Safe and Drug-Free Schools

When the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act was enacted in 1994, about 3 million thefts and violent crimes occurred at schools each year--nearly 16,000 incidents per school day. About one in five high school students regularly carried a firearm, knife, razor, club, or other weapon. After declining in the 1980s, drug use among school-age youth increased between 1992 and 1995 for many types of drugs. For example, one study reported that marijuana use by eighth graders more than doubled and use by high school seniors rose from 22 percent to 35 percent. Since 1986, the federal government has awarded more than $4 billion to help states implement school-based drug- and violence- prevention programs. This report discusses (1) the accountability measures required by the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act at the federal, state, and local levels; (2) the Department of Education's oversight of state and local programs; (3) how state education agencies ensure local programs' compliance with the act; and (4) how Safe and Drug-Free Schools funding is specifically used at the state and local levels.

GAO noted that: (1) the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program is one of several substance abuse- and violence-prevention programs funded by the federal government; (2) the act that authorizes the program requires four major types of actions to ensure accountability on the federal, state, and local levels: (a) an application process requiring approval of state and local program plans; (b) monitoring activities by state agencies; (c) periodic reports and evaluations; and (d) the use of local or substate regional advisory councils; (3) Education oversees state programs directly and local programs indirectly through required state actions; (4) working along with states, Education reviews, helps states to revise, and approves state plans; (5) Education has issued no program-specific regulations on the act; (6) Education does require states to conform to general and administrative regulations and advises states on program matters, such as allowable expenditures, through nonbinding guidance; (7) the Department may get involved in resolving allegations of impropriety in the use of funds; (8) no overall evaluations of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program have been completed; (9) Education conducts evaluation activities designed to provide both descriptive and evaluative information about the programs; (10) Education's evaluative activities focus on broader aspects of program implementation; (11) Education is indirectly gathering information about the effectiveness of specific state and local programs through reports states must submit to Education every 3 years; (12) the lack of uniformity in what states report may create a problem for federal oversight; (13) nearly all states use the approved local plans to ensure local programs' compliance with the act's requirements; (14) states use local compliance with the approved plans as a way of ensuring that funds are spent on activities permitted under the act; (15) most states use both on-site visits and local self-reports to oversee local program activities; (16) local education agencies (LEAs) are also required to evaluate the effectiveness of their programs; (17) SEAs and LEAs use Safe and Drug-Free Schools funds for a variety of activities; (18) states mostly use their 5-percent set-aside for activities such as training and technical assistance; (19) ninety-one percent of LEAs provide drug-prevention instruction; and (20) staff training is the next most offered activity.