Policy Process and Players 101 | Origin: LC170
This is a general discussion forum for the following learning topic:
CTE Advocacy: Policymakers and the Press --> Policy Process and Players 101
Take a few minutes to post your response and learn more from your peers.
There were two things that landed for me.
First, the authorizing vs. appropriations distinction. I knew that Perkins V was authorized law. I had not fully internalized that the funding levels written into it are SUGGESTIONS. Congress can fund below them, and as we've seen, they routinely do. That changes the advocacy calendar. The fight isn't re-authorization every six years. It is the appropriation's cycle, every single year, apparently.
Second, the number that reframed everything: federal dollars are only four to of school funding. The rest is state and local.
I manage federal CTE money at a major US Urban district. My instinct has been to think "up" - towards Perkins, toward DC. But the leverage is much closer than that. Our state Board of Education and our district budget decide far more of what my schools actually get than any federal line item.
How I hope to apply this would be to redirect, advocacy energy down a level. Most of my real funding constraints in terms of staffing some curriculum work or certification costs are local appropriations decisions not federal ones. That is where I realize my time should be going.
Governtment is a huge entitity. It is best to start at the Grassroots level and adovate for CTE at the local and state levels.
Although this information we all grow up knowing, it was really important to stop and remember how our government works and the importance of CTE.
It is important to get to know your local govt. structure and players and advocate appropriately for CTE.
