New report from Learning Policy Institute examines how states are expanding summer learning opportunities

The summer months offer a critical opportunity to support students’ academic growth, social development, and mental well-being, while supporting families by providing safe and supportive environment for children while parents are often at work. During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal investments through the American Rescue Plan (ARP) and ESSER funds empowered states to expand access to these transformative programs. As federal funding wanes, states must decide how to sustain and build on these gains.

How States Are Expanding Quality Summer Learning Opportunities, a new report from the Learning Policy Institute with support from The Wallace Foundation, examines the innovative strategies used by nine states—Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, and Vermont—to ensure summer learning programs remain impactful and accessible as federal relief funding winds down.

Garnering Support for Summer Learning Investments

New funding offered through ARP, along with a need to support students’ academic recovery, helped state leaders garner support for summer learning efforts.

• Aligning Goals with State Priorities: By linking summer programs to broader objectives, states strengthened their case for investment. New Mexico’s focus on career development and exploration through paid internships and Georgia’s whole-child approach through the Building Opportunity through Out-of-School Time (BOOST) grant program are examples of this alignment.
   
• Harnessing Leadership: State leaders played key roles in advocating for summer learning. Vermont’s Governor Phil Scott championed universal access to afterschool and summer programs, helping to establish the Universal Afterschool Task Force and securing $3.5 million in state funding through recreational cannabis tax revenues.
   
• Building Coalitions: Collaborative efforts brought diverse stakeholders together. Vermont’s Interagency Task Force included representatives from education, health, and other sectors, while Michigan’s state afterschool network united local leaders to advocate for funding.
   
• Securing Sustainable Funding: States explored long-term funding options like dedicated budget lines and tax revenues. In Michigan, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont, movements toward state investment in summer learning had been gaining momentum in the years leading up to ESSER funding, and the perceived success of ESSER grant programs helped state leaders establish new sustainable state funding streams to support these programs moving forward.

Implementing State Grant Programs

States employed formula or competitive grant programs and emphasized different modes of delivery, such as LEAs for academic growth or community-based organizations (CBOs) for enrichment programs and support for working families. Key approaches included:

• LEA-Focused Funding: States like Louisiana, Tennessee, and Texas funded LEAs directly to provide summer programs, emphasizing flexibility in program design (e.g., Texas allowed flexible timing and formats for summer learning days). Administrative requirements balanced structure with adaptability to local needs, including mandatory programming for priority students in Tennessee.
• CBO-Focused Funding: CBOs contributed to expanding access and providing enrichment programs. Georgia involved an intermediary partner in the Georgia Statewide Afterschool Network, to administer grants, leveraging their expertise and relationships with local providers. Grant processes were simplified to encourage smaller and underserved providers' participation.

Increasing Access for Priority Groups

Many states focused on ensuring underserved groups had access to summer learning opportunities. These approaches included the following strategies:

• Identifying Priority Groups in Legislation: States like Michigan and Tennessee enacted laws to prioritize students from low-income families, underserved communities, and those performing below grade level. Tennessee's policy gave these groups early enrollment opportunities in summer learning camps, while Michigan prioritized low-income families in funding decisions.
   
• Identifying Priority Groups in Grant RFPs: Vermont’s RFP focused on affordability, program expansion, and representation of underserved populations (e.g., BIPOC, LGBTQ+, English learners). Georgia emphasized reducing barriers, expanding access, and improving program quality, with evidence showing high participation from targeted groups (e.g., students eligible for free/reduced lunch). Oregon restricted eligibility to districts serving the highest percentages of priority students.

Promoting High-Quality Programming

Research underscores the importance of well-trained staff, engaging activities, and rigorous content in summer programs. States supported quality through:

• Requiring Elements of Quality: Some states, like Tennessee, require certified teachers and high-quality curriculum. Others, like Oregon, emphasize broader quality practices for enrichment-focused programs.
   
• Issuing Voluntary Guidance to Promote Quality: States like Louisiana and Vermont produce guidance to help programs improve voluntarily. This guidance includes templates, schedules, and best practices.
   
• Cultivating a Strong Workforce: States address staffing shortages through flexible hiring, training, and recruiting initiatives, such as high school internships in Michigan and Massachusetts.
   
• Providing Technical Assistance: States like Texas and Georgia support program planning and implementation. Assistance includes training, resources, and feedback to improve program quality and accessibility.

Collecting and Using Data

Data collection and analysis were central to evaluating and refining summer programs:

• Collecting Key Pieces of Data for Tracking Purposes: States use various methods, such as participant surveys, site visits, and standardized assessments, to gather data on program participation, demographics, and outcomes. States like Tennessee and Oregon monitored enrollment, demographics, and program impact to measure success.
   
• Using Data for Ongoing Improvement and Sustainability: Data is utilized to refine programs, assess quality, and provide technical assistance to providers. States like Tennessee and Massachusetts leverage data systems to link student participation with academic outcomes.

Actions States Can Pursue to Support Summer Learning

The report also includes policy considerations for states aiming to sustain and expand summer learning opportunities.

• Generating Support for Summer Learning Investments: Establish statewide visions and goals that align summer programs with broader education priorities; building coalitions of stakeholders (e.g., legislators, nonprofits, businesses) to advocate for and guide investments; and identifying sustainable funding sources, such as dedicated state budget lines or alternative revenue streams (e.g., cannabis taxes).
   
• Grant Program Implementation: Minimize administrative burdens to encourage participation, particularly for smaller providers and using partnerships with organizations like state afterschool networks to enhance capacity and implementation.
   
• Access for Priority Groups: Prioritize access for disadvantaged groups through targeted funding and program requirements as well as addressing barriers such as cost, transportation, and availability, especially in rural areas.
   
• Promoting high-quality programming: Promote quality by setting program standards (e.g., qualified staff, engaging curricula) and offering technical assistance, including best practices to support provider improvement.
   
• Collecting and using data: Align data collection with state goals to evaluate program effectiveness and gaps and utilize that data for continuous improvement and advocacy to demonstrate program reach and impact to secure ongoing funding.

As federal funding sunsets, states have an opportunity to build on lessons learned and sustain investments in summer learning. By fostering collaboration, prioritizing equity, and emphasizing quality, states can unlock the full potential of summer programs to support students year-round. You can find the full report, including the case studies for each state, on The Wallace Foundation’s website.