A.

B.

C.

Assignment to a person or group the responsibility for making needed
improvements in education and other public and private services
for the benefit of migrant workers and their families. This group
is to have access and impact into all agencies serving migrant
workers and their families. Better coordination processes esta-
blished in order that exchange of concepts in education and re-
lated services coincide across state lines.

Development of administrative procedures that accommodate interstate cooperation, i.e., personnel exchange visits, participation with state liaison and multi-state coordinated projects.

Establishment of a system for conducting interstate planning, i.e., state education agency allocation of funds to effect a mechanism for improved interstate planning.

III.

Recommendations for Federal-State-Local Relationships

A.

B.

C.

The U.S. Office of Education (USOE) should mandate interstate planning and cooperation.

Require by interstate cooperatives or other administrative structures using federal funds to develop federal-state-local operating procedures for cooperation.

Standardize, by using comparable operating criteria, state, and local needs assessment and evaluation between states.

TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

Two broad categories of recommendations were developed. The first section consists of task force position statements that address goals for migrant education, limitations or guidelines in pursuit of cooperation, task force strategy and the need for more public information concerning migrant students and families.

Section Two of the report highlights critical areas of change needed at the federal, state and local levels. Within this second category are such recommendations as assigning coordination responsibility, administrative procedures, interstate planning, and federal and state program regulations. Also included are suggestions for project and task force action to be implemented during the future months. These are reflected in project objectives and tasks for 1977.

Additional recommendations that relate to children of migrant workers and their families will be presented in subsequent task force publications.

I.

Section One

Task Force Position Statements

Goals for the Education of Migrant Students

The following statements represent the position of the ECS task force

on migrant education. The statements reflect the basic assumptions

made by the task force and provide a framework for understanding sub

sequent recommendations.

It is recognized that:

A.

The educational goals and expectations established for migrant students must be the same as those for all students in preschool through postsecondary programs.

B.

Program goals should be student oriented, rather than program oriented, so as to insure that programs serve students individually instead of institutions.

C. Opportunities must be developed for states to cooperatively provide services and to meet their legal and moral obligations to migrant students and their families in order to implement the educational goals on an interstate basis.

D.

In order to implement these objectives successfully (on an interstate basis), some administrative as well as student-oriented goals are needed.

E. Migrant programs must address the unique educational and related needs of migrant students, particularly the expansion of existing programs for limited or non-English-speaking migrant students as

a means of equalizing educational opportunities.

II. Traditional and Legal Constraints Affecting Education and Other Com-
prehensive Services for Migrant Families

The diversity of responsibility for education and other traditional
migrant services on federal, state and local levels is reflected in
numerous laws, regulations and customs, many of which were enacted
before the education of migrant students became a recognized equal
educational opportunity need. The Interstate Migrant Education Task
Force recognizes that:

A.

Constitutional limits and national traditions regarding state and local prerogatives exist that restrict the nature of possible change in education and other migrant services.

B. Federal or state efforts must not usurp the constitutional prerogatives of respective levels of government.

C.

The lack of national, state and local policies (statutes, regulations
and administrative guidelines) concerning interstate, interagency
and intrastate cooperation is a major barrier to interstate coopera-
tion.

D. There are limitations on state and local expenditures.

State and

local funds are often earmarked for certain services or age groups.

E. Compulsory attendance laws varying from state to state are a

potential barrier to providing continuity in the education of migrants.

F.

The administrative procedures of state government agencies are
sometimes barriers to interstate cooperation.

G.

Local schools as well as states are reluctant to make comparisons of pupil performance.

III.

Implementation:

Position Statements on a Task Force Strategy to Create Better Educational Opportunities and Other Comprehensive Services for Migrant Families

It is recognized that:

A.

One of the primary aims of the task force is to establish an interstate and interagency system of cooperation that will maximize the quality of education and other services for migrant families and emphasize each state's responsibilities in these areas.

B. The goals of interstate and interagency cooperation may best be achieved by utilizing third-party intermediary, regional approaches, and multistate and migrant stream structures.

C. The Education Commission of the States, or a similar third party, must be involved in efforts to achieve interstate cooperation and provide opportunities for activities currently not possible under federal grant guidelines or restricted by the amount of monies provided to the states for administration of migrant education programs.