Vocational Education: Legislation to Reauthorize the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act

Publication Date: May 1998

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Education

Type:

Abstract:

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act provides federal assistance for secondary and postsecondary vocational education. The Perkins Act was authorized through fiscal year 1996; nevertheless, FY1997 and FY1998 appropriations have been provided for the Act. On July 22, 1997, the House passed H.R. 1853, which would reauthorize the Perkins Act. On May 5, 1998, the Senate passed H.R. 1385 in lieu of S. 1186, which would also reauthorize the Perkins Act, among other provisions. This report presents background on vocational education, on the Perkins Act, and on related action during the 104th Congress. The report concludes by comparing major features of H.R. 1853 and the Senate version of H.R. 1385.

The Perkins Act, currently funded at $1.1 billion, is the main source of specific federal funds for vocational education, although these funds account for a small percentage of the total spent on vocational education in the United States. The main purposes of the Perkins Act are to improve the quality of vocational education and to provide access to quality vocational education for “special populations,” such as disadvantaged and disabled students. The last reauthorization of the Perkins Act in 1990 made several significant changes to the Act. These included the creation of new programs, most notably the tech-prep program, aimed at coordinating secondary and postsecondary vocational education; the requirement of within state formulas based mainly on poverty measures for the distribution of secondary and postsecondary federal vocational education funds; the elimination of most set-asides of funds for various “special populations”; and the requirement that states develop and implement performance standards and measures.

Key differences between the House and Senate bills include: the House would provide somewhat less targeting based on poverty in the state formula and in the secondary substate formula; the Senate would retain current formulas. The House would allocate 90% of state funds directly to the local level; the Senate would allocate 75%. The House would provide for set-asides for grants to local rural and urban areas; the Senate would not. The House would eliminate required funding at the state level for a “sex equity coordinator” and reduce state administration funds from 5% to 2% of the state grant; the Senate would retain funding for the sex equity coordinator and increase funding for state administrative activities to 10%. The House would require a state-determined board of vocational education to fulfill requirements of the Act, such as submission of the state application; the Senate would have the “eligible agency,” the sole state agency that administers vocational education policy, fulfill these requirements. The House would require states to identify “quantifiable benchmarks;” the Senate would require the Secretary of Education to establish “performance measures.” The Senate would authorize the Secretary to make incentive grants to states exceeding performance measures established under the Act; the House has no provision for incentive grants.

Latest action: The Senate passed H.R. 1385 in lieu of S. 1186 on May 5, 1998, by a vote of 91 to 7.