<p>SBDad - I hope you're right, but I just don't think so. We have only two choices: either the Byrds are funded for the 2007-2008 school year from the FY2007 appropriations or from the FY2008 appropriations. Based on the following, I believe that the Byrd scholarships for the 2007-2008 school year come from the FY2008 budget.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The federal budget process is notorious for being so late passing an appropriations bill that stopgap measures need to be taken. As a former government employee, I can speak from personal experience that every October, it was iffy as to whether we were going to get paid or be sent home pending stopgap legislation. The federal government just isn't used to funding things ahead of time. You'll find references all over the Internet regarding grants or programs being put on hold until the funding is passed in October. If they were a year ahead, this wouldn't be an issue. </p></li>
<li><p>Every reference I can find regarding the federal budget process indicates that a federal FY begins in October of the previous year (i.e. October 2007 for FY 2008). The following is from "Ben's Guide": "Fiscal Year: A twelve month accounting period used by the Federal Government that goes from October 1st to September 30th. Currently, the Government is in FY07, which goes from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007." It's clear from the Senate appropriations website I included above that the Senate is now working on the FY 2008 budget to fund programs beginning Oct. 1. 2007.</p></li>
<li><p>Students who already receive Byrd appear to get their actual money late in the year - Oct or Nov - which would make sense if that's when the appropriation is made. If this money had been approved during the prior fiscal year, why is it so late? </p></li>
<li><p>MN's website had this posted: "As of April 26, 2007, the federal appropriation for this program has not been made. As soon as the appropriation has been received and processed, our office will notify all applicants of the results for this year by letter." Why would MN put an item on their website specifically stating that funding hadn't been approved yet in April 2007 if it was actually funded way back in October 2006? Even if the Dept. of Education was actually holding onto previously appropriated money until the last minute, why would MN not notify students that they had won scholarships if funding was guaranteed? </p></li>
<li><p>Posters from Texas and Connecticut both stated that their award letters specifically indicated that their awards were contingent on funding. If funding was already approved, why the reference?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I suppose it's possible that some states guarantee the Byrd with state funds if the feds don't come through - maybe Michigan is one of those. I think it's more likely that they go ahead and send award letters in order to have the process completed when the money does come through because they're so used to it coming through that they're fairly confident it will. Not to mention that here it is July already and students would be understandably upset with the states if they hadn't heard anything yet for a school year that for many of them starts in a little over a month.</p>
<p>I'd be curious as to whom you spoke with at the Michigan DOE - were they an upper-level administrator intimately familiar with the appropriations process or a phone-answerer who thinks sending an award letter means the program is funded?</p>
<p>Again, I really hope you're right - that would mean it looks like Byrd is funded for both the 2007-2008 school year and the 2008-2009 year. I guess I just have a more jaded view of our government's ability to do things ahead of time.</p>
<p>Thanks for the info Snowmn. I think your info is correct. I know that the Byrd always comes into my DD's school account late (as in late Oct/Nov) each year for the first half of the funds ($750), and equally late for the spring payment ($750). The 41$ million is such a small number in the scale of things; I really hope they keep funding it!</p>
<p>I spoke with the individual who administers the scholarship at the state - don't know if that qualifies as "low level" or not. Ann Wohlfert, Director of Scholarships and Grants, Michigan Department of Education.</p>
<p>I just sent her an email to clarify. I will report back.</p>
<p>My S got an email last week regarding the Byrd for this his second year. He just had to confirm that he's still in school and the funds will filter to the university...probably in October as previous posters stated.</p>
<p>Well, good news for your son - can't get much clearer than that. </p>
<p>I finally got through on the phone to the MN Byrd administrator. She apologized for the delay and said that they're still in the process of making award decisions and hope to notify students by next week. Since they originally said applicants would hear by the end of the school year, I suspect that the whole "we'll notify you when funding has been approved" business may have been designed to camouflage their tardiness. It's as if MN filed all these applications away for 4 months (application deadline was March 15th) and just now discovered them. I'm still not clear on which appropriation funds which school year, but I guess it really doesn't matter as long as these state organizations tell us that the current school year is funded.</p>
<p>Whether your son or daughter received the Byrd please let you Congress and Reps know that you think it is important to continue with the funding! I even emailed Robert C. Byrd</p>
<p>I stand corrected. There is no funny business going on in MO.
Received email From MO Representative Brian L. Baker stating:</p>
<p>Fewer new scholarships were awarded for 2007-08 than previous years because the number of renewal scholarships took most of the money. More students are eligible to renew and do renew their scholarship than in some prior years. That leaves less money available for new scholarships. </p>
<p>Also, more students are earning a perfect ACT score of 36 than a few years ago. An attempt is made to award an equal number of scholarships in each of Missouri’s congressional districts. The applicants with the very high ACT scores along with high GPAs in a congressional district reduces, and perhaps eliminates, the number of scholarships available to be awarded to students with high, but less than perfect, ACT scores.</p>