adjusted using only one of the three possible minimum grant rules: the state minimum grant equal to 0.5% of total allocations. Additionally, a special rule is introduced for the distribution of "new money," which is defined as the amount by which the current year's funding available to states exceeds the total funding available to states in FY2006.

The formula for state allocations when total funding exceeds FY2006 levels would allot up to one-third of the new money to bring states with allocations below 0.5% of total allocations up to the 0.5% level. The new money would be allotted in such a way that states that are furthest below the 0.5% mark would receive proportionately larger shares of the new money than states that are closer to, but still below, the 0.5% minimum. As a result, none of the states with initial allocations below 0.5% of the total could end up with final allocations above 0.5%. If total appropriations are sufficiently high, then each state should be able to reach the 0.5% minimum allocation.

The remaining funds—at least two-thirds of the new money and the funds left over from bringing the smaller states up to the 0.5% minimum—would be allocated to the remaining states in proportion to their initial allocations, except that no state, including those at or below the 0.5% minimum, would receive a grant less than its FY1998 allocation.

Appendix B. Basic State Grants Allocation Table