Readings Newsletter
Become a Readings Member to make your shopping experience even easier.
Sign in or sign up for free!
You’re not far away from qualifying for FREE standard shipping within Australia
You’ve qualified for FREE standard shipping within Australia
The cart is loading…
GAO discussed the implementation of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act, focusing on the allocation of program funds to economically depressed areas. GAO found that: (1) although funds were generally used to provide vocational education to underserved groups, some allocation mechanisms directed funds to more affluent areas; (2) vocational education students in disadvantaged areas were less likely to receive as much funding on a per-capita basis for improved or modernized program activities as students outside such areas; (3) some states designated relatively wealthy areas as economically disadvantaged and provided greater per-capita funding to those areas than to some poorer communities; (4) the funds allocation formula for disadvantaged populations shifted funds from poor communities to more affluent ones because it included nonpoor, academically disadvantaged students; (5) disadvantaged and handicapped population funds could be reallocated from poorer to wealthier communities; and (6) complete and reliable data on vocational education enrollment and spending were unavailable at either the national or state level.
$9.00 standard shipping within Australia
FREE standard shipping within Australia for orders over $100.00
Express & International shipping calculated at checkout
GAO discussed the implementation of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act, focusing on the allocation of program funds to economically depressed areas. GAO found that: (1) although funds were generally used to provide vocational education to underserved groups, some allocation mechanisms directed funds to more affluent areas; (2) vocational education students in disadvantaged areas were less likely to receive as much funding on a per-capita basis for improved or modernized program activities as students outside such areas; (3) some states designated relatively wealthy areas as economically disadvantaged and provided greater per-capita funding to those areas than to some poorer communities; (4) the funds allocation formula for disadvantaged populations shifted funds from poor communities to more affluent ones because it included nonpoor, academically disadvantaged students; (5) disadvantaged and handicapped population funds could be reallocated from poorer to wealthier communities; and (6) complete and reliable data on vocational education enrollment and spending were unavailable at either the national or state level.