NCSL: LegisBrief: Funding School-Based Violence Prevention Programs

NCSL LegisBrief

Briefing Papers On the Important Issues of the Day

Funding School-Based Violence Prevention Programs

By Julie Thomerson

March 2001
Volume 9, Number 15

As serious incidents of violence continue within school walls, safety remains a priority for state legislators and their constituents. Issues include building security, crisis preparation and violence prevention. Researchers are identifying effective ways to prevent or respond to school violence. Many states allocate general funds to support a broad spectrum of violence prevention and school safety approaches. But how can they afford to support these programs with restricted resources? And what can state legislatures do to create new sources of funding?

Grants to School Districts. Independent of general fund appropriations, many state legislatures have created competitive grant programs for schools and school districts. For example, the Illinois Safe to Learn Program gives money to districts for safety and violence prevention programs. The Pennsylvania Department of Education distributes grants for building security, alternative education and violence prevention. Some states, such as Tennessee and Ohio, also provide technical assistance for school districts applying for state or federal grants.

Federal Grants. Federal grants also can be invaluable to states investing in school safety. Some federal agencies, such as the United States Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, United States Department of Education, Safe and Drug Free Schools program, and the Center for Mental Health Services, provide money to support a variety of local violence prevention initiatives. One popular federal program, the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Initiative, currently funds 54 local programs that use comprehensive, community-wide strategies to create safe and drug-free schools and promote healthy childhood development. Most programs are administered through school districts, but applicants are required to work with local law enforcement, mental health agencies and juvenile justice officials. Other federal projects include initiatives to reduce class sizes, expand elementary school counseling programs, reduce suspensions and expulsions, and train middle school drug and safety coordinators.

Use of Tobacco Settlement Money. Tobacco settlement payments to states go into the general fund, but yearly installments provide increased flexibility and long-term commitment without detracting from other priorities. The Alabama Legislature allocated some of its tobacco funds for school security measures and alternative education. Kansas used settlement dollars to create the Wraparound Kansas Project, a competitive grant program for school districts that collaborate with community mental health agencies to prevent violence.

Creative Fundraising Initiatives. Some states and local governments are taking creative approaches to raising additional money. In Illinois, the Violence Prevention Authority created a special license plate with an increased fee. Idaho uses income taxes imposed on lottery winnings to help fund the Idaho Safe and Drug Free Schools Program. On the local level, Quakertown, Pa., residents agreed to increase property taxes, partially to fund violence prevention programs. Private foundations are another potential funding source.

Collaboration with Local Agencies or Businesses. By using independent resources and encouraging local collaboration among schools, agencies and businesses, schools can improve their prevention efforts. Some legislatures pool funding, leverage money, match grants, or give financial incentives for local partnerships. For example, the Virginia General Assembly provides matching grants to school districts to employ school resource officers. Connecticut supports local community agencies and organizations working together to provide after-school programs. Rhode Island authorized using private or federal funding to coordinate community organizations, schools, law enforcement officials, parents and business leaders to provide alternative education programs at school or community sites. And the Maine Legislature recently created a council to coordinate statewide collaboration among agencies serving children and families.

Investing in Effective Programs. Reliable research identifying effective programs is essential to state legislative decision making. States need to know that they are making wise investments in programs that work, and funders frequently require applicants to demonstrate need and evaluate results. Some organizations and federal agencies have evaluated programs nationwide to identify programs that work. They include the Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence, the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, and the Centers for Disease Control. Their research shows that certain approaches are generally effective in preventing violence. However, experts caution that success can vary across different regions, cultures or circumstances.

**********
"Seven Characteristics of Promising School Violence Prevention Programs" illustration is not available online. Please contact the author for a copy or view the Adobe Acrobat version. Adobe Version

Contacts for More Information

Julie Thomerson
NCSL-Denver
(303) 364-7700, ext. 245
julie.thomerson@ncsl.org

NCSL School Health Finance Project
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/pp/schlfund.htm

Centers for Disease Control
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
Division of Adolescent School Health
(404) 639-3311
http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dash/

U.S. Department of Education
Safe and Drug Free Schools
(202) 260-3954
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/grants.html

Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence
(202) 496-2200
http:/www.hamfish.org

Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence
(303) 492-8465
http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/