Skip Navigation
When Schools Stay Open Late:  The National Evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program

NCEE 2004-3001
October 2004

Key Findings From the Second Year

The findings from the second year of the study are generally consistent with those from the first year. Specifically, the study found

  • Supervision by Other Adults Increased. Students in programs were more likely to be with adults who were not their parents after school and less likely to be with their parents or older siblings.
  • Self-Care Was Unaffected. Participation in programs had no effect on whether students were in self-care (so-called latch-key children) after school. Multiple definitions of self-care were analyzed with similar results.
  • Few Impacts on Academic Achievement. Programs did not affect reading test scores or grades for elementary students. Grades for middle school students in programs were higher in social studies relative to the comparison group but not in English, mathematics, and science. Programs did not increase whether elementary or middle school students completed their homework. Middle school students in programs missed fewer days of school and were more likely to aspire to attend college.
  • Elementary Students Felt Safer. Elementary students in after-school programs reported feeling safer during after-school hours. Middle school students did not report feeling safer.
  • Mixed Evidence on Negative Behavior for Middle School Students. Some estimates pointed to higher levels of negative behaviors for middle school students, while others indicated no differences between treatment and comparison groups.
  • Some Impacts on Parent Outcomes. Parents of participating elementary school students were more likely to report that they attended school events. Other measures of parent involvement did not increase. There was some evidence that programs increased whether mothers of elementary students worked or looked for work. Involvement of middle school parents did not differ between the treatment and comparison groups. No employment difference was observed for mothers of middle school students.
  • Few Impacts on Developmental Outcomes. Elementary students were more likely to report helping other students after school. They were no more likely to report being able to work with others on a team, believe the best of other people, or set goals and work to achieve them. Middle school students showed no differences in these outcomes.
  • Low Middle School Attendance in Second Year. Two attendance patterns emerged in the study's second year. First, many students who had access to programs in the second year (53 percent) did not attend. Second, among those who did attend, average attendance was low (30 days) and similar to attendance during the first year (33 days).
  • Moderate Elementary School Attendance. The first report noted that elementary school students attended programs an average of 58 days in the school year. With five additional sites and a larger student sample, average attendance was 63 days.
  • Stable Program Leadership, But High Staff Turnover Between the First and Second Years. Eighty-two percent of project directors who worked in programs during the first year still worked for the programs in the second year. However, two-thirds of the line staff and one-third of center coordinators who worked in programs during the first year of the study were no longer working for the programs in the second year.

Study Methodology

The national evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program includes an elementary school study and a middle school study.

The elementary school study uses random assignment of students to treatment and control groups. The study involved 12 school districts and 26 centers, which were included in the evaluation because the centers had more students interested in attending than the centers could serve, a precondition for random assignment. The findings are based on baseline and followup data collected from students, parents, teachers, principals, program staff members, and school records. The baseline and follow-up data were collected for 589 treatment group students and 384 control group students in 7 school districts in the 2000–2001 school year, and for 693 treatment group students and 666 control group students in 5 school districts in the 2001–2002 school year. The total elementary school sample was 2,308 students.

The middle school study is based on a nationally representative sample of 21st Century programs serving middle school participants and a matched comparison group of students who are similar to participants. Similar students were identified in host schools or in other schools in the participating districts. Student data were collected from 32 school districts and 61 centers in those districts. The sample includes 1,782 participants who were matched to 2,482 comparison students.

The U.S. Department of Education has funded seven cohorts of grantees. The middle school study includes grantees from the first three cohorts of grants, and the elementary school study includes grantees from the first five. When the study began, all grantees were in their second or third year of a 3-year grant. In 2001, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law changed the program to state administration; this study does not include 21st Century programs from the state-administered program.

The implementation analysis was based on site visits that were conducted to all grantees, with visits lasting between two and four days. Each center was visited twice, once during each of the two years of the study.

Top