Immigration to the United States over recent decades has fueled complex demographic and economic changes which are not yet well understood. It is increasingly clear, however, that coping with the new wave of immigrants--many of them ill-prepared to move easily into the mainstream of American society--poses major challenges for the society at large. Thus, the Foundation has focused its activities on immigrant policy--domestic policies affecting either directly or indirectly the settlement of immigrants--which should be distinguished from the separate but related domain of immigration policy--national policies regulating the in-flow of foreigners. The Foundation's initiatives in immigrant policy have focused primarily on the institutions faced most immediately with the obligation to respond to these changes and to the needs of immigrants: state and local governments and schools in areas populated heavily by immigrants.

Our activities began in March 1990 and have led to grants totaling over $16 million, of which nearly $10 million has been appropriated within the last two years. To provide a context for discussion of the Foundation's immigrant policy program, this essay begins with an examination of recent trends in immigration. It concludes with reflections on grantmaking in the field.

Trends in Immigration and Their Effects

The current large immigration wave began in the late 1960s and consists of three groups: legal immigrants admitted as permanent residents, refugees and asylum seekers, and those entering the US without legal documentation. It has been shaped not only by the 1965 Immigration Reform Act and its amendments (which opened the US to increasing immigration from Asia, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Latin America), but also by political and economic "push" factors in other countries which produced refugees, seekers of asylum, and undocumented immigrants.

Immigration to the United States over the 1980s exceeded the record figures reached in the early part of the 20th century and now totals almost 10 million persons per year. The Urban Institute projects that another 10 million or more immigrants (legal and undocumented) are likely to enter the US during the 1990s. Adverse demographic and economic forces in the major sending regions remain strong. Moreover, recent US immigration legislation, which many projected would have a chilling effect on future immigration, has not produced a real reduction.

Since the 1970s, the largest number of immigrants has been from Asia (35 percent of legal immigrants in the 1970s and 45 percent in the 1980s). The second largest group of immigrants has come from Latin America and the Caribbean (40 percent of legal immigrants in the 1970s and 38 percent in the 1980s). By contrast, Europeans and Canadians accounted for only about 14 percent of all immigrants to the US during the 1980s, down from 22 percent in the 1970s and 46 percent in the 1960s. (It is harder to state reliably the numbers of undocumented immigrants from various parts of the world.)

One important consequence of current immigration trends is the increased share of the US population consisting of racial and ethnic minorities. Between 1980 and 1990 the white population increased by 6 percent (to 189 million), while the Asian population more than doubled (to 7.3 million), the Hispanic population grew by 53 percent (to 22.4 million), and the African-American population by 13.2 percent (to 30 million). Minorities now account for approximately one-fourth of the US population.

Data from the 1990 Census show that the composition of the nation's minority population has also been significantly altered by recent immigration patterns. The most rapid growth has occurred in the Asian and Hispanic populations, and the African-American population now comprises only about 50 percent of the total minority population. Indeed, the size of the Hispanic population is expected to exceed that of the African-American population before the year 2010.

While immigration affects the entire country, its impact is felt most profoundly in the six states receiving the most immigrants: California (the largest, which became home to 2.3 million immigrants during the 1980s, or over one-third of the total); New York (which received the second largest number, almost one million immigrants--one-sixth of the total); followed by Texas, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey. Together, these states received 76 percent of all immigrants entering the US in the 1980s. Within these states, the major metropolitan areas receive most of the newcomers.

Some observers argue that the average human capital of incoming immigrants (that is, their education and job skills) is declining. This observation raises the specter of a growing population of low-skilled immigrants from less-developed countries who have cast their lot with that of the domestic poor and the urban underclass. While this prediction seems harsh, it is the case that roughly half of new entrants arrive with comparatively low education and job skills. As a consequence, their integration into the economy is difficult and presents growing challenges to both public service institutions and private employers. The urgency of the situation is underscored by the fact that between 1980 and 1990 the number of immigrant households in poverty grew by 42 percent (compared with 11 percent for native households).

Finally, the relatively high birth rates and relatively low average ages of the major immigrant populations insure that an increasing percentage of the population served by US public schools will be children of immigrants. While school districts across the country are affected, most of the responsibility for educating children of immigrants is borne by already troubled school systems in and near the major metropolitan areas.

Immigrant Education

The numbers and general characteristics of the nation's immigrant students follow from the immigration patterns described above. Most recently arrived immigrant students are Hispanic (60 percent) or Asian (22 percent) and have limited English-proficiency (90 percent). Most are young: 60 percent of elementary school age, 18 percent of middle school age, and 21 percent of high school age.

The public education system is not well prepared to meet the special needs of linguistically and culturally diverse students. There is no strong consensus about the best way to serve these students and no major national program of financial aid to the school systems most affected by immigration. High dropout rates, among other indicators, point to the difficulties schools face in providing adequate and appropriate education for these students.

When we began working on immigrant education, we found little research which examined the challenges of educating immigrant children, or documented and evaluated school and school district responses. Accordingly, our initial objectives were to support baseline research on the impact of immigration on the nation's schools, and to investigate the formulation of appropriate responses.

Among the projects the Foundation funded in this early phase were several studies of immigrant education in major receiving areas and the establishment of a national center to disseminate information about educating immigrant schoolchildren. It is difficult to measure the immediate effects of these studies and services. However, in some cases we have a obtained a clear impression of a project's effects on decisions by educators and policymakers.

To illustrate, the Rand Corporation's multi-state study of immigrant education is partially responsible for New York City's commitment to increase the number of schools for newly arrived immigrants. This same study is currently being used to justify changes in student tracking practices in Seattle's schools.

Another grantee, the Center for Immigrant Students of The National Coalition of Advocates for Students, was retained by the Palm Beach County Board of Education to help improve language education for the 14,000 immigrant and limited-English-proficient students who have inundated the county. The district is now successfully using teaching strategies and student enrollment practices developed by the Center with the support of the Foundation.

These efforts informed more intensive work on two relatively neglected immigrant populations: secondary school students and students in demographically changing suburban and small urban districts. Following review of our earlier projects and extensive consultation, the Foundation launched two five-year $5 million initiatives.

The first focuses directly on immigrant education itself and relies heavily on the leadership of the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL). The Center is seeking to address key problems which appear to account for the failure of secondary schools to serve immigrant students: shortages of school personnel trained to meet the specific needs of immigrants; school structures that fail to ensure smooth transitions from program to program, school to school, or school to work; school systems that fail to provide immigrant students with access to academic concepts and skills; a lack of appropriate assessment policies and procedures for immigrant students; and few curricular and programmatic alternatives for "late entrant students"11 needing to develop language and academic skills for higher education or work.

Four local demonstration projects managed by CAL have been funded in order to address these problems. The Center administers the program, organizes collaboration across demonstration sites, and oversees research and evaluation. These demonstration projects are based at California State University, Long Beach; California Tomorrow (San Francisco); Intercultural Development Research Association (San Antonio); and University of Maryland, Baltimore County. They link the efforts of educational organizations, school districts, schools of education, postsecondary institutions (including two-year colleges and vocational training programs), community-based organizations, and local businesses. While each project has specific objectives and methods, their common goal is to develop effective and cost-efficient strategies for educating secondary-school-age immigrant students by improving English language and literacy development, mastery of academic content and skills, and access to postsecondary opportunities.

Although the program has been launched so recently that it would be premature to attribute particular achievements to it, substantial progress has been made in developing promising approaches. For example, with the help of a local community organization, the University of Maryland has assisted a Prince Georges County high school with low college enrollment rates in establishing an intensive college preparatory program for immigrant students. Even in the first year of the program, the number of college applications has increased markedly.

California Tomorrow has collaborated with secondary schools in Salinas and Hayward to redesign the school day for immigrant students using "block scheduling." This approach reduces the number of class periods in the school day by half, allowing for more intensive involvement in each subject, and extended contact with individual teachers. Teachers report improvements in the quality and volume of work completed by students, grades, and credit accumulation.

The second initiative is intended to help school districts achieve both diversity and excellence. It focuses on districts experiencing demographic transitions as a consequence of immigration and other factors. The DEWEY Network of the National Center for Restructuring Education, Schools and Teaching (NCREST), which is housed at Teachers College of Columbia University, was designed at the Foundation's request to support educational excellence in such settings. The network includes eight school districts in the metropolitan New York City area; each is located in a suburb or small city with an increasingly diverse population as measured by economic status, nationality, race, ethnicity, and language; has a tradition of high academic achievement; and is highly motivated to seek new approaches to educating students that will enable it to serve as a model of excellence and diversity. NCREST is providing assistance in designing new strategies for staff development, parent involvement, and educational practice which are responsive to the needs of diverse students.

The current school year is the first in which the program is fully operational; however, the initial school restructuring efforts of participating districts have been impressive. One district has developed a "cluster" strategy for middle and high schools in which small groups of teachers from several disciplines and a diverse population of students replace large classes of homogeneously tracked students. Academic coursework is pursued more often through collaborative projects that integrate content areas and enliven the material presented. It is expected that this personalized, hands-on approach will enhance academic performance.

Immigrant Policy at the State and Local Level

The Foundation's focus on state and local immigrant policy was prompted by the fact that government agencies at these levels form the front line of our country's response to immigrants. Ironically, while immigration policy is formulated exclusively at the federal level, state and local governments bear most of the responsibility for settlement of immigrants and experience most profoundly the difficulties of providing education and public services to linguistically and culturally distinct groups.

Significantly diminished federal assistance and the worsening fiscal circumstances of some receiving states and localities have combined to intensify the challenges we observed initially. Indeed, several states have recently adopted new strategies (including litigation and ballot initiatives) seeking to force federal coverage of the costs of immigration and to reduce state and local services to immigrants.

Here again, data collection and analysis are far from adequate, and one of our immediate objectives was to support baseline research. Funding was provided to the Urban Institute for a study of state and local immigrant policies and programs assisting newcomers and their host communities. This investigation revealed that at all levels of government, immigrant policy in this country is more notable for its lack of definition and purpose than for clear contours and goals. The programs and policies having the greatest effect on immigrants are mainstream ones, which are not particularly cognizant of the special needs of these populations and their host communities. To the extent that policies which deliberately address the social and economic integration of newcomers can be identified, they tend to vary widely from one jurisdiction to the next.

On the basis of these discouraging findings, we planned a more refined agenda in state and local immigrant policy. Not seeking to encourage government to take on a larger and more costly role, we have aimed instead at encouraging a more analytic and proactive approach that could lead to more effective use of available resources. Our current strategy has three aims: (a) to build a stronger policy development and research capacity in immigrant policy; (b) to improve the access of state and local policymakers to sound information and analysis; and (c) to advance the development of effective programs to educate and train adult immigrants. To illustrate:

• A grant was made in 1992 to the Urban Institute to establish a program on immigrant policy focusing primarily on policy research and design; providing technical assistance to policymakers, practitioners, and agencies concerned with immigrants; and conducting research on immigrant economic mobility. Some of this research has had a direct effect early on. To illustrate, the government's distribution of $1.8 billion to jurisdictions affected by immigration was based directly on the Institute's study of the fiscal impact of undocumented aliens.

• In 1991 and 1993, grants were made to the State and Local Coalition on Immigration12 to improve intergovernmental coordination and communication, to enhance the capacity of state and local officials in managing immigrant policy, and to research the implications for immigrants of welfare and job training reforms. The Coalition has a strong technical assistance capacity and has advised legislative committees in Oregon, Virginia, and Illinois as these states consider appropriate strategies in employment, social services, and education for immigrants.

• The Center for Applied Linguistics received a grant to increase the capacity and improve the quality of adult immigrant education programs. This project includes a literacy component exploring the special literacy problems of the limited-english-proficient; a workplace component focusing on skills training; and a vocational component targeting career education, recertification, and applied mathematics and science instruction.

• A grant was made to the Regional Plan Association to support an examination of the labor force preparedness, educational needs, and human resources of adult immigrants in the New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut region.

Research on the Effects of Immigration

The Foundation's projects have been designed to probe specific questions of "impact." For example, the Foundation supported a study of the economic impact of immigration on an entire state (New Jersey) in the hope of obtaining a fuller picture of the true economic costs and benefits of recent immigration; a study of the effects of immigration upon the nation's African-American population; and in-depth examinations of immigrant populations in several major receiving cities, including Los Angeles, Houston, and New York. This work has emphasized the changes which immigration is producing in the composition of particular ethnic groups, (especially Hispanics and Asians) and the evolving characteristics of those populations.

The Foundation has also made a $1.3 million grant to enable the Social Science Research Council to establish a program on immigration research, which will encourage concerted efforts by social scientists in a variety of disciplines to advance the understanding of immigration in a comparative context. The components of this program include training workshops, fellowships for pre- and postdoctoral fellowships, and a small grants program to encourage the development of cooperative research projects. It is expected to produce greater diversity and competence of those in the field and to link together the vast array of studies of immigration now under way in various disciplines of the social sciences, history, and law.

Structuring the Immigrant Policy Program: General Comments

The Foundation's approach to grantmaking in immigrant policy has been shaped by the field's distinctive characteristics. First, it is embryonic (even inchoate), and research, analysis, and policy formulation are still poorly coordinated. At the same time, political debate about immigration and immigrants is highly developed. Positions have been staked out in debates over recent legislation. Political tactics (including ballot initiatives and litigation against the federal government) are evolving at an accelerated rate. This is a field in which the public has a deep and abiding interest; after all, what immigrants receive in the way of benefits and opportunities is frequently viewed primarily in terms of costs to the taxpayer. The field is also highly fragmented. Participants are distributed across all levels of government and jurisdictions; organizations with an interest in relevant policies or programs are widely varied and often disconnected.

These characteristics present several challenges to the formulation of effective grantmaking strategies: how to identify potential grantees from among the many types of organizations and agencies concerned with immigrant issues; how to form and manage a broadly diverse set of institutional grantees and structure complementary projects; and how to avoid involvement in immigration debates.

Given these characteristics, the Foundation's grantmaking strategy has incorporated a variety of approaches. In some instances, Foundation staff and grantees have collaborated in program design. In other instances the Foundation has proposed research projects to prospective grantees. Infrequently, unsolicited proposals, modified to ensure compatibility with our objectives, have been approved. The Foundation has also sponsored a "request for proposals" process. Over time our grants have evolved along what might be called a "path of complexity"--from fairly simple short-term research projects and "mapping" efforts (such as the Urban Institute's first study on immigrant policies) to more complicated program and model building activities, in some cases involving multiple participants, advisory committees, and oversight organizations (such as the Center for Applied Linguistics).

The range of grantees is already considerable --encompassing five policy research organizations, thirteen universities, three advocacy groups, seven educational organizations, two government associations, a scholarly research council, a community foundation, and several hybrid groups that defy categorization. The field has attracted a diverse set of scholars and practitioners, and a number of the Foundation's projects are headed by an Hispanic, a Black, or an Asian-American. The varied perspectives of the project leaders are an asset of the program, which the Foundation has sought to nurture through periodic conferences for project leaders. This practice was instituted to facilitate communication on matters of mutual interest and to enable the Foundation to learn about emerging issues. Collaboration among grantmakers has also helped to extend the program's contributions. Foundation staff participated in the formation of a grantmakers network (sponsored by the Council on Foundations).

Avoiding the distractions of political debates has not been easy, but efforts to achieve this objective have been helped by defining the focus of our program with some precision. The Foundation has chosen not to become involved in such highly charged issues as how to defend our borders; whether more or fewer immigrants should be admitted; and which agencies ought to bear any costs associated with immigrants. These are important questions, but ones better addressed by others.

Future Directions

Regardless of the outcome of these political controversies, we believe that our focus on research and on improving the effectiveness of educational and governmental institutions in the immigrant settlement process will remain useful. Enhancing immigrants' economic mobility, for example, will continue to be an important objective.

Looking ahead, the Foundation expects to center more of its activities on female immigrants, who currently comprise nearly one-half of all immigrants to the US each year but whose economic plight has been neglected. While the number of native women in the American labor force increased by about 25 percent over the 1980s, the number of immigrant women in the work force increased by almost 65 percent. In one state (California) this group accounted for one-fifth of the total growth in the labor force between 1980 and 1990. Yet, three of every five recently arrived women of working age can neither speak nor understand English very well and just over half have completed high school. High occupational concentration among women--exceeding that of immigrant men--and even more limited access to language and skills training raise serious questions about their incorporation into the economy and prospects for family mobility, especially for female-headed immigrant households.

The intersection of race and immigration is another complicated subject which remains under-examined. As the size and diversity of the US minority population increase, we are challenged to think in new ways about pluralism, racial identity, and equity issues. The impacts of immigration on the native minority populations and poor are only beginning to be understood, and implications for the allocation of public resources need to be analyzed comprehensively.

If there was any question about the importance of immigrant policies when the Foundation began its work in this field, there is certainly no doubt today. The problems confronting everyone concerned about this complex set of social, economic, and political issues are daunting indeed, and we hope to continue to benefit from the insights and advice of those working intensively in this field. We also hope to encourage others to take up these questions, and to contribute their own ideas to their resolution.