Department of Education

SPECIAL EDUCATION

Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request 

CONTENTS

Page

Appropriations Language..............................................................................................................1

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes............................................................................6

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers.................................................................................14

Summary of Changes .................................................................................................................15

Authorizing Legislation................................................................................................................16

Appropriations History.................................................................................................................17

Summary of Request ..................................................................................................................18

Activities:

State grants:

Grants to States ..............................................................................................................19

Preschool grants .............................................................................................................38

Grants for infants and families ........................................................................................48

National activities:

State personnel development .........................................................................................62

Technical assistance and dissemination.........................................................................68

Personnel preparation.....................................................................................................76

Parent information centers ..............................................................................................86

Educational technology, media, and materials................................................................95

Special Olympics education programs................................................................................101

Account Summary Table...........................................................................................................105

State Tables*

*State tables reflecting final 2021 allocations and 2022 and 2023 estimates are posted on the 

Department’s webpage at: https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/statetables/index.html
SPECIAL EDUCATION

1

Appropriations Language

For carrying out the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Special 

Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004, $18,130,170,000, of which $8,410,430,000 

shall become available on July 1, 2023, and shall remain available through September 30, 

2024, and of which $9,283,383,000 shall become available on October 1, 2023, and shall 

remain available through September 30, 2024, for academic year 2023-2024:1 Provided, That 

the amount for section 611(b)(2) of the IDEA shall be equal to the lesser of the amount available 

for that activity during fiscal year 2022, increased by the amount of inflation as specified in 

section 619(d)(2)(B) of the IDEA, or the percent change in the funds appropriated under section 

611(i) of the IDEA, but not less than the amount for that activity during fiscal year 2022:2 

Provided further, That the Secretary shall, without regard to section 611(d) of the IDEA, 

distribute to all other States (as that term is defined in section 611(g)(2)), subject to the third 

proviso, any amount by which a State's allocation under section 611, from funds appropriated 

under this heading, is reduced under section 612(a)(18)(B), according to the following: 

85 percent on the basis of the States' relative populations of children aged 3 through 21 who are 

of the same age as children with disabilities for whom the State ensures the availability of a free 

appropriate public education under this part, and 15 percent to States on the basis of the States' 

relative populations of those children who are living in poverty: 3 Provided further, That the 

Secretary may not distribute any funds under the previous proviso to any State whose reduction 

in allocation from funds appropriated under this heading made funds available for such a 

distribution:4 Provided further, That the States shall allocate such funds distributed under the 

second proviso to local educational agencies in accordance with section 611(f):5 Provided 

further, That the amount by which a State's allocation under section 611(d) of the IDEA is 

reduced under section 612(a)(18)(B) and the amounts distributed to States under the previous 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

2

provisos in fiscal year 2012 or any subsequent year shall not be considered in calculating the 

awards under section 611(d) for fiscal year 2013 or for any subsequent fiscal years:6 Provided 

further, That, notwithstanding the provision in section 612(a)(18)(B) regarding the fiscal year in 

which a State's allocation under section 611(d) is reduced for failure to comply with the 

requirement of section 612(a)(18)(A), the Secretary may apply the reduction specified in section 

612(a)(18)(B) over a period of consecutive fiscal years, not to exceed five, until the entire 

reduction is applied:7 Provided further, That the Secretary may, in any fiscal year in which a 

State's allocation under section 611 is reduced in accordance with section 612(a)(18)(B), 

reduce the amount a State may reserve under section 611(e)(1) by an amount that bears the 

same relation to the maximum amount described in that paragraph as the reduction under 

section 612(a)(18)(B) bears to the total allocation the State would have received in that fiscal 

year under section 611(d) in the absence of the reduction: 8 Provided further, That the 

Secretary shall either reduce the allocation of funds under section 611 for any fiscal year 

following the fiscal year for which the State fails to comply with the requirement of section 

612(a)(18)(A) as authorized by section 612(a)(18)(B), or seek to recover funds under section 

452 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1234a): 9 Provided further, That the 

funds reserved under 611(c) of the IDEA may be used to provide technical assistance to States 

to improve the capacity of the States to meet the data collection requirements of sections 616 

and 618 and to administer and carry out other services and activities to improve data collection, 

coordination, quality, and use under parts B and C of the IDEA:10 Provided further, That the 

Secretary may use funds made available for the State Personnel Development Grants program 

under part D, subpart 1 of IDEA to evaluate program performance under such subpart:11 

Provided further, That States may use funds reserved for other State-level activities under 

sections 611(e)(2) and 619(f) of the IDEA to make subgrants to local educational agencies, 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

3

institutions of higher education, other public agencies, and private non-profit organizations to 

carry out activities authorized by those sections: 12 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 643(e)(1) of the IDEA, the Secretary may reserve up to $200,000,000 of the funds 

appropriated under Part C of the IDEA to provide grants to States that are either carrying out the 

policy described in sections 632(5)(B)(ii) and 635(c) or are serving at-risk infants and toddlers 

as defined in section 632(1) and 632(5)(B)(i) in order to facilitate the implementation of such 

policy:13 Provided further, That notwithstanding section 643(e)(2)(A) of the IDEA, if 5 or fewer 

States apply for grants pursuant to section 643(e) of such Act, the Secretary shall provide a 

grant to each State in an amount equal to the maximum amount described in section 

643(e)(2)(B) of such Act: 14 Provided further, That if more than 5 States apply for grants 

pursuant to section 643(e) of the IDEA, the Secretary shall award funds to those States on the 

basis of the States' relative populations of infants and toddlers except that no such State shall 

receive a grant in excess of the amount described in section 643(e)(2)(B) of such Act: 15

Provided further, That States may use funds allotted under section 643(c) of the IDEA to make 

subgrants to early intervention service providers to carry out activities authorized by section 638 

of the IDEA: 16 Provided further, That, notwithstanding section 638 of the IDEA, any State 

receiving a grant under section 633 of the IDEA must reserve not less than ten percent of its 

award for use in a manner described in a State plan, approved by the Secretary, to ensure 

equitable access to and participation in Part C services in the State, particularly for populations 

that have been traditionally underrepresented in the program: 17 Provided further, That, 

notwithstanding section 632(4)(B) of the IDEA, a State receiving a grant under section 633 of 

the IDEA may establish a system of payments but may not include in that system family fees or 

out-of-pocket costs to families for early intervention services:18 Provided further, That any State 

seeking to amend its eligibility criteria under section 635(a)(1) of the IDEA in such a way that 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

4

would have the effect of reducing the number of infants and families who are eligible under 

Part C must conduct the public participation under section 637(a)(8) of the IDEA at least 

24 months prior to implementing such a change: 19 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 638 of the IDEA, a State may use funds it receives under section 633 of the IDEA to 

offer continued early intervention services to a child who previously received services under 

Part C of the IDEA from age three until the beginning of the school year following the child’s 

third birthday without regard to the procedures in section 635(c) of the IDEA:20 Provided further, 

That, notwithstanding section 643(c) of the IDEA, the Secretary shall allot, from the funds 

remaining for each fiscal year after the reservation and payments under subsections (a), (b), 

and (e) of section 643, to each State (as that term is defined in section 643(c)(4)(B)) according 

to the following: 85 percent on the basis of the State's relative population of infants and toddlers 

and 15 percent on the basis of the State's relative population of such children who are living in 

poverty, except that no State shall receive less than 90 percent of the amount it received in the 

preceding fiscal year:21 Provided further, That, notwithstanding section 638 of the IDEA, a State 

may use funds appropriated under Part C of the IDEA to conduct child find, public awareness 

and referral activities for an individual who is expected to become a parent of an infant with a 

disability (as that term is defined in section 632(5)), as established by medical or other 

records:22 Provided further, That any State electing to use funds under the preceding proviso 

shall ensure, that as soon as possible but not later than 45 days after the child's birth, it 

completes the referral and eligibility process under this part for that child:

23 Provided further, 

That, notwithstanding section 611 of the IDEA, the Secretary may reserve up to $5,000,000 to 

study issues related to the creation and implementation of a comprehensive system of services 

and supports for children with disabilities from birth through age five.24
SPECIAL EDUCATION

5

NOTES

Each language provision that is followed by a footnote reference is explained in the Analysis of Language 

Provisions and Changes document which follows the appropriations language.

A full-year 2022 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, 

the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division A of P.L. 117-

43, as amended). The amounts included for 2022 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

6

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1 ... $18,130,170,000, of which 

$8,410,430,000 shall become available on 

July 1, 2023, and shall remain available 

through September 30, 2024, and of which 

$9,283,383,000 shall become available on 

October 1, 2023, and shall remain available 

through September 30, 2024, for academic 

year 2023-2024:

This language provides for funds to be 

appropriated on a forward-funded basis for a 

portion of the Grants to States program, and 

all of the Preschool Grants and Grants for 

Infants and Families programs. The 

language also provides that a portion of the 

Grants to States funds are for an advance 

appropriation that becomes available for 

obligation on October 1 of the fiscal year 

following the year of the appropriation. 

2 Provided, That the amount for section 

611(b)(2) of the IDEA shall be equal to the 

lesser of the amount available for that activity 

during fiscal year 2022, increased by the 

amount of inflation as specified in section 

619(d)(2)(B) of the IDEA, or the percent 

change in the funds appropriated under 

section 611(i) of the IDEA, but not less than 

the amount for that activity during fiscal year 

2022:

This language limits the amount of funds 

required to be transferred to the Department 

of the Interior under the Grants to States 

program to the lesser of an amount equal to 

the amount transferred to the Department of 

the Interior in 2022 plus inflation or the 

percent change in the appropriation for the 

Grants to States program. This language 

also clarifies that in the event of a decrease 

or no change in the appropriation for the 

Grants to States program, the amount of 

funds required to be transferred to the 

Department of the Interior remains level with 

the amount they received under the fiscal 

year 2022 appropriation.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

7

Language Provision Explanation

3 Provided further, That the Secretary shall, 

without regard to section 611(d) of the IDEA, 

distribute to all other States (as that term is 

defined in section 611(g)(2)), subject to the 

third proviso, any amount by which a State’s 

allocation under section 611, from funds 

appropriated under this heading, is reduced 

under section 612(a)(18)(B), according to the 

following: 85 percent on the basis of the 

States’ relative populations of children aged 

3 through 21 who are of the same age as 

children with disabilities for whom the State 

ensures the availability of a free appropriate 

public education under this part, and 15 

percent to States on the basis of the States’ 

relative populations of those children who are 

living in poverty:

This language authorizes the Department to 

reallocate funds that are reduced from a 

State’s award as a result of a failure to meet 

the maintenance of State financial support 

requirements of section 612 of the IDEA and 

requires that those funds be distributed to 

other States on the basis of their relative 

populations of children in the age ranges for 

which a State ensures a free appropriate 

public education and those children living in 

poverty. 

4Provided further, That the Secretary may 

not distribute any funds under the previous 

proviso to any State whose reduction in 

allocation from funds appropriated under this 

heading made funds available for such a 

distribution:

This language ensures that any State 

receiving a reduction in their section 611 

allocation as a result of not meeting the 

maintenance of State financial support 

requirements of section 612 of the IDEA 

does not receive funds redistributed as a 

result of another State’s failure to meet those 

same requirements.

5 Provided further, That the States shall 

allocate such funds distributed under the 

second proviso to local educational agencies 

in accordance with section 611(f):

This language requires States to distribute 

the funds received under the second proviso 

to local educational agencies without 

reserving a portion of those funds for Statelevel activities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

8

Language Provision Explanation

6 Provided further, That the amount by which 

a State’s allocation under section 611(d) of 

the IDEA is reduced under section 

612(a)(18)(B) and the amounts distributed to 

States under the previous provisos in fiscal 

year 2012 or any subsequent year shall not 

be considered in calculating the awards 

under section 611(d) for fiscal year 2013 or 

for any subsequent fiscal years:

This language allows the Department to 

calculate a State’s allocation under section 

611(d) in future years without regard to 

reductions in awards made as a result of a 

failure to meet the maintenance of State 

financial support requirements in section 612. 

This language mitigates the potential longterm impact of one-time reductions in 

awards.

7 Provided further, That, notwithstanding the 

provision in section 612(a)(18)(B) regarding 

the fiscal year in which a State's allocation 

under section 611(d) is reduced for failure to 

comply with the requirement of section 

612(a)(18)(A), the Secretary may apply the 

reduction specified in section 612(a)(18)(B) 

over a period of consecutive fiscal years, not 

to exceed five, until the entire reduction is 

applied:

This language permits the Secretary to 

spread out a reduction from a State’s award 

as a result of a failure to meet the 

maintenance of State financial support 

requirements of section 612 of the IDEA over 

a maximum of 5 years.

8 Provided further, That the Secretary may, in 

any fiscal year in which a State's allocation 

under section 611 is reduced in accordance 

with section 612(a)(18)(B), reduce the 

amount a State may reserve under section 

611(e)(1) by an amount that bears the same 

relation to the maximum amount described in 

that paragraph as the reduction under 

section 612(a)(18)(B) bears to the total 

allocation the State would have received in 

that fiscal year under section 611(d) in the 

absence of the reduction:

This language permits the Secretary to 

reduce the maximum State set-aside for 

State administration by the same percentage 

as the reduction in the State’s overall IDEA 

section 611 grant.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

9

Language Provision Explanation

9 Provided further, That the Secretary shall 

either reduce the allocation of funds under 

section 611 for any fiscal year following the 

fiscal year for which the State fails to comply 

with the requirement of section 612(a)(18)(A) 

as authorized by section 612(a)(18)(B), or 

seek to recover funds under section 452 of 

the General Education Provisions Act (20 

U.S.C. 1234a):

This language permits the Secretary to: 

(1) seek to recover non-Federal (State) funds 

in the amount of the State’s failure to meet 

the maintenance of State financial support 

requirements of section 612 under the 

recovery of funds provision in section 452 of 

the General Education Provisions Act, or 

(2) reduce the State’s IDEA section 611 

grant. 

10Provided further, That the funds reserved 

under 611(c) of the IDEA may be used to 

provide technical assistance to States to 

improve the capacity of the States to meet 

the data collection requirements of sections 

616 and 618 and to administer and carry out 

other services and activities to improve data 

collection, coordination, quality, and use 

under parts B and C of the IDEA:

This language authorizes the Department to 

use funds available under section 611(c) to 

provide technical assistance and support to 

States on a broad range of issues, including 

compliance with applicable privacy laws and 

appropriate coordination and linking of 

information within and across Federal, State,

and local data systems for the unique needs 

of students with disabilities and their families 

and the purposes of the IDEA programs and 

data collections.

11Provided further, That the Secretary may 

use funds made available for the State 

Personnel Development Grants program 

under part D, subpart 1 of IDEA to evaluate 

program performance under such subpart:

This language permits the Secretary to use 

funds appropriated for the State Personnel 

Development Grants program under Part D 

of the IDEA to evaluate program 

performance.

12 Provided further, That States may use 

funds reserved for other State-level activities 

under sections 611(e)(2) and 619(f) of the 

IDEA to make subgrants to local educational 

agencies, institutions of higher education, 

other public agencies, and private non-profit 

organizations to carry out activities 

authorized by those sections

This language permits States to subgrant 

funds that they reserve for “Other State-level 

activities” under the Grants to States and 

Preschool Grants to States programs.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

10

Language Provision Explanation

13 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 643(e)(1) of the IDEA, the Secretary 

may reserve up to $200,000,000 of the funds 

appropriated under Part C of the IDEA to 

provide grants to States that are either 

carrying out the policy described in sections 

632(5)(B)(ii) and 635(c) or are serving at-risk 

infants and toddlers as defined in section 

632(1) and 632(5)(B)(i) in order to facilitate 

the implementation of such policy:

This language permits the Secretary to 

reserve up to $200 million for State Incentive 

Grants under Part C of the IDEA to provide 

grants to States that exercise either the 

option to serve at-risk infants and toddlers or 

the option to continue to provide services 

under Part C of the IDEA to children ages 

three through five.

14 Provided further, That notwithstanding 

section 643(e)(2)(A) of the IDEA, if 5 or fewer 

States apply for grants pursuant to section 

643(e) of such Act, the Secretary shall 

provide a grant to each State in an amount 

equal to the maximum amount described in 

section 643(e)(2)(B) of such Act:

In years in which five or fewer States apply 

for funding under the State Incentive Grants 

program under Part C of the IDEA, this 

language would allow the Department to 

provide all States that apply 20 percent of the 

funds reserved for the program.

15 Provided further, That if more than 5 

States apply for grants pursuant to section 

643(e) of the IDEA, the Secretary shall award 

funds to those States on the basis of the 

States' relative populations of infants and 

toddlers except that no such State shall 

receive a grant in excess of the amount 

described in section 643(e)(2)(B) of such Act.

In years in which more than five States apply 

for funding under the State Incentive Grants 

program under Part C of the IDEA, this 

language would allow the Department to 

ensure that all funds are allocated to eligible 

States on the relative basis of the number of 

infants and toddlers in each State.

16 Provided further, That States may use 

funds allotted under section 643(c) of the 

IDEA to make subgrants to early intervention 

service providers to carry out activities 

authorized by section 638 of the IDEA:

This language authorizes States to subgrant 

funds received under Part C of the IDEA to 

early intervention service providers.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

11

Language Provision Explanation

17 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 638 of the IDEA, any State receiving 

a grant under section 633 of the IDEA must 

reserve not less than ten percent of its award 

for use in a manner described in a State 

plan, approved by the Secretary, to ensure 

equitable access to and participation in 

Part C services in the State, particularly for 

populations that have been traditionally 

underrepresented in the program:

This language requires all States to reserve 

10 percent of their Part C funding to 

implement a State equity plan which must be 

approved by the Secretary.

18 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 632(4)(B) of the IDEA, a State 

receiving a grant under section 633 of the 

IDEA may establish a system of payments 

but may not include in that system family 

fees or out-of-pocket costs to families for 

early intervention services:

This language would prohibit any State 

receiving funds under Part C of the IDEA 

from charging family fees or requiring out-ofpocket costs for receipt of services under 

Part C of the IDEA.

19 Provided further, That any State seeking to 

amend its eligibility criteria under section 

635(a)(1) of the IDEA in such a way that 

would have the effect of reducing the number 

of infants and families who are eligible under 

Part C must conduct the public participation 

under section 637(a)(8) of the IDEA at least 

24 months prior to implementing such a 

change:

This language requires any State seeking to 

limit eligibility under Part C to provide at least 

two years of advance notice to the public 

before implementing such changes. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

12

Language Provision Explanation

20 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 638 of the IDEA, a State may use 

funds it receives under section 633 of the 

IDEA to offer continued early intervention 

services to a child who previously received 

services under Part C of the IDEA from age 

three until the beginning of the school year 

following the child’s third birthday without 

regard to the procedures in section 635(c) of 

the IDEA.

This language would allow States to use 

Federal funds to continue to offer Part C 

services to eligible children with disabilities 

from their third birthday until the beginning of 

the next school year.

21 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 643(c) of the IDEA, the Secretary 

shall allot, from the funds remaining for each 

fiscal year after the reservation and 

payments under subsections (a), (b), and (e) 

of section 643, to each State (as that term is 

defined in section 643(c)(4)(B)) according to 

the following: 85 percent on the basis of the 

State's relative population of infants and 

toddlers and 15 percent on the basis of the 

State's relative population of such children 

who are living in poverty, except that no 

State shall receive less than 90 percent of 

the amount it received in the preceding fiscal 

year:

This language would require the Secretary to 

allocate funding to States under Part C of the 

IDEA on the basis of their relative 

populations of infants and toddlers and those 

children living in poverty. Further, this 

language limits the potential reduction a 

State may see in its allocation from one year 

to the next.

22 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 638 of the IDEA, a State may use 

funds appropriated under Part C of the IDEA 

to conduct child find, public awareness and 

referral activities for an individual who is 

expected to become a parent of an infant 

with a disability (as that term is defined in 

section 632(5)), as established by medical or 

other records:

This language would provide States with the 

flexibility to use funds under Part C of the 

IDEA to conduct certain activities with 

individuals expecting to become parents of 

infants or toddlers with disabilities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

13

Language Provision Explanation

23 Provided further, That any State electing to 

use funds under the preceding proviso shall 

ensure, that as soon as possible but not later 

than 45 days after the child's birth, it 

completes the referral and eligibility process 

under this part for that child:

This language requires any State exercising 

the flexibility in the preceding proviso to 

ensure that referral and eligibility processes 

are completed in a timely manner for all 

affected children.

24 Provided further, That, notwithstanding 

section 611 of the IDEA, the Secretary may 

reserve up to $5,000,000 to study issues 

related to the creation and implementation of 

a comprehensive system of services and 

supports for children with disabilities from 

birth through age five.

This language allows the Secretary to 

reserve up to $5 million of funds under the 

Grants to States program to study the 

implications of establishing a comprehensive 

system of services and supports for children 

with disabilities from birth through age five.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

14

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2021 2022 2023

Discretionary:

Discretionary Appropriation $14,070,743 $14,070,743 $18,130,170

Total, discretionary appropriation 14,070,743 14,070,743 18,130,170

Mandatory

Discretionary Supplemental, ARP Act (P.L. 117-02) 3,030,000 0 0

Total, mandatory appropriation 3,030,000 0 0

Advance:

Advance for succeeding fiscal year -9,283,383 -9,283,383 -9.283,383

Advance from prior year 9,283,383 9,283,383 +9,283,383

Total, budget authority 17,100,743 14,070,743 18,130,170
SPECIAL EDUCATION

15

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2022 Estimate $14,070,743

2023 18,130,170

Net change +4,059,427

Increases: 2022 Estimate

Change 

from base

Program:

State grants: Grants to States $12,937,457 +$3,321,736

State grants: Preschool grants 397,620 +105,000

State grants: Grants for infants and families 481,850 +450,150

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination 44,345 +5,000

National activities: Personnel preparation 90,200 +159,800

National activities: Parent information centers 27,411 +17,741

Net change +4,059,427
SPECIAL EDUCATION

16

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2022

Authorized

Footnote

2022

Estimatefootnote

2023

Authorizedfootnote

2023

Request

footnote

State Grants:

State grants Grants to States (IDEA-B-611) Indefinite 1 $12,937,4572 Indefinite1 $16,259,1932

State grantsPreschool grants (IDEA-B-619) Indefinite 397,620 Indefinite 502,620

State grantsGrants for infants and families (IDEA-C) 0 3 481,850 03 932,000

National activities:

National activities State personnel development (IDEA-D-1) 03 38,630 03 38,630

National activities Technical assistance and dissemination (IDEA-D2-663) 03 44,345 03 49,345

National activities Personnel preparation (IDEA-D-2-662) 03 90,200 03 250,000

National activities Parent information centers (IDEA-D-3-671-673) 03 27,411 03 45,152

National activities Educational Technology, Media, and Materials

(IDEA-D-3-674) 03 29,547 03 29,547

Special Olympics education programs (SOSEA 3(a)) Indefinite 23,683 Indefinite 23,683

Total definite authorization 0 0

Total annual appropriation 14,070,743 18,130,170

Portion of request subject to reauthorization 1,344,674

1 Funding for technical assistance on State data collection is limited to $25,000 thousand adjusted for inflation. This amount is estimated to be $37,310 thousand 

for fiscal year 2022 and $38,400 thousand for fiscal year 2023. 2 Includes $20,000 thousand for technical assistance on State data collection in fiscal year 2022 and 2023. 3 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

17

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget 

Estimate

to Congress

House 

Allowance footnote

Senate 

Allowance footnote Appropriation

20141 12,657,307 N/A 12,803,387 12,497,300

2014 Advance for 2015 (10,124,103) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20152 12,600,627 N/A 12,555,044 12,522,358

2015 Advance for 2016 (10,124,103) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20163 12,822,358 13,024,510 12,636,817 12,976,858

2016 Advance for 2017 (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20174 13,066,858 13,406,517 13,066,858 13,001,315

2017 Advance for 2018 (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,220,340)

20185 12,942,125 13,251,691 13,066,858 13,038,681

2018 Advance for 2019 (10,124,103) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20196 13,051,776 13,422,651 13,493,684 13,468,728

2019 Advance for 2020 (10,124,103) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20207 13,451,145 14,523,544 13,473,228 13,885,228

2020 Advance for 2021 (10,124,103) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

20218 13,985,228 14,092,995 14,012,728 14,070,743

2021 Mandatory supplemental, 

ARP Act (P.L. 117-02) 9 0 0 0 3,030,000

2021 Advance for 2022 (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

2022 Estimate10 17,193,256 17,193,256 17,193,256 14,070,743

2022 Advance for 2023 (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383) (9,283,383)

2023 18,130,170

2023 Advance for 2024 (9,283,383)

1 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action.

2 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only.

3 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action; Senate allowance reflects Senate 

Subcommittee action only.

4 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2017 appropriations bill; 

the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017.

5 The level for the House allowance reflects floor action on the Omnibus appropriation bill; the Senate allowance reflects 

Committee action on the regular annual 2018 appropriations bill; the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141). 6 The levels for the House and Senate Allowance reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2019 appropriations bill; 

the Appropriation reflects enactment of the Department of Defense and Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education 

Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 115-245).

7 The Senate Allowance reflects the Chairman’s mark; the Appropriation reflects the Further Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94).

8 The level for the Senate Allowance reflects the Chairman’s mark; the Appropriation reflects Division H of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260).

9 The Appropriation reflects the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L. 117-02).

10 The House allowance reflects floor action on the FY 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act; the Senate allowance 

reflects the Chairman’s mark; and the Appropriation reflects the annualized continuing resolution level.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

18

Summary of Request

The Administration is dedicated to ensuring that every child in America’s schools has the 

opportunity to be successful. Part of that commitment is ensuring that States, districts, and 

schools have the resources they need to effectively support the students and families they 

serve. The fiscal year 2023 President’s Request for Special Education of $18.1 billion 

represents an historic commitment to meeting the diverse needs of children with disabilities 

nationwide, increasing regular annual funding for IDEA programs by $4.1 billion over a fiscal 

year 2022 annualized continuing resolution (CR) based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation, 

with investments in State formula grants, personnel development grants, technical assistance, 

and parent resources. The request also includes proposals to increase equity in IDEA 

programs, keep students safe and in the classroom, and ensure continuity of services.

The Administration requests $16.3 billion for the Grants to States program, $3.4 billion more 

than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation, to assist 

States and schools in covering the excess costs of providing special education and related 

services to children with disabilities ages 3 through 21. The request would provide an average 

of $2,199 for each of the 7.4 million children with disabilities who are estimated to be served in 

2023. Under this Request, the Federal contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special 

education and related services would be approximately 15 percent of the national average per 

pupil expenditures.

The request of $502.6 million for Preschool Grants, an increase of $105 million, would assist 

States and schools in providing special education services to children ages 3 through 5. 

The request of $932 million for Grants for Infants and Families would provide an increase of

$450 million to help States implement statewide systems of early intervention services for 

children from birth through age 2. The request also proposes several changes through 

appropriations language to strengthen program implementation and improve equity by (1) 

allocating formula funds, in part, on the basis of poverty; (2) requiring States to develop and 

implement equity plans under Part C of the IDEA; (3) providing States with the flexibility to use 

program funds to support new parents of infants and toddlers with disabilities; (4) prohibiting

out-of-pocket expenses for families participating in the program; (5) requiring States to provide 

adequate notice before instituting limits on eligibility under the program; (6) providing financial 

incentives to States to serve at risk infants and toddlers; and (7) increasing flexibility for States 

to offer summer bridge services to children transitioning from the Part C program into their 

State’s Part B program.

The $412.7 million request for National Activities programs would provide targeted increases 

designed to support the needs of schools, districts, and families. Specifically, the request 

includes $250 million for the Personnel Preparation program, an historic investment in 

bolstering the educator pipeline that would support the training of tens of thousands of new 

teachers and service providers over the next five years. In addition, the request includes 

$49.3 million for Technical Assistance and Dissemination to improve the development and 

implementation of best practices in services delivered under the IDEA. The request also 

includes $45.1 million for Parent Information Centers, an historic investment in the program, to 

support parents and families of children with disabilities. The request maintains support for all 

other National Activities programs at the fiscal year 2021 level.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

19

State grants: Grants to States

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part B, Section 611)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: Indefinite 1, 2

Budget Authority:

Budget Authority 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

Annual appropriation $3,654,074 $6,975,810 +$3,321,736

Advance for succeeding fiscal year 9,283,383 9,283,383 0

Total 12,937,457 16,259,193 +3,321,736

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Grants to States program authorized by Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act (IDEA) provides formula grants to assist the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 

the Department of the Interior, the Outlying Areas, and the Freely Associated States in meeting 

the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities. 

In order to be eligible for funding, States must serve all children with disabilities between the 

ages of 3 through 21, except they are not required to serve children aged 3 through 5 or 18 

through 21 if services are inconsistent with State law or practice or the order of any court. A 

State that does not provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to children with 

disabilities aged 3 through 5 cannot receive base payment funds attributable to this age group 

or any funds under the Preschool Grants program.

One of the primary objectives of the Grants to States program is to improve the quality of the 

education provided to children with disabilities so that they can participate and succeed in the 

general education curriculum. This includes helping to ensure that eligible children have access 

to challenging grade-level academic content; meet the same rigorous standards established to 

help prepare all children for college or careers; and are prepared to lead productive, 

independent adult lives to the maximum extent possible.

The IDEA requires that States and school districts provide any child identified as having a 

disability covered by the Act with access to a free appropriate public education in the least 

restrictive environment. The Grants to States program is aimed at assisting States and districts 

in meeting this mandate.

Funding Formula – Funds are allocated among States in accordance with a variety of factors, as 

outlined under section 611(d) of the IDEA. First, each State is allocated an amount equal to the 

amount that it received for fiscal year 1999. If the total program appropriation increases over 

1 Section 611(c) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act limits technical assistance activities to 

$25,000 thousand, increased by the amount of inflation from year to year. It is estimated that the maximum amount 

authorized for fiscal year 2023 would be $38,400 thousand. 2 Section 611(b)(2) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires that from the funds appropriated for 

Grants to States, 1.226 percent shall be set aside for the Department of the Interior. It is estimated that the maximum 

amount authorized for fiscal year 2023 would be $199,397 thousand.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

20

the prior year, 85 percent of the remaining funds are allocated based on the number of children 

in the general population in the age range for which the States guarantee FAPE to children with 

disabilities. Fifteen percent of the remaining funds are allocated based on the number of 

children living in poverty that are in the age range for which the States guarantee FAPE to 

children with disabilities. 

The IDEA also includes several maximum and minimum allocation requirements that are 

triggered when the amount available for distribution to States increases. The amount that any 

single State’s allocation may increase from one year to the next is capped at the amount the 

State received in the prior year multiplied by the sum of 1.5 percent and the percentage 

increase in the total amount appropriated for Part B of IDEA from the prior year. The maximum 

amount that any State may receive in any single fiscal year is calculated by multiplying the 

number of children with disabilities ages of 3 through 21 served during the 2004-2005 academic 

year in that State by 40 percent of the annual per pupil expenditure, adjusted by the rate of 

annual change in the sum of 85 percent of the children aged 3 through 21 for whom that State 

ensures FAPE and 15 percent of the children living in poverty. Because there are multiple caps, 

in any single year, the “effective cap” on any single State’s allocation is the lowest cap for that 

State.

If the amount available for allocation to States remains the same from one year to the next, 

States receive the same level of funding as in the prior year. If the amount available for 

allocation to States decreases from the prior year, any amount available for allocation to States 

above the 1999 level is allocated based on the relative increases in funding that the States 

received between 1999 and the prior year. If there is a decrease below the amount allocated for 

1999, each State’s allocation is ratably reduced from the 1999 level.

States may reserve a portion of their funding for State-level activities, as described below. Any 

funds not reserved by the State must be passed through to local educational agencies (LEAs). 

These sub-State allocations are made in a fashion similar to that used to allocate funds among 

States when the amount available for allocation to States increases. LEAs receive a holdharmless allocation, and the remaining funds are allocated on the basis of 85 percent population 

and 15 percent poverty.

State Administration – A State may reserve for State administration up to the greater of the 

maximum amount the State could reserve for State administration from fiscal year 2004 funds, 

or $800,000, increased by inflation as reflected by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban 

Consumers. For fiscal year 2023, the latter amount is estimated to be approximately 

$1.2 million.

Other State Activities – A State may also reserve funds for a variety of other State-level 

activities such as providing technical assistance to LEAs, monitoring, enforcement, and 

addressing personnel needs. One authorized activity involves allocating set-aside funds to 

support a risk pool, or high-cost fund, that is used to assist LEAs in covering the costs of serving 

children with more intensive needs. If a State opts to use State-level funds for a risk pool, it 

must use 10 percent of the funds it reserves for other State-level activities for this purpose. 

Federal funds set aside by a State must be distributed to LEAs or consortia of LEAs to address 

the needs of specific children.

Starting in 2007, the amount that a State may set aside for other State-level activities is based 

on a percentage of its total allocation for 2006, increased for inflation. The percentage is based 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

21

on whether the State opts to use funds for a risk pool and the amount of funds that the State 

sets aside for administration. If the State opts to use funds for a risk pool and the State sets 

aside $850,000 or less for administration, the percentage is 10.5 percent. If the State opts to 

use funds for a risk pool and the State sets aside more than $850,000 for administration, the 

percentage is 10 percent. If the State opts not to use funds for a risk pool and the State sets 

aside $850,000 or less for administration, the percentage is 9.5 percent. If the State opts not to 

use funds for a risk pool and the State sets aside more than $850,000 for administration, the 

percentage is 9 percent.

Maintenance of Effort – The IDEA also requires each State to maintain its level of State financial 

support for special education and related services from one year to the next. This requirement 

is commonly referred to as the State maintenance of effort, or MOE. However, the IDEA allows 

any State that provided 100 percent of the non-Federal costs of special education services in 

the 2003-2004 school year, or any subsequent year, to reduce its level of expenditures by up to 

50 percent of any increase in its allocation under the Grants to States program over the prior 

year. The Department may prohibit a State from exercising this authority if it is determined that 

a State is not adequately carrying out its responsibilities under the IDEA.

The IDEA also contains a local “maintenance of effort” requirement. Under this requirement, 

each LEA must maintain its total expenditures on special education from one year to the next. 

The standard for determining whether this MOE requirement has been met is that the LEA 

actually expends, in total or per capita, an equal or greater amount of local, or State and local, 

funds in each subsequent year. However, in any fiscal year that an LEA’s IDEA Part B subgrant 

allocation exceeds the amount that the LEA received in the previous fiscal year, the IDEA also 

permits certain LEAs to reduce the level of support otherwise required by this local maintenance 

of effort requirement by up to 50 percent of any increase in their Part B allocation. LEAs taking 

advantage of this flexibility must use any funds that otherwise would have been used for the 

education of children with disabilities to support activities that are authorized under the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965, as amended. Also, if a State 

educational agency (SEA) determines that an LEA is not meeting the requirements of Part B, 

including meeting targets in the State’s performance plan, the SEA must prohibit that LEA from 

reducing its level of support.

Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS) – LEAs typically may use up to 15 percent of 

their allocation, less any amount used to reduce that LEA’s maintenance of effort level, for early 

intervening services. Early intervening services generally address the needs of students who 

require additional academic and behavioral supports to succeed but who are not identified as 

needing special education. If an SEA determines that an LEA has significant disproportionality 

on the basis of race in the identification of children as children with disabilities, in particular 

disability categories, in placement in particular educational settings, or in discipline, the SEA 

must require the LEA to use the full 15 percent for comprehensive coordinated early intervening 

services to address the factors contributing to the identified significant disproportionality. 

The IDEA requires awards to the Freely Associated States of the Pacific Basin (Palau, the 

Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands) to be the same 

amounts that they received from the fiscal year 2003 appropriation.

The IDEA also authorizes the Department to set aside a portion of the Grants to States 

appropriation to provide technical assistance to improve the capacity of States to meet data 

collection requirements necessary for the implementation of the program.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

22

IDEA requires that 1.226 percent of funds appropriated for Grants to States be set aside for the 

Department of the Interior to meet the need for assistance for the education of children with 

disabilities on reservations aged 5 through 21, inclusive, enrolled in elementary and secondary 

schools for Indian children operated or funded by that Department. The maximum amount 

authorized for fiscal year 2023 is estimated to be approximately $199 million. 

Number of Children Served – From 1975, when the IDEA was enacted, through 2005, the rate 

of growth in the number of children with disabilities served outpaced the rate of growth in the 

general population aged 3 through 21. In the 2004-2005 school year, the number of children 

with disabilities reached 6.8 million before beginning a decline through the 2011-2012 school 

year to a low of 6.5 million. Since that time, the number of children with disabilities served 

under the IDEA has generally increased, rising to 7.3 million children in the 2019-2020 school 

year. In estimating future trends in the number of children served under the IDEA, the 

Department uses a rolling three-year average growth rate. Using this methodology, the 

Department estimates that approximately 7.4 million children with disabilities will be served in 

fiscal year 2023. Additional data can be found at: 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/index.html. 

Grants to States is a forward-funded program that includes advance appropriations. A portion 

of the funds becomes available for Federal obligation on July 1 of the fiscal year in which they 

are appropriated and remain available for 15 months. The remaining funds become available 

for Federal obligation on October 1 of the following fiscal year and remain available for 

12 months, expiring at the same time as the forward-funded portion. For fiscal year 2023, 

school districts will use both the forward- and advance-funded amounts primarily during the 

2023-2024 school year.

Both forward-funded and advance funds remain available for obligation at State and local levels 

for an additional year. Hence, States and LEAs will have until September 30, 2025, to obligate 

their fiscal year 2023 awards.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $12,277,848

2019 12,364,392

2020 12,764,392

2021 12,937,392

2021 Mandatory ARP Act 2,580,000

2022 Estimate 12,937,452

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $16.3 billion for Grants to States, $3.3 billion 

more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. The 

request would represent the highest level of funding ever provided under the Grants to States 

program1 and would support States and LEAs in providing special education and related 

services to an estimated 7.4 million students with disabilities nationwide in 2023. The request

1 Excludes funds made available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

23

represents an important step toward full funding, as it would increase the Federal share per 

child to nearly 15 percent of average per pupil expenditures from 13 percent in 2021. This would 

represent the largest two-year increase in the Federal share since the program’s reauthorization 

in 2004.

From 2004 through 2021, after adjusting for inflation, regular annual funding for the Grants to 

Sates program increased by approximately 7 percent. However, during that same time, the 

number of students served under the program increased by 7 percent, and the nationwide

average per pupil expenditure increased by approximately 18 percent in real dollars. As a 

result, the Federal share of the cost of serving children with disabilities declined nearly 

30 percent –a meaningful decline in the resources available to States, districts, and schools to 

meet the needs of children with disabilities. 

The request reflects the Administration’s commitment to providing schools the resources they 

need to close achievement gaps. The request would provide an average of $2,199 per child 

served, an increase of $405 per child over the 2021 level, which could be spent on additional 

staffing, educational programming, or services.1 For example, the increased funding could help 

schools hire over 54,000 additional special education teachers.2 The funding could help address 

persistent achievement gaps between students with disabilities and their peers. For example, in 

school year 2018-2019, 72 percent of students with disabilities graduated high school3

compared to 86 percent of all students4 (with and without disabilities). The gap was even more 

pronounced among students of color, as Black and Hispanic students with disabilities graduated 

at rates of 65 and 69 percent respectively. Additionally, the 2019 National Assessment of 

Education Progress (NAEP) found among fourth graders, students without disabilities were four 

times more likely to be proficient in reading than students with disabilities.

The requested increase is also critical to help schools address the significant impact the 

COVID-19 pandemic has had on students with disabilities. Research and anecdotal reporting 

indicate that many students with disabilities, particularly those with more significant disabilities, 

experienced prolonged gaps in services and struggled to access online instruction at the same 

rate as their peers. Furthermore, students with disabilities experienced higher rates of 

absenteeism and course failure than their peers.5 To help address the specific challenges facing 

students with disabilities, the American Rescue Plan (ARP) provided an additional $2.5 billion 

for IDEA Part B in fiscal year 2021. However, that funding will expire at the end of the 2023 

fiscal year. The requested funds for fiscal year 2023 would be available until the end of the 2025

fiscal year and therefore would provide districts with the necessary resources to sustain and 

build upon investments made with ARP IDEA funds to help students with disabilities continue to 

recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The request would assist ongoing efforts by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services (OSERS) to more effectively partner with States to identify, prioritize, and implement 

evidence-based strategies intended to improve outcomes for children with disabilities, including 

1 Excludes funds made available under the American Rescue Plan of 2021.

2 The 2020 median pay of special education teachers was $61,500 per year according to BLS 

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-training-and-library/special-education-teachers.htm. 3 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgg#:~:text=Approximately%20423%2C000%20students%20ages%201

4,than%20one%2Dhalf%20of%201

4 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/coi#:~:text=In%20school%20year%202018%E2%80%9319,first%20mea

sured%20in%202010%E2%80%9311. 5 https://crpe.org/wp-content/uploads/final_swd_report_2021.pdf
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

24

efforts identified in State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIP). As part of the Department’s 

Results Driven Accountability initiative, States submit SSIPs to the Department to evaluate their 

results for children with disabilities, their capacity to improve those results, and the steps 

necessary to improve State support systems and local service delivery systems.

Promoting Equity in IDEA

The Administration believes that all children, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender status, 

family income, national origin, or zip code, should receive the services to which they are entitled 

under the IDEA. However, research has shown that children of color often are identified at 

higher rates for special education and related services than their white peers in some disability 

categories, while also being under identified in other categories, including children with autism. 

IDEA requires States, on an annual basis, to determine whether there is significant 

disproportionality in race and ethnicity in the State or the LEAs of the State with respect to the 

identification (including identification of children with a particular disability), placement in 

particular education settings, and discipline of students with disabilities. Beginning in 2018, 

States were required to begin using a standard methodology to make these determinations and, 

in fiscal year 2020, the Department provided a $475,000 supplement to the IDEA Data Center to 

support States in implementing these requirements. 

During the 2019-2020 reporting year, 417 LEAs nationwide were identified with significant 

disproportionality. Thirty-four States and the District of Columbia identified at least one LEA in 

that year. Of all LEAs identified, 65 were identified on the basis of identification as a child with a 

disability, 276 on the basis of identification as a child with a particular disability, 24 on the basis 

of placement in particular educational settings, and 298 on the basis of discipline. In addition, a 

number of States were identified by the Department has having potential data quality issues. 

However, much of the work done thus far has focused on effective collection and analysis of the 

data to make determinations rather than responding to any identified disproportionalities. Once 

an LEA is identified as having significant disproportionality, the LEA must conduct a root cause 

analysis and reserve 15 percent of its IDEA Part B allocation to provide comprehensive 

coordinated early intervening services (comprehensive CEIS) to students. Moving forward, the 

Department is committed to making this second phase of the significant disproportionality 

requirements a major focus in monitoring and technical assistance efforts. 

Later this year, the Department will begin implementing updates to its monitoring protocols to 

ensure that States are meeting their monitoring and enforcement requirements relative to the 

significant disproportionality regulations and support future technical assistance efforts. Those 

updates will be included in Phase 2 of its Differentiated Monitoring and Supports (DMS 2.0) 

system.

In addition, the Department is currently in the process of updating its information collections to 

gather additional information on implementation of the significant disproportionality requirements 

to inform support and technical assistance efforts.

Keeping Our Students Safe

Data from the 2017-2018 school year show that 77 percent of all seclusions and 80 percent of 

all physical restraints were utilized with students with disabilities representing only about 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

25

13 percent of the total student population. The Department is deeply concerned that the use of 

such practices may violate students’ civil rights and deny them access to FAPE in the least 

restrictive environment, and may, in extreme circumstances, put children in physical danger or 

cause death. The Administration supports the goals of the proposed Keeping All Students Safe 

Act and intends to issue updated guidance on the use of seclusion and restraint for children with 

disabilities. In addition, the Department is leveraging a wide range of investments under the 

Technical Assistance and Dissemination program to support efforts to limit the use of seclusion 

and physical restraint, reduce exclusionary discipline practices, and promote positive behavioral 

interventions and supports in schools.

Creating a Seamless Birth Through Five System

Rapid brain growth in the early childhood years sets the foundation for future learning and 

development and can greatly impact children’s functioning across multiple domains. Effectively 

serving children during this period can improve academic and developmental outcomes as well 

as reduce the need for more extensive services during elementary and secondary school. 

There has been a longstanding, nationwide concern about effective coordination of services for 

children with disabilities birth through age five. Currently, these children are served by a host of 

local, State, and Federal programs, each with its own governance structures, funding streams, 

service delivery models, personnel, system requirements, eligibility requirements, and services, 

which can make it difficult to provide seamless services for young children with disabilities and 

their families.

Coordination and seamless transition between services under IDEA Part Cand Part B can be 

challenging – a fact Congress itself recognized in providing States with the flexibility to continue 

Part C services for children for a period of time beyond age three. 

Federal and State fragmentation creates significant challenges for families seeking to ensure 

access to and continuity of services for their children. During the first five years of their child’s 

life – already a challenging time for any parent – families must learn to navigate multiple service 

delivery systems, often with different entry points, service locations, and points of contact. 

Transitions between programs and services have the potential to cause gaps in service 

provision for young children and their families as they wait for new services to be established 

between systems. Additionally, children may lose services as they transition between programs 

due to varying eligibility requirements. 

A more seamless early childhood system could improve program administration and integration 

for States, school districts, and early intervention service providers while improving outcomes 

and access for children with disabilities. Therefore, the Administration seeks to solicit input and 

from a wide range of experts on the development and implementation of a cohesive birth 

through five system for children with disabilities which offers coordinated, efficient, and effective 

services. The 2023 request includes appropriations language which would allow the Secretary 

to reserve up to $5 million to support such an analysis.

Additional Fiscal Year 2023 Proposed Appropriations Language 

The Administration is also proposing to continue appropriations language provided in previous 

years regarding State Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements, the technical assistance set-
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

26

aside under section 616(i) of the IDEA, the allocation provided to the Department of the Interior, 

and providing States with greater flexibility to more efficiently distribute funds they reserve for 

Other State-level Activities.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Formula grants:

Formula grants to States $12,777,860 $12,765,250 $16,084,087

Formula grants to Outlying Areas $38,012 $45,622 $45,622

Grants to Freely Associated States $6,579 $6,579 $6,579

Department of the Interior $100,006 $100,006 $102,925

Subtotal, formula grants $12,922,457 $12,917,457 $16,239,193

Technical Assistance $15,000 $20,000 $20,000

Total program funding $12,937,457 $12,937,457 $16,259,193

Mandatory Supplemental Appropriation, 

ARP Act (P.L. 117-02) $2,280,000 0 0

Number of children with disabilities 

served ages 3 through 211 7,214,401 7,321,945 7,387,582

Average Federal share per child (whole 

dollars) 1 $2,147 $1,764 $2,199

Average per pupil expenditure (APPE) 

(whole dollars) 1 $13,895 $14,059 $14,907

Federal funding as a percentage of 

APPE 1 15.5% 12.5% 14.7%

1 Estimate.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

27

Basis for Leaving Special Education for Youth with Disabilities Ages 14 and Older

Basis:

School 

Year

2017-2018

Percent

School 

Year

2017-2018

Number

School 

Year

2018-2019

Percent

School 

Year

2018-2019

Number

School 

Year

2019-2020

Percent

School 

Year

2019-2020

Number

Graduating with 

regular diploma 47.5% 300,447 47.1% 301,435 52.21% 325,051

Graduating through 

certification 6.4% 40,312 6.6% 42,533 6.82% 42,485

Transferred to 

regular education 9.5% 60,189 9.0% 57,329 8.09% 50,364

Dropped out, or 

moved but not 

known to have 

continued in 

education 10.4% 66,113 10.7% 68,711 8.65% 53,836

Moved, but known 

to have continued 

in education 25.2% 159,302 25.6% 163,614 23.41% 145,732

Reaching 

maximum age for 

services and 

other reasons 1.0% 6,383 0.7% 4,667 0.83% 5,172

Total 100.0% 632,746 100.0% 639,790 100.00% 622,640

Source: Annual data collection from States by OSERS and through the Education Data Exchange Network 

(EDEN)/EDFacts.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 00 percent due to rounding.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

28

History of Children Served and Program Funding

Fiscal Year

Children Served 

(thousands)

Appropriation footnote (dollars in thousands)

Federal 

Share Per Child1

(whole dollars)

Percentage 

of APPE

1992 4,727 1,976,095 418 8%

1993 4,896 2,052,728 419 8%

1994 5,101 2,149,686 421 8%

1995 5,467 2,322,915 425 8%

1996 5,629 2,323,837 413 7%

1997 5,806 3,107,522 535 9%

1998 5,978 3,807,700 636 11%

1999 6,133 4,310,700 701 11%

2000 6,274 4,989,685 793 12%

2001 6,381 6,339,685 991 14%

2002 6,483 7,528,533 1,159 15%

2003 6,611 8,874,398 1,340 17%

2004 6,723 10,068,106 1,495 18%

2005 6,820 10,589,7462 1,558 18%

2006 6,814 10,582,9612 1,551 18%

2007 6,796 10,782,9612 1,584 17%

2008 6,718 10,947,5112 1,609 17%

2009 6,599 11,505,2112 1,742 17%

2009 ARRA 6,599 11,300,0002 1,711 16%

2010 6,614 11,505,2112 1,736 16%

2011 6,558 11,465,9602 1,745 16%

2012 6,543 11,577,8552 1,766 16%

2013 6,574 10,974,8662 1,674 15%

2014 6,593 11,472,8482 1,743 16%

2015 6,697 11,497,8482 1,715 15%

2016 6,814 11,812,8482 1,745 15%

2017 6,808 12,002,8482 1,760 15%

2018 6,904 12,277,8482 1,775 14%

2019 7,130 12,364,3922 1,731 13%

2020 7,278 12,764,3922 1,752 13%

2021 7,214 12,937,4572 1,789 13%3

2021 ARP Act 7,2143 2,580,0002 358 3 2%3

2022 Estimate 7,3213 12,937,14572 1,764 3 12%3

2023 7,3883 16,259,1932 2,198 3 15%3

1 The Federal share per child is calculated from IDEA Part B Grants to States funding, excluding amounts available 

for studies and evaluations or technical assistance, as applicable. 2 Includes $10,000 thousand for technical assistance activities in 2005, $15,000 thousand in 2006 through 2009 and 

2014, $25,000 thousand in 2010 through 2012, $23,693 thousand in 2013, $13,000 thousand in 2015, $20,000 

thousand in 2016, $21,400 thousand in 2017, $21,000 thousand in 2018, $20,000 thousand in 2019, $10,000 

thousand in 2020, $15,000 thousand in 2021, and $20,000 thousand in 2022 and 2023.

3 Estimate
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

29

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Goal: Ensure all children with disabilities served under the IDEA have available to them 

a free appropriate public education to help them meet challenging standards and prepare 

them for independent living and postsecondary education and/or competitive 

employment by assisting State and local educational agencies and families. 

Objective: All children with disabilities will meet challenging standards as determined by 

national and State assessments with accommodations as appropriate.

National Assessment of Educational Progress Measures 

Measure: The percentage of fourth-grade students with disabilities scoring at or above Basic 

on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading.

Year Target Actual

2013 40% 31%

2015 40 33

2017 40 32

2019 40 30

2021 40

2023 40

Measure: The percentage of eighth-grade students with disabilities scoring at or above Basic 

on the NAEP in mathematics.

Year Target Actual

2013 38% 34%

2015 38 32

2017 38 30

2019 38 32

2021 38

2023 38

Additional information: As defined for purposes of NAEP, “students with disabilities” includes 

any student classified by a school as having a disability, including children who receive services 

under a Section 504 plan. 

Students with disabilities score well below other students on NAEP assessments. On the 2019 

fourth grade reading assessment, only 30 percent of students with disabilities scored at or 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

30

above Basic, while 72 percent of other students scored at or above Basic. On the 2019 math 

assessment, only 32 percent of eighth graders with disabilities scored at or above Basic, while 

75 percent of other eighth-grade students scored at or above Basic.

Elementary and Secondary Education Measures

Data on the following measures are collected annually through the Education Data Exchange 

Network (EDEN) and made available through EDFacts. The first two measures focus on the 

achievement of students with disabilities on State reading and mathematics assessments. The 

next two measures focus on the achievement gaps between students with disabilities and other 

students based on those State assessments. The last measure focuses on graduation rates of 

students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). 

Measure: The percentage of students with disabilities in grades 3-8 scoring at the proficient or 

advanced levels on State reading assessments.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 21%

2019 Baseline

2020 35%

2021 35

2022 35

2023

Measure: The percentage of students with disabilities in grades 3-8 scoring at the proficient or 

advanced levels on State mathematics assessments.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 22%

2019 Baseline

2020 35%

2021 35

2022 35

2023 35

Measure: The difference between the percentage of students with disabilities in grades 3-8 

scoring at the proficient or advanced levels on State reading assessments and the percentage 

of all students in grades 3-8 scoring at the proficient or advanced levels on State reading 

assessments.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 31%

2019 Baseline

2020 20

2021 20

2022 20

2023 20
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

31

Measure: The difference between the percentage of students with disabilities in grades 3-8 

scoring at the proficient or advanced levels on State mathematics assessments and the 

percentage of all students in grades 3-8 scoring at the proficient or advanced levels on State 

mathematics assessments.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 28

2019 Baseline

2020 20

2021 20

2022 20

2023 20

Additional information: The performance of students with disabilities on State reading and 

mathematics assessments improved slightly in the 2017-2018. However, the gap between 

students with disabilities and all students increased year over year. Overall performance was in 

line with historical trends on these measures. The Department dloes not anticipate nationally 

representative data on these measures for 2019 due to waivers of the assessment requirements 

under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act fo 1965, as amended, provided by the 

Department for the 219-2020 school year, 

Measure: The percentage of students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) who 

graduate from high school with a regular high school diploma.

Year Target Actual

2018 70.0% 72.6%

2019 72.0

2020 72.0

2021 75.0

2022 75.0

2023 75.0

Additional information: Performance on this measure has improved over the past 10 years, 

with a total increase of 12.0 percentage points during that period. However, the graduation rate 

for students with IEPs still lags slightly more than 10 percentage points behind that of all 

students. 

Postsecondary Outcomes

One of the purposes of the IDEA is to help prepare children with disabilities for further 

education, employment, and independent living. In 2011, the Department developed a measure 

on employment and postsecondary education. This measure tracks the median percentage of 

students who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, 

and were: a) enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training 

program, or (b) competitively employed or in some other form of employment within 1 year of 

leaving high school. Data for this measure is collected directly from the States on an annual 

basis. The Department believes that this is a critical measure for the program because it 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

32

reflects the ultimate results of efforts to provide special education under the Grants to States 

program. 

Measure: The median percentage of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in 

effect at the time they left school, and were enrolled in higher education or in some other 

postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other 

employment within 1 year of leaving high school.

Year Target Actual

2018 78.0% 77.7%

2019 80.0 76.2

2020 80.0

2021 80.0

2022 80.0

2023 80.2

Efficiency Measure

Measure: The average number of days between the completion of a site visit and the Office of 

Special Education Programs’ (OSEP) response to the State.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 276

2019 257

2020 407

2021

2022 180

2023 180

Additional information: The Department did not conduct regular site visits to States from 

2011 through 2015. During that time, OSEP continued to meet its statutory monitoring 

responsibilities through the State Performance Plan /APR process, fiscal monitoring, and its 

work with State dispute resolution systems. In 2016, OSEP began conducting site visits using a

risk-based approach to monitoring. Performance on this measure in 2020 declined significantly. 

No site visits were conducted in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, though OSEP continued 

to actively monitor State compliance. OSEP plans to begin site visits again in2022.

Other Performance Information

The Institute of Education Sciences is currently conducting the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA0 State and Local Implementation Study 2019. The first report of the study 

is expected in 2022. Additional information on the study can be found at 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/disabilities_localidea.asp. Prior studies of the Grants 

to States program and related issues are described below.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

33

DEA National Assessment

Section 664 of the IDEA requires the Department to conduct a national assessment of activities 

carried out with Federal funds. To implement this requirement, funds requested for the Special 

Education Studies and Evaluation program in the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) account 

were used to conduct an independent evaluation of the program. This evaluation addresses the 

extent to which States, districts, and schools are implementing the IDEA programs and services 

to promote a free appropriate public education for children with disabilities in the least restrictive 

environment possible and in partnership with parents. The National Assessment also 

addressed the effectiveness of the IDEA programs and services in promoting the developmental 

progress and academic achievement of children with disabilities. The National Assessment 

includes the following activities:

Analytic Support: A report published in January 2010, “Patterns in the Identification of and 

Outcomes for Children and Youth with Disabilities (Patterns),”1 provided a synthesis of existing 

evidence and new analyses of extant data sources to address research questions for the IDEA 

National Assessment, targeting three topic areas: (1) identification of children for early 

intervention and special education, (2) declassification of children for early intervention and 

special education services, and (3) developmental and academic outcomes for children with 

disabilities. 

From 1997 to 2005, the percent of children aged 6 to 17 served under IDEA increased from 

12.3 to 12.9. The percentage varies by race/ethnicity, with a low of 6.3 percent for Asian 

children served under IDEA up to a high of 16.7 percent for Black children. There is also 

variation by State, ranging from 9.9 percent up to 18.6 percent. From 1997 to 2005, the largest 

increases by disability type were in the areas of autism and developmental delay. Autism 

showed a 400 percent increase among children ages 10 to17 years, and developmental delay 

showed an almost 2,000 percent increase among children ages 3 to 9 years. The study cited 

research on declassification (Holt, McGrath, and Herring 2007) that showed almost 50 percent 

of children eligible in kindergarten were no longer eligible for services by third grade. Children 

with speech/language impairment are the most likely to be declassified within 2 years 

(34 percent). Declassified children had higher literacy and math outcomes than children who 

continued to receive services under IDEA.

The Patterns study found that children with disabilities were performing well on NAEP tests, but 

that they are still far behind their non-disabled peers. Children with disabilities demonstrate a 

much larger range of performance on the NAEP exam than do children without disabilities. 

State assessment data point to a wide array of outcomes and standards for proficiency. In 

fourth grade math and reading, the percentage of children with disabilities who scored proficient 

or above on a State’s assessment ranged from just less than 10 percent up to 80 percent. 

Implementation Study: The final report for the IDEA National Assessment Implementation 

Study was published in July 2011. This study collected data from State agencies and school 

districts to address implementation questions for the IDEA National Assessment in four broad 

areas targeted for this study: (1) services to young children with disabilities; (2) identification of 

children and youth with disabilities; (3) efforts to promote positive developmental and 

educational outcomes for children and youth with disabilities; and (4) dispute resolution and 

mediation. 

1 See http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20104005/index.asp
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

34

The study specifically focused on implementation related to new or revised provisions from the 

2004 reauthorization of IDEA. One such provision, Coordinated Early Intervening Services 

(CEIS), allows districts to use up to 15 percent of their Part B funds to provide services to 

children not yet identified as in need of special education. Of the districts that implement CEIS, 

funds were used at the elementary school level in 93 percent of districts and focuses on literacy 

instruction in 84 percent of districts. The study found that the use of Response to Intervention 

(RtI) was also widespread and was being used in 71 percent of districts nationally. Similar to 

CEIS, RtI was most commonly used in elementary schools and in reading/language arts. 

However, only 41 percent of districts reported using IDEA funds for RtI, while 80 percent of 

districts reported using their own general funds.

The study looked at qualifications and distribution of “highly qualified” special education 

personnel. Almost 90 percent of special education teachers met their State’s definition of highly 

qualified, but States range from 56 percent to 100 percent.1 Districts reported difficultly finding 

qualified personnel for secondary schools, particularly those trained in math and working with 

students with emotional disturbances and with autism. The most common method districts used

to increase the qualifications of their staff, implemented by 64 percent of all districts and 

76 percent of districts facing routine shortages of quality applicants, was to provide professional 

development. No other approach was used by more than 25 percent of districts.

Finally, the study found that dispute resolution events were very infrequent, with 23 or fewer 

events for every 10,000 students served between 2004 and 2008. The number of due process 

hearing requests over that time was steady at about 21 requests per 10,000 students, but the 

frequency of due process hearings completed decreased from 3.36 hearings per 

10,000 students in 2004 to 1.61 hearings in 2008.

Impact Evaluation of Response to Intervention Strategies: Response to Intervention (RtI) is a 

multi-step approach to providing early and more intensive intervention and monitoring within the 

general education setting. In principle, RtI begins with research-based instruction and 

behavioral support provided to students in the general education classroom, followed by 

screening of all students to identify those who may need systematic progress monitoring, 

intervention, or support. Students who are not responding to the general education curriculum 

and instruction are provided with increasingly intense interventions through a "multi-tiered" 

system, and they are frequently monitored to assess their progress and inform the choice of 

future interventions, including possibly special education for students determined to have a 

disability. The IDEA permits some Part B special education funds to be used for "early 

intervening services" such as RtI and also permits districts to use RtI to inform decisions 

regarding a child's eligibility for special education.

The RtI evaluation employed a quasi-experimental design to examine the natural variations in 

elementary school reading instruction, intervention, and support in schools that may already be 

implementing RtI in 13 States. We note that concerns have been raised in the field regarding 

the strength of the research design of this study, particularly its focus on students just below 

reading proficiency, and not those with moderate or significant needs.

1 State definitions of highly qualified special education teacher varied, meaning differences in percentage 

of teachers meeting the definition may be driven by differences in definitions rather than variations in 

teacher preparation.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

35

The final report found that, for the 2011-12 school year, schools implementing three or more 

years of RtI approaches in reading provided more support to students reading below grade-level 

standards than those reading at or above grade-level standards. For those students reading 

just below the grade-level standards (as measured by a school-determined eligibility cut point 

on a screening test) in grade 1, RtI reading interventions did not improve reading outcomes, but 

actually produced negative impacts (e.g., lower scores compared to the initial screening test) for 

such students. For grades 2 and 3, the estimated effects on reading outcomes were not 

statistically significant. Researchers stated that some plausible factors that may be related to 

negative impacts of assignment to intervention on some grade 1 students include: (1) false or 

incorrect identification of students for intervention, (2) mismatch between reading intervention 

and the instructional needs of students near the cut point, and (3) poor alignment between 

reading intervention and core reading instruction. Overall, the study found that the estimated 

impacts of reading interventions on reading outcomes vary significantly across schools. It is 

also worth noting that this study focused on a very specific population in one subject area and 

did not assess whether RtI may be effective in improving student outcomes in other subjects 

areas and grade levels, or whether RtI elementary literacy interventions may be effective for 

students performing well below grade-level standards.

Other Studies: The Department sponsored the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) 

and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) to provide nationally representative 

information about secondary-school-age youth who were receiving special education services in 

1985 and 2000, respectively. Data collection consisted of telephone interviews or mail surveys 

with youth or the youth’s parents if the youth were not able to respond themselves. The 

National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER), in a September 2010 report, 

“Comparisons Across Time of the Outcomes of Youth With Disabilities up to 4 Years After High 

School”, compared the changes in outcomes among youth in the NLTS and NLTS2 who had 

been out of high school for up to 4 years. The report focused on changes in rates of 

postsecondary education, employment, engagement in either postsecondary education or 

employment, household circumstances and community integration. Researchers also 

compared outcomes of youth with disabilities to the general population and across subgroups 

including disability category, gender, race/ethnicity, household income, high school completion 

status, and length of time since leaving high school.

According to the NCSER report, youth with disabilities were more likely to have enrolled in 

postsecondary education within 4 years of leaving high school in 2005 than in 1990. Almost half 

(46 percent) of all youth with disabilities had spent some time in postsecondary education in 

2005. The rate of youth with disabilities who were currently enrolled in postsecondary education 

and/or employed was 86 percent in 2005, a 21 percentage-point increase over 1990. This 

increase is likely attributable to an increase in youth who were concurrently enrolled in 

postsecondary education and employed, given that rates of engagement in only one of these 

activities did not change significantly over that period of time. The report also illustrated the 

connection between high school completion and postsecondary outcomes, as high school 

completers had significant and positive changes between 1990 and 2005 in a greater number of 

outcome measures than non-completers. Youth with disabilities from low-income households 

increased their postsecondary enrollment rate by 16 percentage points to 35 percent in 2005, 

but a significant enrollment gap remains between the highest and lowest income households. 

Similarly, in 2005, youth with disabilities enrolled in postsecondary education at a rate well 

below the general population, specifically, 46 percent compared to 63 percent.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

36

The National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) is the third in a series examining 

the characteristics and school experiences of a nationally representative sample of youth with 

disabilities. NLTS 2012 focuses on students ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011) but also 

includes a small sample of students without disabilities and those on 504 plans to enable direct 

comparisons of students with and without individualized education programs (IEPs). The study 

collected baseline data in the spring of 2012 through the summer of 2013 on a nationwide 

sample of youth. The study is addressing such questions as:

• What are the personal, family, and school characteristics of youth with disabilities in public 

schools across the country? 

• What regular education, special education, transition planning, and other relevant services 

and accommodations do youth with disabilities receive? 

• How do the services and accommodations differ from those of youth not served under IDEA, 

including those identified for services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? 

• How do the services and accommodations for youth with disabilities vary with the 

characteristics of youth? 

• How much have the services and accommodations of youth with disabilities changed over 

time? 

Post-High School Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities: Helping students, particularly those with 

disabilities, to complete high school prepared to pursue postsecondary education or begin wellpaying, productive jobs is a national priority. IDEA emphasizes transition services focused on 

improving the academic and functional achievement of students with disabilities to facilitate their 

transition from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education and 

employment. The study, awarded in 2015, will address such questions as:

• To what extent do youth with disabilities who receive special education services under IDEA 

make progress through high school compared with other youth, including those identified for 

services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? For students with disabilities, has high 

school course taking and completion rates changed over the past few decades?

• Are youth with disabilities achieving the post-high school outcomes envisioned by IDEA, and 

how do their college, training, and employment rates compare with those of other youth?

• How do these high school and postsecondary experiences and outcomes vary by student 

characteristics, including their disability category, age, sex, race/ethnicity, English Learner 

status, income status, and type of high school attended (including regular public school, 

charter school, career/technical school, special education school, or other State or 

Federally-operated institution)?

This new study will utilize administrative records data to follow a sample of youth with disabilities 

beyond high school. The sample for this study will focus on the youth who participated in the 

baseline study of the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012). The NLTS 

2012 sample included a group of over 12,000 students ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011), 

including a small sample of students without disabilities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

State Grants: Grants to States

37

Study of School Accountability for Students with Disabilities: As part of the IDEA National 

Assessment, IES studied changes in student outcomes after schools adopted programs focused 

on improving academic outcomes for students with disabilities. The focus of the study was on 

comparing outcomes for students with disabilities in elementary and middle schools identified 

for improvement with corresponding outcomes in schools not identified for improvement but still 

accountable for the performance of students with disabilities (SWD).

An interim report was released in May 2012; an update with information through the 

2009−10 school year was released in October 2013; and a third report that provided the results 

of analysis of 2011 survey data on school practices in 12 States was released in February 2015 

and is available at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20154006/. The study found that, when surveyed 

in 2011, elementary schools accountable for the SWD subgroup were 15.8 percentage-points 

more likely than elementary schools that were not accountable to report moving students with 

disabilities from self-contained settings to regular classrooms over the previous 5 years. Middle 

schools accountable for the SWD subgroup were 16.7 percentage-points more likely than 

middle schools that were not accountable to report moving students with disabilities from selfcontained settings to regular classrooms over the previous 5 years.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

38

State grants: Preschool grants

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part B, Section 619)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: Indefinite

Budget Authority:

Budget Authority 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$397,620 $502,620 +$105,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Preschool Grants program provides formula grants to States, the District of Columbia, and 

Puerto Rico for the provision of special education and related services for children with 

disabilities aged 3 through 5. In order to be eligible for these grants, States must serve all 

eligible children with disabilities aged 3 through 5 and have an approved application under 

Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Currently, all States have 

provided assurances to the Department that they are making a free appropriate public education 

(FAPE) available to all children aged 3 through 5 with disabilities.

At their discretion, States may include preschool-aged children who are experiencing 

developmental delays (as defined by the State and as measured by appropriate diagnostic 

instruments and procedures) and need special education and related services. If consistent 

with State policy, State and local educational agencies also may use funds received under this 

program to provide FAPE to 2-year olds with disabilities who will turn 3 during the school year.

IDEA requires that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities are educated 

with children who do not have disabilities. Removal of children with disabilities from the regular 

educational environment is only warranted when the nature or severity of the disability of a child 

is such that education in classes with students without disabilities, even with the use of 

supplementary aids and services, is not possible. Since States are not required to provide public 

preschool programs for the general population, preschool-aged children with disabilities are 

served in a variety of settings, including public or private preschool programs, inclusive

kindergarten, Head Start programs, and child care facilities. The Preschool Grants program 

expands inclusive and accessible options to preschool for children with disabilities and provides 

specific services. 

Funding Formula

Funds are distributed to eligible entities through a formula based on general population and 

poverty. Each State is first allocated an amount equal to its fiscal year 1997 allocation. For any 

year in which the appropriation is greater than the prior year level, 85 percent of the funds 

above the fiscal year 1997 level are distributed based on each State’s relative percentage of the 

total number of children aged 3 through 5 in the general population. The other 15 percent are 

distributed based on the relative percentage of children aged 3 through 5 in each State who are 

living in poverty. The formula provides several floors and ceilings regarding the amount a State 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

39

can receive in any year. When appropriations increase, no State can receive less than it 

received in the prior year. In addition, every State must receive an increase equal to the higher 

of either: (1) the percent the appropriation grew above the prior year, minus 1.5 percent, or, 

(2) 90 percent of the percentage increase above the prior year. The formula also provides for a 

minimum increase in State allocations of one-third of 1 percent of the increase in the 

appropriation over the base year and places a ceiling on how much the allocation to a State 

may increase. Specifically, no State may be allocated an increase above the prior year greater 

than the percent of growth in the appropriation from the prior year plus 1.5 percent.

These provisions help ensure that every State receives a part of any increase, and that there 

are no sudden shifts in resources among the States. States must distribute the bulk of their 

grant awards to local educational agencies (LEAs).

This is a forward-funded program. Funds become available for obligation on July 1 of the fiscal 

year in which they are appropriated and remain available for 15 months, through September 30 

of the following year.

State-Level Activities

States may retain a portion of funds allocated to them in any given year for State-level activities, 

with the amount of this reservation capped at 25 percent of each State’s fiscal year 1997 

allocation, adjusted upward by the lesser of the rate of increase in the State’s allocation or the 

rate of inflation. Likewise, the amount that may be used for administration is limited to 

20 percent of the funds available to a State for State-level activities. These funds may also be 

used for the administration of the Grants for Infants and Families program (Part C).

State-level activities include: (1) support services, such as establishing and implementing a 

mediation process, which may benefit children with disabilities younger than 3 or older than 5, 

as long as those services also benefit children with disabilities aged 3 through 5; (2) direct 

services for children eligible under this program; (3) activities at the State and local level to meet 

the goals established by the State for the performance of children with disabilities in the State; 

and (4) a supplement for the development and implementation of a statewide coordinated 

services system designed to improve results for all children and families or caregivers, including 

children with disabilities and their families or caregivers. This supplement cannot exceed 

1 percent of the amount received by the State under this program for a fiscal year. The State 

may also use its set-aside funds to provide early intervention services. These services must 

include an educational component that promotes school readiness and incorporates preliteracy, language, and numeracy skills. In addition, such services must be provided, in 

accordance with the Grants for Infants and Families program, to children who are eligible for 

services under the Preschool Grants program and who previously received services under 

Part C until such children enter or are eligible to enter kindergarten and, at a State’s discretion, 

may include continued service coordination or case management for families who received such 

services under Part C.

Numbers of Children Served

The number of children ages 3 through 5 served under the IDEA decreased from 815,010 in fall 

2018 to 750,343 in fall 2020. The variations in the total number of children served, combined 

with the uncertain ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, make it difficult to forecast the 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

40

number of children being served in future fiscal years. Therefore, the Department assumes that 

the number of children with disabilities ages 3 through 5 will remain at the 2020 level for fiscal 

years 2021 through 2023.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $381,120

2019 391,120

2020 394,120

2021 397,620

2021 Mandatory ARP Act 200,000

2022 Estimate 397,620

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $503 million for the Preschool Grants program, 

$105 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation. More than 80 percent of children participating in the Preschool program 

demonstrated significant improvement in academic, behavioral and social and emotional 

outcomes, which is consistent with numerous studies that have found that the provision of 

special education and related services for preschool-aged children significantly improved 

outcomes in these areas.1 The request would provide an estimated average of $670 per eligible 

child, the highest level of per child funding under this program through regular appropriations in 

almost 30 years. These funds supplement funding available under the Grants to States 

program under IDEA, Part B, for which the Administration is requesting $16.3 billion in fiscal 

year 2023, to help States and LEAs serve children with disabilities ages 3 through 21.

Promoting Equity in IDEA

The Administration believes that all children, regardless of their race, ethnicity, family income, 

national origin, zip code, or any other such characteristic, should receive the services to which 

they are entitled under the IDEA. However, research has shown that children of color often are 

identified at higher rates for special education and related services, placed in more restrictive 

environments, and subjected to exclusionary discipline at higher rates than their white peers. 

IDEA requires States, on an annual basis, to determine whether there is significant 

disproportionality in race and ethnicity in the State, or the LEAs of the State, with respect to the 

identification, placement, and discipline of students with disabilities. Beginning in 2018, States 

were required to begin using a standard methodology to make these determinations and, in 

fiscal year 2020, the Department provided a $475,000 supplement to the IDEA Data Center to 

support States in implementing these requirements. Beginning in 2020, States were required to 

begin including children ages three through five in these calculations. 

In addition to the supports and technical assistance described under the Grants to States 

program, the Department is implementing updates to its monitoring protocols to provide greater 

emphasis on State implementation of the significant disproportionality requirements with regard 

1 https://ectacenter.org/~pdfs/topics/inclusion/research/Research_Supporting_Preschool_Inclusion_R.pdf
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

41

to children ages 3 through 5 to ensure compliance and support future technical assistance 

efforts. As noted in the Grants to States request, the Department is also revising its annual 

information collections to include additional information related to equitable services for 

preschool age children.

Keeping Our Students Safe and in the Classroom

The Administration believes that all students deserve equal and equitable access to the learning 

environment and is particularly concerned about the harms that arise when preschool children 

are suspended (including in-school and out-of-school suspensions) or expelled. Research 

shows that exclusionary discipline is both ineffective and disproportionately affects children with 

disabilities and children of color. During the 2017-2018 school year, preschoolers with 

disabilities represented almost one in four out-of-school suspensions among preschoolers, and, 

among those receiving suspensions, were more likely to receive multiple out-of-school 

suspensions than their peers without disabilities. Research shows that these disparities can 

often be the result of perceptions of student behavior rather than actual behavior by the 

student.1 The Department will work to reduce exclusionary discipline practices and replace such 

practices with research-based approaches, including positive behavioral interventions and 

supports and restorative measures.

To support LEAs and schools in keeping students in the classroom and identifying and 

implementing effective and evidence-based ways to ensure a safe learning environment for all 

students, the Department will leverage a wide range of investments under the Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination program (described elsewhere in this account) on activities 

designed to limit the use of seclusion, physical restraint, and other exclusionary discipline 

practices. These investments also will promote positive behavioral interventions and supports in 

schools. The Department believes that these targeted investments and updated guidance can 

support more effective discipline practices and their equitable application and ensure that all 

students have equitable access to the classroom.

The Department also is updating its monitoring protocols to ensure that States are meeting their 

monitoring and enforcement requirements relative to early childhood discipline practices.

Improving Child Find Practices

In addition to the steps noted above, the Department is also implementing updates to its 

monitoring protocols to improve its focus on child find systems to ensure that all potentially 

eligible children are identified and evaluated, particularly those in underserved populations and 

those with less access to or interaction with traditional referral sources, such as doctors and 

daycare providers.

1 Gilliam, W., Maupin, A., Reyes, C., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early educators’ implicit biases regarding sex 

and race relate to behavior expectations and recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions? New 

Haven, CT: Yale University Child Study Center, 1–18.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

42

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Range in size of awards:

Smallest award $263 $251 $321

Average award $7,647 $7,647 $9,666

Largest award $40,028 $39,986 $51,145

Number of Children Served 750,343 750,343 750,343

Share per child (whole dollars) $530 $530 $670

NOTES: 

States may, at their discretion, provide free appropriate public education to 2-year olds who will turn 3 during the 

school year. However, the figures for the number of children served do not include children served by the States who 

are 2 years old at the time of the count, but will turn 3 during the school year.

The numbers of children served are estimates based on fall 2019.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

43

History of Children Served and Program Funding

Fiscal Year

Children Served

(thousands)

Appropriation

(dollars in thousands)

Federal

Share per Child

(whole dollars)

1990 352 $251,510 $715

1991 367 292,766 7981

1992 398 320,000 804

1993 441 325,773 739

1994 479 339,257 709

1995 522 360,265 689

1996 549 360,409 656

1997 562 360,409 642

1998 572 373,985 654

1999 575 373,985 651

2000 589 390,000 662

2001 599 390,000 652

2002 617 390,000 632

2003 647 387,465 599

2004 680 387,699 571

2005 702 384,597 548

2006 704 380,751 546

2007 714 380,751 533

2008 710 374,099 527

2009 709 374,099 528

2009 ARRA 709 400,000 564

2010 732 374,099 511

2011 738 2 373,351 508

2012 745 2 372,646 500

2013 749 2 353,238 472

2014 745 2 353,238 474

2015 753 2 353,238 469

2016 763 2 368,238 483

2017 760 2 368,238 485

2018 815 2 381,120 467

2019 806 2 391,120 480

2020 750 2 394,120 523

2021 750 2, 3 397,620 530

2021 ARP Act 750 2, 3 200,000 267

2022 Estimate 750 2, 3 397,620 530

2023 750 2, 3 502,620 670

1 Beginning in fiscal year 1991, the IDEA required that services be made available to all eligible children with 

disabilities aged 3 through 5 as a condition for receiving funding for children in this age range under the Grants to 

States program.

2 Beginning in fiscal year 2011, this table reports the number of children served by the 50 States, District of Columbia, 

and Puerto Rico. Prior fiscal years also include the number of children served in the Outlying Areas, Freely 

Associated States, and the Bureau of Indian Education, which are no longer eligible to receive Preschool Grant 

awards.

3 Estimate based on the number of children served in the fall of 2019.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

44

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Data for 2020, which reflects performance during the 2020-2021 school year, will be reported to 

the Department in late spring 2022.

Goal: To help preschool children with disabilities enter school ready to succeed by 

assisting States in providing special education and related services.

Objective: Preschool children with disabilities will receive special education and related 

services that result in increased skills that enable them to succeed in school.

Measure: The percentage of children who entered the program below age expectations in 

positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships) who substantially increased their 

rate of growth by the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 84% 81%

2019 84 81

2020 85

2021 85

2022 85

2023 85

Measure: The percentage of children who entered the program below age expectations in 

acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communication and early 

literacy) who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 84% 82%

2019 84 82

2020 85

2021 85

2022 85

2023 85
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

45

Measure: The percentage of children who entered the program below age expectations in the 

use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs who substantially increased their rate of 

growth by the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 84% 81%

2019 84 81

2020 84

2021 85

2022 85

2023 85

Additional information: Through their Annual Performance Reports (APRs), States report on 

the cognitive, social-emotional, and behavioral development of children with disabilities served 

through the Preschool Grants program. In 2018, States maintained or improved performance 

across all three domains. The Department believes that continued work on the part of States to 

improve service delivery for young children with disabilities, combined with improved data 

collection, analysis, and use, will lead to continued improvement over time.

Measure: The percentage of children with disabilities (ages 3 through 5) attending a regular 

early childhood program and receiving the majority of hours of special education and related 

services in the regular early childhood program.

Year Target Actual

2018 46% 45%

2019 50 44

2020 50 40

2021 50

2022 50

2023 50

Additional information: Overall performance on this measure was stable for approximately 

5 years before declining slightly beginning in 2018.

Measure: The number of States with at least 90 percent of special education teachers of 

children with disabilities ages 3 to 5 who are fully certified in the areas in which they are 

teaching.

Year Target Actual

2018 47 42

2019 47 41

2020 47

2021 47

2022 47

2023 47

Additional information: Performance eon this measure has remained relatively stable over the 

past several years. This measure includes the 50 States, D.C., Puerto Rico, the Outlying Areas 

and the Bureau of Indian Education.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

46

Efficiency Measure

Measure: The average number of days between the completion of a site visit and the Office of 

Special Education Programs’ (OSEP) response to the State.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 276

2019 257

2020 407

2021

2022 180

2023 180

Additional information: The Department did not conduct regular site visits to States from 

2011 through 2015. During that time, OSEP continued to meet its statutory monitoring 

responsibilities through the State Performance Plan /APR process, fiscal monitoring, and its 

work with State dispute resolution systems. In 2016, OSEP began conducting site visits using a

risk-based approach to monitoring. Performance on this measure in 2020 declined significantly. 

No site visits were conducted in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. OSEP plans to begin 

site visits again in2022.

Other Performance Information

Pre-Elementary Longitudinal Study (PEELS) (http://www.peels.org)

In October 2010, the National Center for Special Education Research released the report, 

“Access to Educational and Community Activities for Young Children with Disabilities.” As 

reported in parent interviews, participation in community activities such as sports, organized 

clubs, art, and music varied significantly by type of disability and by household income. 

Children from households with annual incomes greater than $40,000 participated in sports with 

greater frequency than children from households with lower incomes. Children of parents who 

perceived their neighborhood to be unsafe or who reported that their transportation did not meet 

their families’ needs were significantly less likely to participate in extracurricular activities. 

Parents also reported on educational settings, and 69 percent said they sent their children to full 

day kindergarten. Children from high-wealth districts and those from suburban settings were 

less likely to attend full-day kindergarten than their peers.

In a survey of kindergarten teachers, 73 percent of teachers reported that the regular education 

classroom was the main setting for children receiving special education services. This inclusion 

rate was significantly higher in very large districts (91 percent) than districts of other sizes, and 

significantly higher in rural districts (86 percent) than in suburban or urban districts. Children in 

very low wealth districts were less likely to have regular classrooms as their main setting 

(59 percent) compared to all other districts. On average, children spent 17.1 hours per week in 

regular classrooms and 7.1 hours in special education settings.

Teachers also reported on modifications and accommodations provided to children with 

disabilities. Overall, teachers reported using unmodified grade-level materials in 44 percent of 

cases, while 14 percent of children received specialized materials or curricula. There was no 

significant variation in these data across district size or wealth. The study also found that 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Preschool grants

47

children who received special education services in a regular classroom were in classrooms in 

which, on average, 82 percent of students were nondisabled.

In August 2011, the latest report from this study was released, “A Longitudinal View of the 

Receptive Vocabulary and Math Achievement of Young Children with Disabilities.” This report 

found that children who received preschool special education services showed growth each 

year in vocabulary and mathematics; however, growth slowed in both math and vocabulary as 

they got older. Children’s performance varied across assessments and across subgroups 

defined by disability. At age 3, children with a speech or language impairment had higher 

average scores than those with developmental delays. At age 10, the gap between these 

subgroups persisted, and there were no statistically significant differences in growth rates 

between subgroups.

Other Studies

The Department also is investing in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study program through the 

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (https://nces.ed.gov/ecls). This program 

involves two complementary cohort studies, a Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) and a Kindergarten Cohort 

(ECLS-K), that focus on children’s early school experiences. The ECLS-K has followed the 

kindergarten class of 1998-99 through eighth grade. The ECLS-K provides descriptive 

information on children’s status at entry to school and their transition into school, and their 

progression through middle school. The ECLS-B is designed to follow children from 9 months 

through kindergarten. It focuses on health, development, early care, and education during the 

formative years of children born in 2001. These studies also are providing data on outcomes 

experienced by children with disabilities participating in preschool programs and baseline data 

on outcomes experienced by nondisabled children.

OSEP, and subsequently the National Center on Special Education Research, have sponsored 

a special education questionnaire for teachers in the ECLS-K Study and the collection of more 

extensive data on children with disabilities and their programs, including the identification of, 

receipt of services for, and use of special equipment for a number of disabling conditions that 

may interfere with a sampled child’s opportunity to learn. 

Data from ECLS-K on demographic and school characteristics indicate that for the cohort of 

students beginning kindergarten in 1998, specific learning disabilities and speech or language 

impairments were the most prevalent primary disabilities. The percentage of the student cohort 

receiving special education grew from 4.1 percent in kindergarten to 11.9 percent of students in 

fifth grade. The results also indicate that higher percentages of boys than girls, and of students 

from low-income backgrounds than students from higher-income backgrounds, received special 

education. About 12 percent of students receive special education in at least one of the grades: 

kindergarten, first, and third grade, including 16 percent of boys, 8 percent of girls, 18 percent of 

children from low-income backgrounds, and 10 percent of children from higher-income 

backgrounds. One in three students who receive special education in early grades first receive 

special education in kindergarten. Half of those who begin special education in kindergarten are 

no longer receiving special education by third grade. In addition to students’ gender and poverty 

status, results are presented separately for other student and school characteristics, including 

race/ethnicity, school, urbanicity, region, and poverty concentration.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

48

State grants: Grants for infants and families

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

Budget Authority 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$481,850 $932,000 +$450,150

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Grants for Infants and Families program (Part C) awards formula grants to the 50 States, 

the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Department of the Interior, and Outlying Areas to 

assist them in implementing statewide systems of coordinated, comprehensive, 

multidisciplinary, interagency programs ensuring that appropriate early intervention services are 

made available to all eligible birth-through-2-year-olds with disabilities and their families, 

including Indian children and families who reside on reservations geographically located within a 

State. Infants and toddlers with disabilities are defined as children who: (1) are experiencing 

developmental delays, as measured by appropriate diagnostic instruments and procedures, in 

one or more of the following five areas: cognitive development, physical development, 

communication development, social or emotional development, or adaptive development; or (2) 

have a diagnosed physical or mental condition that has a high probability of resulting in 

developmental delay. Within statutory limits, States define “developmental delay” and have the 

discretion to provide services to infants and toddlers who are at risk of having substantial 

developmental delays if they do not receive appropriate early intervention services.

Funds can be used to: (1) implement and maintain the statewide system described above; 

(2) fund direct early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their 

families that are not otherwise provided by other public or private sources; (3) expand and 

improve existing services; (4) provide a free appropriate public education, in accordance with 

Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), to children with disabilities from 

their third birthday to the beginning of the following school year; (5) continue to provide early 

intervention services to children with disabilities from their third birthday until such children enter 

or are eligible to enter kindergarten or elementary school; and (6) initiate, expand, or improve 

collaborative efforts related to identifying, evaluating, referring, and following up on at-risk 

infants and toddlers in States that do not provide direct services for these children.

The IDEA requires that early intervention services be provided, to the maximum extent 

appropriate, in natural environments. The natural environment includes the home and 

community settings where children would be participating if they did not have a disability. These 

services can be provided in another setting only when early intervention cannot be achieved 

satisfactorily for the infant or toddler in a natural environment. Each child’s individualized family 

service plan (IFSP) must contain a statement of the natural environments in which early 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

language.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

49

intervention services will be provided, including a justification of the extent, if any, to which the 

services will not be provided in a natural environment.

The statewide system also must comply with additional statutory requirements, including 

designating a lead agency responsibility for the coordination and administration of funds, and 

developing and maintaining a State Interagency Coordinating Council to advise and assist the 

lead agency. One of the purposes of the Part C program is to assist States in coordinating 

payment for early intervention services from Federal, State, local, and private sources, including 

public and private insurance coverage (e.g., Medicaid, the State Children’s Health Insurance 

Program), Supplemental Security Income, and Early Head Start.

The IDEA gives States the discretion to extend eligibility for Part C services to children with 

disabilities who are eligible for services under section 619 Preschool Grants and who previously 

received services under Part C, until such children enter or are eligible under State law to enter 

kindergarten or elementary school, as appropriate. The Act further stipulates that any Part C 

programs serving children aged 3 or older must provide both: (1) an educational component that 

promotes school readiness and incorporates pre-literacy, language, and numeracy skills; and 

(2) a written notification to parents of their rights regarding the continuation of services under 

Part C and eligibility for services under section 619.

Funding Formula

Allocations are based on the number of children in the general population aged birth through 

2 years in each State. The Department uses data provided by the United States Census Bureau 

in making this calculation. No State can receive less than 0.5 percent of the funds available to 

all States, or $500,000, whichever is greater. The Outlying Areas may receive not more than 1 

percent of the funds appropriated. The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Education 

(BIE), receives 1.25 percent of the aggregate of the amount available to all States. Interior must 

pass through all the funds it receives to Indian tribes, tribal organizations, or consortia for the 

coordination of early intervention services on reservations with BIE schools. Tribes and tribal 

organizations can use the funds they receive to provide (1) help to States in identifying Indian 

infants and toddlers with disabilities, (2) parent training, and (3) early intervention services.

This is a forward-funded program. Funds become available for obligation on July 1 of the fiscal 

year in which they are appropriated and remain available for 15 months, through September 30 

of the following year.

State Incentive Grants

In any fiscal year in which the appropriation for Part C exceeds $460 million, the statute includes 

authority for the Department to reserve 15 percent of the amount above $460 million for a State 

Incentive Grants (SIG) program. The purpose of this program is to provide funding to assist 

States that have elected to extend eligibility for Part C services to children with disabilities aged 

3 years until entrance into kindergarten or elementary school, or for a portion of this period. No 

State can receive more than 20 percent of the amount available for SIGs in a fiscal year. In 

fiscal years 2018 through 2021, the total of funds appropriated for Part C exceeded the 

$460 million level. For fiscal year 2021, the three States that opted to extend their provision of

Part C services beyond age 3 received additional funds through this program and have until 

September 30, 2023 to expend these funds.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

50

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $470,000

2019 470,000

2020 477,000

2021 481,850

2021 Mandatory ARP Act 250,000

2022 Estimate 481,840

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $932 million for the Grants for Infants and 

Families (Part C) program, $450.2 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on 

the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. The proposed increase and reforms described in greater 

detail below would support a significant expansion of early intervention programs that provide 

services to infants and toddlers with disabilities, particularly for historically underserved children 

such as children of color and children of low-income families. 

Part C early intervention programs are designed to improve children’s long-term outcomes and 

mitigate the need for more extensive services in the future. A bevy of evidence shows that Part 

C services can have an enormous impact on a young child’s cognitive, physical, communicative 

and social-emotional development.1 The Part C program also helps ensure that infants and 

toddlers with disabilities receive the supports and services they need to prepare them to enter 

elementary school. A national longitudinal study found that over 40 percent of children receiving 

early intervention services did not need special education services in Kindergarten.2

In addition to improved outcomes for individual children and their families, investments in early 

intervention programs can be particularly cost effective. Indeed, providing effective early 

childhood interventions can generate net savings over time by reducing future service utilization. 

For example, in one study, the costs of an early intervention program for children with Autism 

were offset in two years and led to longer-term savings of approximately $19,000 per year per 

child as improved developmental gains reduced future need for services (e.g., speech therapy) 

that are typically paid by the government (e.g. through Medicaid), private health insurance, or 

families.3 Another study of an early intervention program in North Carolina found participation 

reduced special education placement by 10 percent, resulting in an average inflation adjusted 

net savings of $630 per child.4 Furthermore, a study of an early intervention program found 

significant health benefits for participating children who, for example, made 33 percent fewer 

trips to the emergency room visits through age 4.5 Longitudinal studies have also 

demonstrated that another reason why early intervention programs produce a high return on 

investment is because such programs increase earnings in adulthood. 

1 Gillispie, C. (2021). Our youngest learners: Increasing equity in early intervention. The Education Trust. 2 https://www.sri.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/neils_finalreport_200702.pdf 3 https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2017/august/study-finds-early-intervention-for-children-withautism-quickly-results-in-costs-savings 4 https://caldercenter.org/sites/default/files/WP%20121.pdf

5 https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG341.html
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

51

Despite these well-established benefits, several studies have found a high percentage of 

children who qualify for early intervention services do not receive them. For example, one study 

found that of just 19 percent of children eligible for Part C services were referred to such 

services, and only 5 percent actually received them.1 And the COVID-19 pandemic likely 

exacerbated this access problem. During the 2020-2021 program year, States served 365,715 

infants and toddlers with disabilities – a 17 percent decline from the previous year and the 

lowest number served since 2015. The Department anticipates a dramatic increase in the 

number of children served under this program through 2023 as pandemic-related barriers to 

identification and participation decrease. Children returning to the program are likely to have 

more intensive needs because they could not access the services during the pandemic. 

Limited Federal funding for Part C has contributed to fiscal constraints at the State level that 

hampered access to services. For example, some States have restricted program eligibility 

criteria due to budget constraints, which research has shown significantly reduces receipt of 

early intervention services, particularly for children with significant disabilities.2 In a 2021 survey 

by the Infants and Toddlers Coordinating Association, more than 70 percent of respondents 

indicated that a lack of providers to meet service needs was one of the most stressful factors of 

their position, and 41 percent indicated that insufficient funding was a major concern.3 The 

requested funding increase for this program, nearly double the fiscal year 2021 level of funding, 

would provide critical support to meet State needs for adequate staffing and funding to serve 

infants and toddlers with disabilities. 

The Administration also recognizes that increased funding alone cannot ensure access to 

services for historically underserved children, such as children of color and children from lowincome families. For example, one study found that at 24 months of age, eligible Black children 

were five times less likely to receive services than White children.4 Part C program data has 

also revealed service gaps for Native American children compared to White children.5 And 

research has shown children from low-income families are 10 to 14 percent less likely to receive 

early intervention services than their wealthier peers.6 These gaps are driven by a variety of 

factors, including disparities in access to pediatric care, societal biases, and constrained 

resources that limit robust informational and outreach activities for underserved communities. 

The Administration is committed to closing these gaps and ensuring all children who need these 

vital services receive them in a timely manner. Doing so would improve outcomes for 

underserved children as evidence shows that early intervention services reduce the likelihood of 

special education placement later in a student’s life. Therefore, the request proposes a range of 

proposals to increase equity and access to Part C services as described below. 

1 McManus et al. (2020). Child characteristics and early intervention referral and receipt of services: A retrospective 

cohort study. BMC Pediatrics. 20. 10.1186/s12887-020-1965-x 2 McManus et al. (2013) Restricting state Part C eligibility policy is associated with lower early intervention utilization. 

Maternal and Child Health Journal. 18:1031-1037 3 https://www.ideainfanttoddler.org/pdf/2021-Tipping-Points-Survey.pdf 4 Feinberg et al. The impact of race on participation in part C early intervention services. Journal of Developmental 

and Behavioral Pediatrics. 2011;32(4):284–291 5 https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/42nd-arc-for-idea.pdf 6 McManus et al. (2020). Child characteristics and early intervention referral and receipt of services: A retrospective 

cohort study. BMC Pediatrics. 20. 10.1186/s12887-020-1965-x
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

52

Expanding Access to Children At-Risk of Developing Delays and Disabilities 

Under the Part C program, all States have the option of serving infants and toddlers who, in the 

absence of early intervention services, are at risk for substantial developmental delays. States 

that have elected to use this option have defined a variety of factors that would qualify a child as 

at-risk including children with medical conditions such as low-birth weight or extended NICU 

stays as well as environmental factors such as children who have parents with certain 

disabilities or children who have been exposed to toxins.

Providing at-risk children with Part C services can expedite the provision of services so that a 

child highly likely to develop a delay does not have to wait for the delay to clinically manifest 

before receiving services. And research has clearly shown that earlier provision of services 

leads to improved long-term outcomes.1 Furthermore, serving at-risk children can particularly 

increase access to the program for underserved children, as children of color and children from 

low-income families are disproportionately likely to qualify through these risk factors. For 

example, research has shown that black children are 2.5 times more likely to be born at lowbirth weight than White children.2 Furthermore, research has found that Black children are eight 

times less likely to be found eligible for services than White children when evaluated on more 

subjective criteria such as the degree of a child’s speech delay. No such difference is found

when evaluating on objective criteria, such as whether a child has Down Syndrome.3 Given atrisk factors are primarily objective criteria (e.g., whether the child has a confirmed medical 

condition or has been exposed to a toxin), expanding eligibility for at-risk children can mitigate

some of the biases and barriers that limit or delay services for low-income children and children 

of color.

States have expressed to the Department a sincere desire to serve at-risk children. However, 

during the 2019-2020 program year, only seven States did so. States have primarily cited the 

cost of serving additional children as the main barrier to expanding eligibility. For example, 

States may incur significant initial costs needed to train additional service providers, revise child 

find procedures to enroll at-risk children, and increase capacity to coordinate services. 

Therefore, to support States who choose to exercise the existing flexibility in IDEA to serve atrisk children, the Administration’s request would allow the Department to reserve up to $200 

million under the Part C State Incentive Grants (SIG) program and add a new allowable use of 

that funding to support States serving at-risk infants and toddlers.4 Under the Administration’s 

proposal, States would continue to separately apply for SIG funds by detailing how they would 

use those funds to expand services to the relevant populations, and maximum awards would be 

determined based on a State’s relative share of the population ages birth through two. This 

proposal would create no new requirements for States. Instead, it but would provide financial 

incentives for States to engage in an optional activity under the program. Any SIG funds not 

claimed by States would continue to be reallocated out to all States based on the formula, 

consistent with current practice.

1 Eapen et al. (2013) Clinical outcomes of an early intervention program for preschool children with Autism Spectrum 

Disorder in a community group setting. BMC Pediatric.

2 Ratnairi et al. (2018) Recent trends, risk factors, and disparities in low birth weight in California, 2005-2014: a 

retrospective study. Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology. 4:15

3 Feinberg et al. (2011) The impact of race on participation in Part C early intervention services. Journal of 

Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. 32(4): 284-291 4 States may currently receive SIG funding if they expand Part C eligibility to children ages 3 through 5.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

53

Promoting More Equitable Distribution of Funding

In reauthorizing the IDEA in 2004, Congress recognized that “a more equitable allocation of 

resources is essential for the Federal Government to meet its responsibility to provide an equal 

educational opportunity for all individuals” (IDEA §301(c)(7)). An equitable allocation of Part C 

funding should factor in poverty, which is strongly correlated with many risk factors for 

developmental delay or disability, such as low birth weight, poor nutrition, and lead exposure. 

Indeed, Congress has long recognized the importance of including poverty metrics in formula 

allocations under the IDEA Grants to States and Preschool Grants programs. Similarly, the 

Administration believes that a measure of poverty should be incorporated into the Part C State 

allocation formula.

Therefore, the Administration is proposing appropriations language that would allocate Part C 

funds based on a formula which, like funding under the Grants to States and Preschool Grants 

programs, allocates 85 percent of funding on the basis of a State’s relative share of the 

population birth through age 2, and 15 percent on the basis of a State’s relative share of 

individuals in that age range living in poverty. This proposal aligns with the Congressional intent 

of the 2004 IDEA reauthorization, ensuring that States with a higher share of children living in 

poverty—and which research indicates have a greater need for Part C services—would receive 

relatively more funding than under the current formula. Furthermore, pairing the formula change 

with the proposed increase in funding would ensure that no State receives less funding in fiscal 

year 2023 than in fiscal year 2021 and 2022.

The Administration’s proposal also includes a “hold harmless” provision to provide a level of 

certainty around Federal funding for States.

Easing Entry into the Part C Program for New Parents

For all new parents, the first weeks and months of a child’s life can be taxing, and even more so 

if a new child has a disability. The unique physical, nutritional, and developmental needs of 

infants with disabilities can occupy a great deal of a new parent’s focus and attention. 

Postpartum can therefore be a particularly challenging time for families to navigate the process 

of establishing Part C eligibility and developing an IFSP. In such instances, entry into the Part C 

system and the provision of services can be delayed by weeks or even months during critical 

times in a child and family’s life. The Administration believes States should be given the 

flexibility to use Part C funds to design and implement systems that make initial entry into the 

Part C system as transparent and seamless as possible for families. 

For this reason, the request includes appropriations language to provide flexibility to States to 

use their Part C funds to conduct child find, public awareness, and referral activities for 

individuals who are expected to become parents of an infant or toddler with a disability. For 

example, if an expectant mother learns through genetic testing that her child will be born with 

Down Syndrome and will therefore be eligible for Part C services in her State upon birth, a State 

choosing to use this flexibility could work with her to ensure she understands how the Part C 

system operates, connect her with vital resources, refer her for services, and, within 45 days of 

the child’s birth, ensure that an IFSP is established to support the infant and her family with 

early intervention services. As with the proposed expansion of SIG, this proposal would not 

create any new requirements but would give States new flexibility to dramatically streamline the 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

54

Part C referral, evaluation, and determination process for countless families nationwide each 

year. 

Promoting Equitable Access to Part C Services

The Administration believes that the first step to meaningfully address the gaps in service 

provision for infants and toddlers is to ensure that all States identify those gaps, develop plans 

for addressing them, and reserve sufficient funding to implement their plans. The request 

includes appropriations language that would require all States receiving funds under Part C to 

reserve at least 10 percent of their annual allocations to develop and implement an equity plan 

approved by the Secretary. Such plans, submitted as part of the State Performance Plan 

(SPP), would include (1) identified subgroups and regions the State determines have limited 

access to Part C services, based on service rate data; (2) a comprehensive set of evidencebased practices the State intends to implement to engage underserved subgroups and meet the 

needs of those populations; and (3) a proposed budget for executing its plan. States would 

provide the Department with annual updates and data on subgroup service rates demonstrating 

the extent to which gaps are being closed. Examples of practices to close equity gaps include:

• providing additional support to providers who serve underrepresented populations;

• making revisions to State Medicaid plans to ensure that a child’s Individualized Family 

Service Plan is sufficient documentation for Medicaid billing;

• translating outreach materials into additional languages, including indigenous languages 

and languages of immigrant communities;

• updating service delivery models to more effectively reach infants and families in remote 

areas;

• improving outreach to home childcare providers and other trusted community care 

providers about the signs of developmental delay;

• increasing support and technical assistance for local health departments to ensure 

effective screening practices are in place for families who receive primary care from 

those agencies; or

• streamlining evaluation procedures to reduce barriers to participation in the program.

Part C funds States are currently spending on these types of activities would count toward the 

10 percent reserve requirement. In addition to supporting these activities, the proposed equity 

plans would ensure States engage in a comprehensive planning process to strategically deploy 

resources to increase enrollment of underserved children. Furthermore, the related data 

submitted as part of the plans would provide Congress, the Department, and the public greater 

transparency on rates of services across demographics and how States are allocating 

resources to address identified gaps. 

The Department will conduct monitoring and oversight of these equity plans to ensure State 

compliance and effective provision of services to the underserved populations they have 

identified. In addition, the Department intends to prioritize fiscal year 2023 funding under the 

Part D State Personnel Development Grants program for projects aligned with States’ Part C 

equity plans. For example, if a State’s equity plan aims to address gaps in services for nonEnglish speaking children, a project could support the training and retention of bilingual early 

intervention providers.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

55

Finally, the Department recognizes that a State’s system of payments under Part C can itself be 

a barrier to equitable access to program services. For example, some States charge families 

$25 to$100 per month for services. Other States charge a fee for each service provided. 

Particularly for families that may not qualify for Medicaid in their State or for children whose 

required services are not covered by Medicaid or private insurance, family fees and out-ofpocket expenses can be the difference between children receiving critical services or being left 

behind. In fact, research has demonstrated that relatively small fees of $1 to $5 can lead to 

reduced service utilization.1

The Department is proposing to address this inequity in access to services through 

appropriations language that would prohibit States from charging family fees or out-of-pocket 

expenses. According to a survey of Part C coordinators, several respondents indicated they are 

concerned that fees can deter participation among low-income families and can be difficult to 

administer and thus lead to inappropriate billing of families.2 Over the last few years, several 

States have curtailed or eliminated their collection of family fees because of the barrier they 

pose to access and the high administrative burden associated with their collection. Additional 

States suspended collection of fees during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to a 2021 

survey from the Infants and Toddlers Coordinators Association, only 14 States out of 41 

respondents were still charging family fees. In total, those States collected only $11 million in 

revenue from those fees, a fraction of the $3.5 billion in revenue States collectively reported for 

early intervention systems.3 It is important to note that the requested appropriations language 

would not restrict States’ ability to collect Medicaid or private insurance premiums. 

Given the limited revenue States receive from fees, the deterrent effect fees may have on 

families whose children require services, and the challenges States have reported in 

administering fees, the Administration strongly believes they should be prohibited. Furthermore, 

the proposed increase in program funding would more than offset revenue lost by ceasing 

collection of family fees. The Administration recognizes that some States may need support in 

shifting their system of payments away from a reliance on family fees. Therefore, the 

Department intends to issue guidance to States that will identify best practices from around the 

country in supporting families in accessing these necessary services without requiring them to 

pay out of pocket, including the use of State or Federal funds to cover insurance co-pays. 

Ensuring Continuity of Services

Part C services represent a critical investment in our children and their future. Effective and 

timely delivery of early intervention services can dramatically improve long-term outcomes for 

children, and families of infants and toddlers with disabilities need to know that early intervention 

services will be there for them when they need them. Particularly for underserved communities, 

complicated, inconsistent, and constantly changing eligibility criteria can increase distrust of the 

system and make families less likely to seek out or utilize program services. 

Parents should not live in fear of suddenly and inexplicably losing eligibility. Parents should not 

be forced to choose between a job promotion in a different State or retaining services for their 

infant or toddler that are critical for their child’s development. Currently, States establish 

1 https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/the-effects-of-premiums-and-cost-sharing-on-low-income-populationsupdated-review-of-research-findings/ 2 https://www.ideainfanttoddler.org/pdf/ITCAFCPSurveySum_A.pdf

3 https://www.ideainfanttoddler.org/pdf/Part-I-2021-Executive-Summary.pdf
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

56

eligibility criteria under Part C within certain parameters, but they can change those criteria over 

time, often with the intent of reducing the number of children eligible to be served under Part C 

to meet budget constraints. And when States do narrow eligibility criteria, research has shown 

fewer children receive services, particularly children with significant disabilities.1 Consequently, 

a family that was eligible for services last year may no longer be eligible this year, creating 

confusion on the part of families and disruptions in vital services for children. Further, data 

shows that States with more restrictive eligibility guidelines also have larger racial disparities in 

service provision. 

The Department proposes to address such uncertainties and disparities in the provision of 

services through appropriations language that would require States to provide families at least 

24 months’ advance notice of any changes to eligibility requirements under the Part C program. 

Requiring such advance notice would remove short-term incentives to cut costs by restricting

eligibility and ensures that infants and families will be able to receive their full range of services 

without interruption. This proposal also aims to amplify the voices and concerns of families, 

providers, and other stakeholders by requiring States to conduct public participation procedures 

prior to a State narrowing criteria. 

The Department has also started an interagency working group including representatives from 

multiple Federal agencies to begin developing model eligibility standards for Part C. The 

workgroup has met with a wide range of stakeholders, including experts in child development, 

researchers, families, disability rights advocates, and State Part C coordinators to solicit 

feedback on how the standards can best support equitable access to Part C services. These 

model standards will be based on the best available evidence about the benefits of early 

intervention services for infants and toddlers, analyses of how States’ current eligibility criteria 

contribute to gaps in services for underserved populations, and a considered understanding 

about State capacity. These standards will serve as a valuable resource to Part C 

Administrators, families, and other stakeholders as they assess and modify their eligibility 

criteria. The Administration aims to publish these standards later this year. 

Ensuring that Every Child Has Access to High Quality Service Providers

Every child with a disability deserves access to high quality service providers with the 

knowledge, skills, dispositions, qualifications, and experience to meet their unique needs. 

However, far too often, Part C programs do not have enough qualified staff to meet the needs of 

the children and families they serve. These personnel shortages can lead to delays in services, 

lower quality services, or, particularly in remote areas, a total lack of access to services, all of 

which can disproportionately affect communities with high rates of poverty and communities of 

color. In order to support State comprehensive systems of personnel development (CSPDs) 

required under section 635(a)(8) of the IDEA, the Department intends to leverage the resources 

provided under Part D of the IDEA, including the proposed $159.8 million increase to the 

Personnel Preparation program, to both increase the number of early childhood training grants it 

supports each year under Part D and make new grants to States to support State-driven 

reforms to increase the effective recruitment, preparation, induction, professional development, 

support, and retention of highly effective early intervention service providers, with a particular 

emphasis on increasing the diversity of providers, including providers from underrepresented 

backgrounds. 

1 McManus et al. (2013) Restricting state Part C eligibility policy is associated with lower early intervention utilization. 

Maternal and Child Health Journal. 18:1031-1037
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

57

Additional Fiscal Year 2023 Proposed Appropriations Language

The request also proposes to continue appropriations language initially provided in prior years 

which would allow States to subgrant funds they receive under this program and that would 

allow the Department to maximize the amount of funds distributed for State Incentive Grants 

and would allow States to offer summer bridge services through Part C to children prior to the 

beginning of the preschool year after their third birthday.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Formula grants:

Formula grants to States $469,142 $469,142 $717,012

Formula grants to Outlying Areas $3,482 $3,482 $3,482

Department of the Interior $5,948 $5,948 $11,506

Subtotal, formula grants $478,572 $478,572 $732,000

State Incentive Grants $3,278 $3,278 $200,000

Total program funding $481,850 $481,850 $932,000

Mandatory Supplemental Appropriation, 

ARP Act (P.L. 117-02) $250,000 0 0

Children served1 407,000 447,000 508,000

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Goal: To enhance the development of infants and toddlers (birth to three) with disabilities 

and support families in meeting the special needs of their child.

Objective: The functional development of infants and toddlers will be enhanced by early 

intervention services.

1 Estimates based on an assumed 4 percent annual increase in the number of infants and toddlers eligible for 

services under the program and an assumption that COVID-related effects on the number of children served will be 

resolved by 2023.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

58

Measure: The percentage of infants and toddlers who entered the program below age 

expectations in positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships) who substantially 

increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 70% 66%

2019 70 65

2020 70 64

2021 70

2022 70

2023

Measure: The percentage of infants and toddlers who entered the program below age 

expectations in acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early 

language/communication and early literacy) who substantially increased their rate of growth by 

the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 76% 71%

2019 76 74

2020 76 69

2021 76

2022 78

2023 78

Measure: The percentage of infants and toddlers who entered the program below age 

expectations in the use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs who substantially 

increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program.

Year Target Actual

2018 77% 74%

2019 77 76

2020 77 71

2021 77

2022 78

223 78

Additional information: Data are from the States’ Annual Performance Reports (APRs).Two 

States have current approval from the Department to collect data for a representative sample of 

the children they serve through the Part C program; all other States report data on all children 

served. Success on these outcomes is based on a Likert scale that examines functional 

progress of children with disabilities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

59

Objective: All infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families will receive early 

intervention services in natural environments that meet their individual needs.

Measure: The number of States that serve at least 1 percent of infants in the general population 

under age 1 through Part C.

Year Target Actual

2018 34 34

2019 36 36

2020 37 27

2021 37

2022 37

2023

Additional information: For a number of years, only 24 or 25 States served at least 1 percent 

of infants in the general population under the age of 1. The program made progress from 2012 

through 2017, exceeding its targets, though performance fell dramatically in 2020 as a result of 

the COVID-19 pandemic. The 1 percent threshold for this measure is based on data collected 

by the U.S. Census bureau on prevalence rates for 5 conditions: severe intellectual disability 

(0.4 percent)1; hearing impairment (0.2 percent); visual impairment (0.1 percent); physical 

conditions (spina bifida, cerebral palsy, etc.) (0.2 percent); and autism (0.1 percent). State lead 

agencies responsible for the implementation of these programs report data annually to the 

Department through their APRs on the numbers of infants and toddlers with disabilities served 

under the Grants for Infants and Families program. Through its monitoring and technical 

assistance efforts, the Department is working with States to ensure that they are appropriately 

identifying and serving all eligible infants with disabilities and expects the number of States to 

increase further as a result.

Measure: The number of States that serve at least 2 percent of infants and toddlers in the 

general population, birth through age 2, through Part C.

Year Target Actual

2018 47 48

2019 47 49

2020 48 46

2021 49

2022 50

2023 50

Additional information: Data are from the APRs. 

1 Consistent with P.L. 111-256, the Department uses the term “intellectual disabilities” instead of “mental retardation,” 

but note that the latter term was used in the source data used to set the threshold.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

60

Measure: The percentage of children receiving age-appropriate early intervention services in 

the home or in programs designed for typically developing peers.

Year Target Actual

2018 95% 97%

2019 95 97

2020 95 97

2021 95

2022 95

2023 95

Additional information: State lead agencies report annually to the Department on the settings 

in which children receive services provided under the Part C program. Current performance 

represents a significant improvement since 2001, when States reported that only 76 percent of 

children receiving early intervention services through the Part C program were served in the 

home or in programs designed for typically developing peers.

Efficiency Measure

Measure: The average number of days between the completion of a site visit and the Office of 

Special Education Programs’ (OSEP) response to the State.

Year Target Actual

2018 Baseline 276

2019 257

2020 407

2021

2022 180

2023 180

Additional information: The Department did not conduct regular site visits to States from 

2011 through 2015. During that time, OSEP continued to meet its statutory monitoring 

responsibilities through the State Performance Plan /APR process, fiscal monitoring, and its 

work with State dispute resolution systems. In 2016, OSEP began conducting site visits using a

risk-based approach to monitoring. Performance on this measure in 2020 declined significantly. 

No site visits were conducted in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, though OSEP continued 

to actively monitor State compliance. OSEP plans to begin site visits again in 2022.

Other Performance Information

Through the “Early Childhood Longitudinal Study - Birth Cohort” (ECLS-B), the National Center 

for Education Statistics (NCES) collected longitudinal data on a nationally representative sample 

of 14,000 children from their birth in 2001 through their entry into kindergarten. Approximately 

75 percent of the sample entered kindergarten in fall 2006, with the remaining 25 percent 

entering in the following year. The ECLS-B provides data on the early development of these 

children, their preparation for school, and key transitions experienced by these children during 

the early childhood years. The study includes detailed data on the physical, cognitive, social, 

and emotional development of these children. More information is available on the NCES Web 

site at: http://nces.ed.gov/ECLS/birth.asp.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

State grants: Grants for infants and families

61

In July 2011, IES published the final report for the “IDEA National Assessment Implementation 

Study.” This congressionally mandated study provides a national picture of State agency 

implementation of early intervention programs for infants and toddlers under Part C of IDEA, as 

well as both State and school district implementation of special education programs for 

preschool- and school-age children under Part B of IDEA.

The study was based on surveys of State agency directors and a nationally representative 

sample of district special education directors conducted in 2009. Key findings relating to the Part 

C program include:

• Referral and identification—The most common outreach activity reported by States was the 

development and/or dissemination of written materials for pediatricians and other health 

care providers, followed by Web-based dissemination and outreach to childcare providers. 

States reported family members and primary healthcare providers as the most frequent 

sources of referral to the Part C program.

• Coordination and transition between IDEA programs—At the time the surveys were 

conducted, States reported supporting the transition of young children with disabilities from 

the Part C program to preschool services under section 619 of Part B, but no States 

reported expanding Part C services to serve eligible children with disabilities until they enter 

kindergarten. Forty-six States reported having different coordinators for the Part C and 

Preschool programs, but 67 percent of Part C coordinators reported meeting at least 

monthly with the coordinator for the Preschool program.

• Financing—For the 37 States that provided this information, the average percentage of early 

intervention services funding that came from the Part C program in fiscal year 2009 was 

21 percent. Twenty-three States indicated that State early intervention services funding 

represented the largest source of funding for early intervention services for infants and 

toddlers with disabilities. The largest sources of funding in other States were: Part C 

(8 States), Medicaid/Title XIX (8 States), local municipality or county funds (4 States), and 

Part B (1 State).

• The final report for the “IDEA National Assessment Implementation Study” is available on 

the IES website at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20114026/index.asp.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

62

National activities: State personnel development

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part D, Subpart 1)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

National activities: State personnel development

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$38,630 $38,630 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The State Personnel Development (SPD) program makes competitive awards to help State 

educational agencies (SEAs) reform and improve their systems for personnel preparation and 

professional development of individuals providing early intervention, educational, and transition 

services to improve results for children with disabilities.

The SPD program focuses on professional development needs and each State grantee must 

spend at least 90 percent of its funds on professional development activities, including the 

recruitment and retention of qualified special education teachers. The remaining 10 percent of 

funds is available for State-level activities, such as reforming special education and regular 

education teacher certification (including recertification) or licensing requirements and carrying 

out programs that establish, expand, or improve alternative routes for State certification of 

special education teachers.

Awards are based on State personnel development plans that identify and address State and 

local needs for the preparation and professional development of personnel who serve infants, 

toddlers, preschoolers, or children with disabilities, as well as individuals who provide direct 

supplementary aids and services to children with disabilities. States may work with relevant 

personnel to develop personalized development projects to carry out their State plans under 

section 653 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and implement professional 

development activities that are consistent with the use of funds provisions in section 654 of 

IDEA. Plans must be designed to enable the State to meet the personnel requirements in Parts 

B and C (section 612(a)(14) of the IDEA, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act 

(ESSA), as well as section 635(a)(8) and (9)) of the IDEA. These plans must also be integrated 

and aligned, to the maximum extent possible, with State plans and activities under the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA); the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended; and the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.

SPD activities are intended to support statewide strategies to prepare, recruit, and retain 

teachers who are qualified under IDEA. Qualified teachers generally: (1) fully meet the 

applicable State certification and licensure requirements (including any requirements for 

certification obtained through alternative routes); (2) are prepared to deliver instruction 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: State personnel development

63

supported by evidence; and (3) are effective in improving outcomes for children with disabilities. 

States must collaborate and seek the input of teachers, principals, parents, administrators, 

paraprofessionals, and other school personnel when developing SPD activities.

Research shows that effective teaching is integral to improving the academic achievement of 

students who are at greatest risk of not meeting State academic standards; for this reason, SPD 

funds are used to provide training in effective interventions. Examples include positive 

behavioral interventions and supports to improve student behavior in the classroom, evidencebased reading instruction, early and appropriate interventions to identify and help children with 

disabilities, effective instruction for children with low incidence disabilities, and strategies for 

successful transitioning to postsecondary educational opportunities. Funds also assist States in 

utilizing classroom-based techniques to assist children prior to referral for special education.

In addition to effective interventions, the SPD program supports States in developing and 

implementing effective strategies for the recruitment and retention of qualified special education 

teachers, such as teacher mentoring provided by exemplary special education teachers, 

principals, or superintendents; induction and support for special education teachers during their 

first 3 years of employment as teachers; and providing incentives, including financial incentives, 

supports, and leadership opportunities to retain special education teachers who have a track 

record of success in helping students with disabilities.

Awards are made for periods of 1 to 5 years, with minimum awards to States of not less than 

$500,000 and not less than $80,000 for Outlying Areas. Factors used to determine the amount 

of each competitive award are: the amount of funds available; the relative population of the 

State or Outlying Area; the types of activities proposed; alignment of proposed activities with 

section 612(a)(14) of IDEA, as amended by the ESSA; alignment of proposed activities with the 

State’s personnel standards; alignment of proposed activities with the State’s consolidated 

ESEA Title I and Title II plans; and, as appropriate, the use of evidence-based programs and 

research.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $38,630

2019 38,630

2020 38,630

2021 38,630

2022 Estimate 38,630

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $38.6 million for the State Personnel 

Development (SPD) program, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal 

year 2021 appropriation. This request would support approximately $38.6 million in continuation 

awards.

The Department intends to reserve a portion of funding for new awards to make competitive 

grants to States proposing projects aligned with their IDEA Part C Grants for Infants and 

Families equity plans, which would be required for the first time under the fiscal year 2023 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: State personnel development

64

request (see Part C Grants for Infants and Families elsewhere in this account). States have long 

experienced challenges in identifying, evaluating, and serving all eligible children and families 

under the Part C program, with children and families of color, children and families from lowincome backgrounds, and those living in rural areas often left behind. The new equity plans 

would include identified subgroups and regions that each State determines have limited access 

to Part C services, a comprehensive set of evidence-based practices the State intends to 

implement to engage these subgroups and meet the needs of those populations, and a new 

reservation of Part C funds to support these activities. These plans may include strategies such 

as recruiting or developing more personnel working in underserved communities. The SPD 

program can play an important role in ensuring that States have sufficient qualified personnel to 

implement and sustain these equity plans.

The fiscal year 2023 request again includes appropriations language that would provide 

authority to use SPD funds under section 655 of IDEA to carry out evaluation activities, 

including support for improved grantee evaluations. SPD is the only program within Part D of 

IDEA that does not have statutory authority to use funds to evaluate program performance.

Personnel shortages and inadequately trained teachers in special education are among the 

most pressing and chronic problems facing the field. According to the annual Teacher Shortage 

Areas Report released by the Department, 49 states reported a shortage of special education 

teachers and related service personnel in the 2020-2021 school year. SPD projects assist in 

addressing critical State and local needs to improve personnel preparation, induction to the local 

educational agency, and ongoing professional development identified in the State’s Personnel 

Development Plan. Projects provide personnel with the knowledge and skills to meet the needs 

and improve the achievement and other outcomes of infants, toddlers, preschoolers, and 

children with disabilities and to meet the State’s performance goals established in accordance 

with section 612(a)(15) of the IDEA.

The following examples illustrate how SPD funds are improving the knowledge and skills of 

teachers serving children with disabilities:

• Through the Florida SPD grant, schools implement Check & Connect and/or the Strategic 

Instruction Model, two evidence-based programs that impact achievement and graduation. 

Three-year trend data show that the dropout rate for students with disabilities is decreasing 

in high schools that are implementing Check & Connect (from 12.1 to 9.2 percent) and the 

cohort graduation rate for students with disabilities is increasing (from 76.8 to 84.9 percent). 

Of the students who participated in a Strategic Instruction Model intervention course, 90.5 

percent improved their reading skills (the average pre-test score of 29 percent increased to 

an average post-test score of 69 percent).

• The Kansas SPD grant funds Kansas School Mental Health, a professional development 

and coaching system designed to integrate school mental health and trauma-informed 

practices within a district’s tiered system of supports. By leveraging school and community 

resources; facilitating collaboration among school districts and community partners, 

including mental health providers; and providing professional development, District–

Community Leadership Teams (DCLTs) are guided through a structured process which 

improves outcomes for children/youth and families in alignment with the Kansas State Board 

of Education’s outcomes of social-emotional growth. An important aspect of successfully 

implementing mental health supports for students is the efficacy of the educators and 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: State personnel development

65

community partners involved. Of the 74 DCLT members who responded to the Inclusive 

Multi-Tiered System of Supports Implementation Scale: Mental Health Supplement, 

95 percent reported knowing how to implement trauma-responsive practices and 

100 percent responded that continued collaboration would improve mental health outcomes 

for children and youth. DCLTs translated these beliefs into practice, monitoring the progress 

of 30 students through a trauma-responsive support planning process, with 93 percent of 

students making progress in their targeted areas.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Project funding amounts:

State Personnel Development grants New awards $13,333 $25,720 0

State Personnel Development grants Continuation awards 25,239 12,846 $38,577

State Personnel Development grants Performance evaluation 53 53 53

State Personnel Development grants Peer review of new award applications 5 11 0

State Personnel Development grants Total funding 38,630 38,630 38,630

State Personnel Development grants Average award 1,071 1,071 1,072

Number of awards:

State Personnel Development grants Number of new awards 7 17 0

State Personnel Development grants Number of continuation awards 29 19 36

State Personnel Development grants Total awards 36 36 36

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To assist State educational agencies in reforming and improving their systems for 

providing educational, early intervention, and transitional services, including their 

systems of professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of 

knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with disabilities.

Objective 1: Provide personnel with the knowledge and skills to meet the needs of, and 

improve the performance and achievement of, infants, toddlers, preschoolers, and children with 

disabilities.

Objective 2: Improve the quality of professional development available to meet the needs of 

personnel serving infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: State personnel development

66

Objective 3: Implement strategies that are effective in meeting the requirements of section 

612(a)(14) of IDEA to take measurable steps to retain highly qualified personnel in areas of 

greatest need to provide special education and related services.

Measure: The percentage of SPD-funded initiatives that meet the benchmarks for use of 

evidence-based professional development practices over time.

Year Target Actual

2018 77% 86%

2019 82 69

2020 85 81

2021 85 82

2022 82

2023 82

Additional information: In 2021, an outside contractor used a random sampling process to 

select one professional development (PD) initiative for review from 27 randomly selected SPD 

grants. Of the 27 SPD grants reviewed, a total of 22, or 81.5 percent, were determined to “meet 

their respective benchmarks for use of evidence-based PD practices.” The Department provided

additional technical assistance to grantees to address declining performance on this measure 

and to improve the detail provided in the Annual Performance Report (APR) to accurately 

assess progress. While the target was not met, the technical assistance does appear to have 

yielded tangible results over the past cycle.

Measure: The percentage of SPD-funded initiatives that meet the benchmark for improvement 

in implementation over time.

Year Target Actual

2018 65% 55%

2019 70 48

2020 70 60

2021 70 59

2022 60

2023 60

Additional information: Of the 27 PD initiatives in their third year of implementation in 2021, a 

total of 16, or 59.3 percent, were deemed to “meet the benchmark for improvement of evidencebased PD practices.” The Department provided additional technical assistance to grantees to 

address declining performance on this measure and to improve the detail provided in the APR

to accurately assess progress.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: State personnel development

67

Measure: The percentage of initiatives that meet targets for their use of funds to sustain SPDsupported practices.

Year Target Actual

2018 85% 90%

2019 85 100

2020 85 94

2021 85 82

2022 85

2023 85

Additional information: Grantee-submitted data describing the cost of the fidelity activities 

designed to sustain individual initiatives is used to support this measure. Targets for each 

initiative are set in conjunction with the grantee. Expert panels review the data to determine 

whether the grantee has met the target for spending on that initiative within 5 percent of the 

target. In 2021, this measure applied to all SPD grants in their second through final years of 

funding.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

68

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part D, Subpart 2, Section 663)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

Budget Authority 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$44,345 $49,345 +$5,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) program is the Department’s primary 

vehicle under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for identifying, providing, and 

disseminating information on effective practices to educators, policymakers, service providers, 

and families of children and youth with disabilities. The program makes competitive awards to

provide technical assistance, support model demonstration projects, disseminate useful 

information, and implement activities that are supported by scientific research. These awards 

are intended to improve services provided under IDEA, promote academic achievement, and 

improve outcomes for children and youth with disabilities.

The majority of TA&D program investments support national and regional technical assistance 

centers that are intended to support the field in implementing Parts B and C of IDEA by

expanding the use of evidence-based and promising practices. Centers focus on a variety of 

critical topics, such as early childhood education, inclusive practices, behavior, literacy,

assessment, and secondary transition. Most centers use a service model that provides three 

levels of technical assistance: (1) intensive, sustained; (2) targeted, specific; and (3) general, 

universal. At the intensive, sustained level, a small number of States receive on-site, ongoing 

planned assistance designed to reach an outcome desired by the recipient. Through targeted, 

specific services, centers support activities based on the topical or technical needs common to 

multiple recipients. Targeted, specific services can include one-time or short-term events, such 

as consultation services or presentations at conferences. The centers also provide general, 

universal technical assistance services that are intended to help broader audiences access 

information and services through presentations, newsletters, or research syntheses that are 

made available on center websites. Activities supported through this program are designed to 

address the needs of a variety of audiences, including teachers, related service personnel, early 

intervention personnel, administrators, parents, and individuals with disabilities. 

The TA&D program also funds model demonstration projects that evaluate the implementation 

of research findings in typical settings. Models that are found to be effective can then be 

promoted by the network of TA&D centers. In recent years, the program also has sought to 

leverage existing resources through improved collaboration and coordination with other related 

federally funded technical assistance and dissemination activities. TA&D activities promote the 

application of knowledge to improve practice by determining areas where technical assistance 

and information are needed, ensuring that materials are prepared in formats that are 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

69

appropriate for a wide variety of audiences, making technical assistance and information 

accessible to consumers, and promoting communication links among consumers. 

Eligible entities under this program include public entities or agencies (such as State 

educational agencies, local educational agencies (LEAs), and institutions of higher education), 

private non-profit organizations, and for-profit organizations. The duration of awards varies with 

the award's purpose, though most individual awards are made for a period of 5 years.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $44,345

2019 44,345

2020 44,345

2021 44,345

2022 Estimate 44,345

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $49.3 million for the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination (TA&D) program, $5.0 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR l 

based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. Of the funds requested, approximately 

$18.6 million (including peer review costs) would be used for new projects, and $30.7 million

would support the continuation of grants made in prior years. As described below, the increase 

would support equity in IDEA through the creation of an Equity in IDEA Technical Assistance 

Center that would support LEAs in identifying and evaluating evidence-based strategies for 

conducting root cause analyses and effectively implementing comprehensive coordinated early 

intervening services. In addition, starting in fiscal year 2022, the Department is committing

significant resources under the TA&D program to support efforts to keep students safe in the 

classroom by limiting the use of seclusion and physical restraint, reducing exclusionary 

discipline practices, and promoting positive behavioral interventions and supports in schools.

TA&D activities support the application of knowledge to improve practices among professionals 

and others involved in providing services that promote academic achievement and improve 

outcomes for children with disabilities. Through TA&D, the Department focuses on identifying 

and disseminating evidence-based practices and building capacity at the State and local levels 

to implement, sustain, and scale-up such practices. For example, these activities have 

successfully facilitated the expanded use of evidence-based practices such as positive 

behavioral interventions and supports, which have been implemented in nearly 26,000 schools 

nationwide, and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS), which have been implemented and 

widely used throughout the country as a framework for delivering differentiated instruction.

Promoting Equity in IDEA

The Administration believes that all children, regardless of their race, ethnicity, family income, 

national origin, zip code, or any other such characteristic, should receive the services to which 

they are entitled under the IDEA. However, research1 has shown that children and youth of 

1 https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statute-chapter-33/subchapter-i/1400/c/12
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

70

color are often identified at higher rates for special education and related services than their 

white peers in some disability categories, while also being under identified in other categories,

including children with autism.1 Misidentification of children, including both over- and underidentification, can have long-lasting consequences for children. For example, overidentification 

can lead to children being placed in more restrictive educational settings, while under 

identification can result in a child not receiving appropriate educational services as required by 

law. Furthermore, children of color with disabilities are significantly more likely to experience 

harsher discipline, such as suspension and expulsion, than their peers. Data from the Civil 

Rights Data Collection shows that 29% of American Indian and Alaskan Native, 27% of Black, 

and 17% of Hispanic boys with disabilities have received out-of-school suspensions compared 

with 12% of White boys.2 Furthermore, racial disparities in school discipline persist even when 

accounting for the socioeconomic status of children.3 Research has shown that students who 

are suspended or expelled are more likely to drop out of school or enter the juvenile justice 

system than their peers. 

The Administration is committed to addressing these disparities. IDEA requires States, on an 

annual basis, to assess data on students with disabilities to determine whether there is 

significant disproportionality in race and ethnicity in the State or the LEAs of the State with 

respect to the identification (including identification of children with disabilities with a particular 

disability), placement in particular education settings, and discipline of students with disabilities.

In fiscal year 2022, the Department updated its data collection and monitoring procedures to 

better understand the needs and challenges States and districts are facing in meeting these 

requirements and reducing disproportionality. 

The Department believes States and LEAs that have been identified as having significant 

disproportionality would benefit from additional assistance in meeting the requirements to

conduct a root cause analysis of the disproportionality and reserve 15 percent of IDEA Part B 

allocation to provide comprehensive coordinated early intervening services (comprehensive 

CEIS) to students aimed at addressing root causes. A thorough root cause analysis and 

effective spending of comprehensive CEIS funds is critical to addressing disproportionality and 

avoiding the harmful consequences of misidentification and disproportionate discipline.

The proposed increase in funding for 2023 would allow the Department to establish an Equity in 

IDEA Technical Assistance Center, which will support LEAs in conducting root cause analyses 

and identifying evidence-based strategies for effectively deploying funds reserved for 

comprehensive CEIS. With effective supports to identify the root causes of the 

disproportionality, as well as a better understanding of the most effective ways to provide 

comprehensive CEIS to students, LEAs can meaningfully address their disproportionality and 

set a path towards more equitable services for all students, regardless of their race and 

ethnicity. Furthermore, the Center will disseminate research, data analyses and best practices 

related to equitably serving children with disabilities to provide all schools strategies to 

proactively prevent disproportionality. 

1 https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/addm-community-report/documents/differences-in-children-addm-communityreport-2018-h.pdf

2 https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/CRDC-School-Discipline-Snapshot.pdf

3 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0002831214541670
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

71

Keeping Our Students Safe and in the Classroom

Data from the 2017-2018 school year show that 77 percent of all seclusions and 80 percent of 

all physical restraints were utilized with students with disabilities, despite those students 

representing only about 13 percent of the total student population.1 The Administration is 

deeply concerned that the use of such practices may violate students’ civil rights and deny them 

access to a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment, and 

may, in extreme circumstances, put children in physical danger or cause death. In addition, the 

Administration is concerned more broadly about the extent to which exclusionary discipline 

practices (including in-school and out-of-school suspensions) prevent equal and equitable 

access to the learning environment, particularly for students with disabilities. The Department 

will work towards reductions in the use of seclusion, restraint, and exclusionary discipline 

practices through investments in the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Social, 

Emotional, and Behavioral Outcomes for Students with Disabilities and the National Technical 

Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports. For example, the National 

Technical Assistance Center on Positive Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Outcomes for 

Students with Disabilities can reduce seclusion and restraint by improving State and local 

capacity to address the social, emotional, and behavioral development of young children with 

disabilities, while the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions 

and Supports provides schools with guidance on deploying school-wide strategies to improve 

school climates that can proactively reduce seclusion and restraint.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Program Funding:

Model demonstration centers:

Model demonstration centers: New $1,995 $1,765 $1,035

Model demonstration centers: Continuations 4,322 3,990 4,025

Model demonstration centers: Subtotal 6,317 5,755 5,060

School climate and behavior:

 New 1,800 1,100 4,840

Regional/Federal Resource Centers: Continuations 3,655 3,650 3,650

Regional/Federal Resource Centers: Subtotal 5,455 4,750 8,490

Early childhood:

Early childhood technical assistance: New 0 5,400 0

Early childhood technical assistance: Continuations 5,400 0 6,000

Early childhood technical assistance: Subtotal 5,400 5,400 6,000

Building systems of support:

Early childhood technical assistance: New 750 1,000 1,500

Early childhood technical assistance: Continuations 6,490 7,555 8,350

Early childhood technical assistance: Subtotal 7,240 8,555 9,850

Effective instruction:

Early childhood technical assistance: New 0 2,000 0

1 https://ocrdata.ed.gov/specialreports/disciplinereport
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

72

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Early childhood technical assistance: Continuations 3,999 2,000 4,000

Early childhood technical assistance: Subtotal 3,999 4,000 4,000

Secondary transition:

Secondary, transition and postsecondary technical assistance: New 0 0 0

Secondary, transition and postsecondary technical assistance: Continuations 2,100 2,100 2,100

Secondary, transition and postsecondary technical assistance: Subtotal 2,100 2,100 2,100

Sensory Disabilities: 

Technical assistance for children who are both deaf and blind: New 1,300 0 11,100

Technical assistance for children who are both deaf and blind: Continuations 11,100 12,400 1,300

Technical assistance for children who are both deaf and blind: Subtotal 12,400 12,400 12,400

National Activities:

 New 0 739 0

 Continuations 1,337 550 1,320

 Subtotal 1,337 1,289 1,310

Total program funding:

New 5,845 12,004 18,475

Continuations 38,403 32,245 30,745

Peer review 97 96 125

Total 44,345 44,345 49,345

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To assist States and their partners in systems improvement through the 

integration of scientifically-based practices. 

Objective 1: States and other recipients of Special Education Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination program services will implement scientifically or evidence-based practices for 

infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.

Objective 2: Improve the quality of Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination 

projects.

Objective 3: The Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination program will 

identify, implement, and evaluate evidence-based models to improve outcomes for infants, 

toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

73

Five performance measures were developed for the Technical Assistance and Dissemination 

program. Three of these measures are annual measures, and two are long-term.

Annual Performance Measures

The three annual measures deal with the quality, relevance, and usefulness of products and 

services funded by the program. These measures were developed as part of an effort to make 

measures relating to technical assistance and dissemination activities more consistent 

Department-wide but have been adapted to reflect the unique purposes of the TA&D program. 

The actual data and targets for these measures reflect the performance in the year that the 

activity took place; in this case, the year the product or service was developed or delivered. 

For each of the three annual performance measures, expert panels review a sample of products 

and services developed by grantees against a listing of evidence-based practices in areas the

Department has identified as critical. The sample of grantees included in this measure for each 

year consists of TA&D centers in their second year or later and 10 State Deaf-Blind programs. 

The expert panels review and score all products and services based on an OSEP-designed 

rubric that is specific to each performance measure, rating the products and services on the 

extent to which they meet the measure’s performance indicators. Scores are weighted by the 

size of the investment in each program area reviewed.

Measure: The percentage of Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services 

deemed to be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified to review the 

substantive content of the products and services.

Year Target Actual

2018 90% 72%

2019 90 91

2020 90 97

2021 90 97

2022 90

2023 90

Additional information: Expert panels review all products and services and score them based 

on a rubric that assesses the extent to which the content of these materials is: evidence-based, 

valid, complete, and up-to-date. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

74

Measure: The percentage of Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services 

deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of high relevance to 

educational and early intervention policy or practice.

Year Target Actual

2018 90% 97%

2019 93 97

2020 93 97

2021 93 100

2022 93

2023 93

Additional information: Expert panels review the products and services and score them 

based on a rubric that assesses the extent to which the content of materials is responsive to 

priority issues, including challenges confronting the target groups. 

Measure: The percentage of all Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination 

products and services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful 

to improve educational or early intervention policy or practice.

Year Target Actual

2018 90% 91%

2019 90 89

2020 90 94

2021 90 100

2022 90

2023 90

Additional information: Expert panels review the products and services and score them 

based on a rubric that assesses the extent to which the content of materials can be easily and 

quickly adopted or adapted by the target group, and the likelihood that the product or service, if 

adopted, will produce the desired result. 

Long-term Performance Measures

The Department established two long-term measures for this program. Data for the long-term 

measures are collected every 2 years. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

National activities: Technical assistance and dissemination

75

Measure: The percentage of effective evidence-based program models developed by model 

demonstration projects that are promoted to States and their partners through the TA&D 

Network. 

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 29%

2016 Baseline 29

2018 Baseline 25

2020 30% 25

2022 30

Additional information: This measure was developed in 2010 to provide the Department 

valuable data on how well model demonstration projects are disseminating effective practices, a 

key component of this program. 

Measure: The percentage of school districts and service agencies receiving technical 

assistance and dissemination services regarding scientifically or evidence-based practices for 

infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities that implement those practices.

Year Target Actual

2011 86%

2013 86% 83

2015 86 100

2017 86 100

2019 83 100

2021 90 90

2023 90

Additional information: Experts review data from States that have received intensive 

technical assistance from OSEP TA&D Centers in six focus areas. These areas include 

inclusive practices, instructional strategies, behavior, early intervention, literacy, assessment, 

and secondary transition.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

76

National activities: Personnel preparation

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part D, Subpart 2, Section 662) 

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2022 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

Budget Authority 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$90,200 $250,000 +$159,800

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Personnel Preparation program helps meet State-identified needs for adequate numbers of 

fully certified personnel to serve children with disabilities by supporting competitive awards to:

• provide research-based training and professional development to prepare special education, 

related services, early intervention, and regular education personnel to work with children 

with disabilities;

• ensure that those personnel are fully qualified and possess the skills and knowledge that are 

needed to serve children with disabilities; and

• ensure that regular education teachers have the necessary knowledge and skills to provide 

instruction to students with disabilities in regular education classrooms.

In addition, the Department is required by statute to make competitive grants that support 

training activities in a few high-priority areas, including personnel development, beginning 

special educators, personnel to serve children with low incidence disabilities, and leadership 

personnel. 

Personnel Development: This broad authority requires the Department to support at least one 

of the following activities:

 

• promoting partnerships and collaborative personnel preparation and training between 

institutions of higher education (IHEs) and local educational agencies (LEAs);

• developing, evaluating, and disseminating innovative models for the recruitment, 

induction, retention, and assessment of teachers;

• providing continuous preparation and professional development to support special 

education and general education teachers and related services personnel;

• developing and improving programs for paraprofessionals to become special educators;

• promoting instructional leadership and improved collaboration between general and 

special education;

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

77

• supporting training and professional development at IHEs with an enrollment of students 

of color of not less than 25 percent; and 

• developing and improving programs to train special educators to develop expertise in 

autism spectrum disorders.

Beginning Special Educators: The Department is also required to make at least one award to: 

(a) enhance and restructure existing teacher education programs or develop teacher education 

programs that prepare special education teachers by incorporating an extended clinical learning 

opportunity, field experience, or supervised practicum (e.g., an additional 5th year), or (b) create 

and support teacher-faculty partnerships between LEAs and IHEs (e.g., professional 

development schools) that provide high-quality mentoring and induction opportunities with 

ongoing support for beginning special educators or in-service support and professional 

development opportunities.

Personnel to Serve Children with Low Incidence Disabilities: Awards to support personnel to 

serve children with low incidence disabilities are designed to help ensure the availability of 

highly qualified personnel by providing financial aid as an incentive for the pursuit of careers in 

special education, related services, and early intervention. Under this authority, the term “low 

incidence disabilities” refers to visual or hearing impairments, significant intellectual disabilities, 

and persistent and severe learning and behavioral problems that need the most intensive 

individualized supports. Activities include preparing personnel; providing personnel from 

various disciplines with interdisciplinary training that will contribute to improvements in early 

intervention and educational outcomes for children with low incidence disabilities; and preparing 

personnel in the innovative uses of technology to enhance educational outcomes for children 

with low incidence disabilities; and to improve communication with parents.

Leadership Personnel: These activities help ensure that leadership personnel in both regular 

and special education have the skills and training to help students with disabilities achieve to 

high standards. Under this authority, leadership personnel may include teacher preparation and 

related service faculty, administrators, researchers, supervisors, and principals. Authorized 

activities include preparing personnel at the graduate, postgraduate, and doctoral levels, and 

providing interdisciplinary training for various types of leadership personnel.

All Personnel Preparation competitions emphasize the value of incorporating best practices, as 

determined through research, evaluations, and experience. These include practices related to 

personnel training and professional development, as well as the provision of special education, 

related services, and early intervention services. Grants are typically 5 years in length.

While individuals and students are not eligible for awards under the Personnel Preparation 

program, many grantees are required to use at least 65 percent of their award(s) for student 

support (e.g. tuition, stipends, and payment of fees). Students who receive financial assistance 

from projects funded under the program are required to pay back such assistance, either by 

working for a period of time after they complete their training in the area(s) for which they 

received training or by making a cash repayment to the Federal Government. In recent years, 

approximately half of the total funding available under the program has been used to directly 

support student scholarships. 

The Department also makes awards to centers under this program that focus on enhancing the 

quality of work in a particular topical area through such activities as professional development, 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

78

technical assistance, partnerships, or the development and dissemination of materials and best 

practices. 

Additional support for personnel preparation activities is provided through the State Personnel 

Development Grants program, under which the Department makes competitive awards to help 

State educational agencies reform and improve in-service preparation and professional 

development activities for teachers, including the recruitment and retention of special education 

teachers. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $83,700

2019 87,200

2020 89,700

2021 90,200

2022 Estimate 90,200

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $250.0 million for the Personnel Preparation 

program, $159.8 million more than the fiscal year 2022 annualized continuing resolution (CR) 

level based on the fiscal year 2021 enacted level. The request would represent the highest 

level of funding ever provided under the program and a historic investment in the personnel who 

provide critical services to support the estimated 7.9 million children with disabilities nationwide 

who receive services under the IDEA. Of the request, approximately $179.9 million (including 

peer review costs) would be used for new projects, and $70.1 million would support the 

continuation of grants made in prior years.

Every child with a disability deserves access to high quality service providers and educators 

with the knowledge, skills, dispositions, and experience to meet their unique needs. However, 

far too many districts and schools nationwide face shortages of qualified special education staff. 

Over 40 States, DC and Puerto Rico reported significant special education teacher and service 

provider shortages in school year 2019-2020.1 These shortages have led some States to 

increase class sizes or to rely more on more on long—term substitutes or teachers who are not 

fully credentialed to teach students with disabilities.2 The shortage of highly qualified teachers 

can impact a district’s ability to provide students with disabilities the services they need that 

districts must provide. In a national survey of 1,000 special educators, 82% of respondents 

reported there were insufficient special education personnel to adequately serve students with 

disabilities.3 And the shortage of special education personnel has become more severe over 

time. Despite a 5% growth in the number of students with disabilities between school years 

2007-8 and 2017-18, the number of special educators remained flat.4

1 https://tsa.ed.gov/#/reports

2 https://edpolicyinca.org/sites/default/files/2020-03/r_ondrasek_feb20_v2.pdf 3 National Coalition on Personnel Shortages in Special Education and Related Services, 

https://specialedshortages.org/about-the-shortage/. 4 32nd and 42nd Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the IDEA
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

79

In addition to the overall shortage, there is an acute shortage of special educators of color. 

Students of color with disabilities, who make up over half of all students with disabilities, are 

served by a special educator workforce that is 82% white.1,2 Research has shown that a 

diverse educator workforce has academic and social benefits for all students, particularly 

students of color.3 

This request recognizes the need for critical investments in high quality preparation programs 

that support the development of diverse staff prepared to fill a wide range of roles in the special 

education pipeline and provide educators with the skills they need to be effective in their 

practice and keep them in the profession. 

Specifically, the request would invest an additional $30 million in doctoral programs designed to 

support the development of faculty at institutions of higher education who can prepare future 

special education teachers and related services providers. Over the next five years, the 

Administration estimates that these investments will produce an additional 720 faculty 

members4 who, in turn, would be able to support the training of an additional 21,000 special 

educators per year. This investment would greatly expand the future teacher preparation

pipeline and ensure that more well-prepared teachers enter the classroom per year than ever 

before.

In addition, the request would invest $80 million in pre-service training programs for special 

education teachers and related services providers, helping meet the needs of students today. 

Within this amount, $30 million will be reserved for programs training teachers to address the 

needs of children with high-incidence disabilities, such as learning disabilities and emotional or 

behavioral disabilities. And to support a special educator workforce that reflects the diversity of 

students with disabilities grants would prioritize projects at Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities (HBCUs) and Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), as well as programs with a 

history of placing well-qualified teachers and service providers in high-need school districts. In 

total, the Administration estimates that these investments, if sustained, would produce more 

than 18,000 additional service providers over the next five years, ultimately serving nearly 

375,000 students per year.

In addition, the request recognizes that early intervention providers and paraprofessionals are a 

critical source of support for children with disabilities, working closely with families, certified 

teachers and service providers to support children with some of the most intensive needs. 

However, many States are facing shortages of early childhood personnel. According to a recent 

survey of 50 IDEA Part C Administrators, 98 percent reported a shortage of qualified providers.5 

That is why the request would also invest $17.5 million in community colleges to support 

associate degree programs in early childhood education which would grow the pipeline of IDEA 

Part C and Preschool service providers, and another $10 million to support the development of 

career ladder programs for currently employed paraprofessionals to obtain their full teaching 

1 NCES statistics on children served under IDEA, Part B by race/ethnicity in school year 2018-19, 

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_204.40.asp. 

2 The Push to Get More Teachers of Color in Special Education Classrooms, Education Week, 

https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/the-push-to-get-more-teachers-of-color-in-special-educationclassrooms/2019/09. 

3 https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/diversifying-teaching-profession-brief 4 All estimates in this section are based on historical performance of grantees under this program.

5 https://www.ideainfanttoddler.org/pdf/2021-Tipping-Points-Survey.pdf
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

80

certification and licensure. The Administration estimates that these investments would generate, 

over the next five years, an additional 7,000 paraprofessionals and nearly 2,500 new teachers.

The request also includes $31 million for the development of training programs for teacher 

coaches trained in literacy, social and emotional development, and mental health with a focus 

on serving students with disabilities. These coaches will be able to provide critical supports to 

classroom teachers as they work to meet the needs of the diverse learners they serve. 

Research has shown that teacher coaches can both improve instruction and student 

achievement.1 Furthermore, research has also shown that coaching has helped close racial 

disparities in discipline through improved teaching practices and student engagement.2 The 

Administration estimates that these investments would support more than 12,500 new teacher 

coaches over the next five years and that they would ultimately be able to support 

approximately 125,000 teachers each year.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Program Funding:

Low incidence disabilities grants:

New Low incidence disabilities grants $2,200 0 500

Continuations Low incidence disabilities grants 3,875 $6,075 $5,542

Subtotal Low incidence disabilities grants 6,075 6,075 6,042

Leadership training grants:

New Low incidence disabilities grants 7,100 6,894 30,000

Continuations Low incidence disabilities grants 17,141 24,513 26,530

Subtotal Low incidence disabilities grants 24,242 31,407 56,530

Training improvement grants:

New Program improvement grants 0 4,700 10,000

Continuations Program improvement grants 5,450 0 4,700

Subtotal Program improvement grants 5,450 4,700 14,700

Early childhood grants:

New Early childhood grants 0 2,000 17,500

Continuations Early childhood grants 2,900 900 2,000

Subtotal Early childhood grants 2,900 2,900 19,500

Pre-service training grants

New Other personnel development grants $7,672 $9,753 $80,000

Continuations Other personnel development grants 38,840 29,715 28,228

Subtotal Other personnel development grants 46,512 39,468 108,278

In-Service Support and Retention

New in-service support and retention 1,477 0 10,000

Continuations in-service support and retention 1,126 2,507 1,014

1 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654318759268

2 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5302858/
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

81

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Subtotal in-service support and retention 2,602 2,507 11,014

Teacher Coaches

New teacher coaches 0 0 31,000

Continuationsteacher coaches 0 0 0

Subtotal teacher coaches 0 0 31,000

National Activities:

New 100 1,832 0

Continuations national activities 2,031 904 2,092

Subtotal national activities 2,131 2,736 2,092

Total Program Funding:

New total program funding 18,549 25,179 179,000

Continuations total program funding 71,362 64,613 70,106

Peer review of new award 

applications 289 408 894

Total 90,200 90,200 250,000

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To prepare service providers and leadership personnel in areas of critical need 

who are highly qualified to improve outcomes for children with disabilities. 

Objective 1: Improve the curricula of IDEA training programs to ensure that personnel 

preparing to serve children with disabilities are knowledgeable and skilled in practices that 

reflect the current knowledge base. 

Objective 2: Increase the supply of teachers and service providers who are highly qualified for 

and serve in positions for which they are trained.

Objective 3: Enhance the efficiency of the expenditure of Federal dollars under the program.

Annual Performance Measures

The program has five annual performance measures designed to provide information on various 

aspects of program quality, including outcomes for scholars who receive funding through the 

program. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

82

Data for 2019 do not include 508 scholars who have not yet entered employment records into 

the service obligation tracking system. The Department is taking proactive steps to resolve the 

issues with missing data for this measure. The contractor is implementing procedures for 

following up with non-responsive program completers.

Data on these measures for 2020 is expected in fall 2022. These measures are:

Measure: Percentage of projects that incorporate scientifically- or evidence-based practices in 

their curricula.

Year Target Actual

2018 90% 92%

2019 90 90

2020 90

2021 90

2022 90

2023 90

Additional Information: Data are collected and analyzed by a contractor using a panel of five 

to seven experts, who review a randomly selected sample of grantee course syllabi submitted 

by funded applicants in the same cohort of grantees. 

In 2017, the Department began requiring grantees to operate interdisciplinary projects and, as a 

result, allowed grantees to use up to 12 months of their project periods for planning purposes. 

As a result, for all cohorts shown above, syllabi review occurred one year after initial award.

Measure: Percentage of scholars who exit training programs prior to completion due to poor 

academic performance.

Year Target Actual

2018 1.9% 1.0%

2019 1.9 1.1

2020 1.9

2021 1.9

2022 1.9

2023 1.9

Additional Information: Grantees submit data annually through the Department Personnel 

Preparation Data Report Web-based data collection (see: http://www.oseppdp.ed.gov). No 

calculation is necessary. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

83

Measure: Percentage of degree/certification recipients who are working in the area(s) for which 

they are trained upon program completion.

Year Target Actual

2018 85% 92%

2019 85 93

2020 87

2021 90

2022 90

2023 90

Additional Information: In 2019, 894 scholars completed their program of study and were 

employed in the area(s) for which they were trained. The denominator includes scholars who 

completed their rogram of study and were not employed in the area(s) for which they were 

trained (63 scholars in 2019) and scholars who completed their program of study and were 

employed in the area(s) for which they were trained (894 scholars in 2019).

Measure: Percentage of degree/certification recipients who are employed in high-need 

districts.

Year Target Actual

2018 85% 85%

2019 85 85

2020 85

2021 85

2022 85

2023 85

Additional information: In calculating this measure, the Department uses employment 

records submitted by scholars and matches that employment data to school districts in the 

Common Core of Data (CCD), which are then classified as high-need using free and reducedprice lunch data.

In 2019, 573 scholars were employed in high need districts. The denominator includes scholars 

who worked in a school district that was not high-need (112 scholars in 2019) and scholars who 

were employed in high-need school districts (573 scholars in 2019). In 2019, 284 scholars did 

not work in a school district, but worked in some other type of organization (e.g., a clinic, 

hospital, or State or Federal education agency) and were therefore excluded from this measure. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

84

Measure: Percentage of degree/certification recipients who are rated as effective by their 

employers.

Year Target Actual

2018 80% 83%

2019 80 87

2020 80

2021 80

2022 80

2023 80

Additional information: In 2019, 708 scholars were rated as effective by their employers. The 

denominator for this measure includes scholars who did not report employment after their 

program (12 scholars in 2019), scholars whose employment records had not been verified by 

their employers (102 scholars in 2019), scholars who had been deemed as “less than effective” 

or “ineffective” by their employer (1 scholar in 2019), and scholars who had been deemed 

“effective” by their employer (708 scholars in 2019). 

Long-Term Performance Measures

The program currently has one long-term measure that tracks the skills of scholars supported 

with program funds. The Department also is currently piloting a new long-term outcome 

measure – the percentage of degree/certification recipients who are employed in the field of 

special education for at least 2 years. The Department is currently reviewing baseline data with 

the intent of establishing targets in fall 2022.

Measure: Percentage of scholars completing Special Education Personnel Preparation funded 

training programs who are knowledgeable and skilled in evidence-based practices for children 

with disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2018 90% 98%

2019 90 94

2020 90

2021 95

2022 95

2023 95

Additional Information: This measure reflects performance on independent exams, such as 

the Praxis II, that are designed to assess the knowledge and skills of special educators. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Personnel preparation

85

Efficiency Measures

Measure: The Federal cost per degree or certification program recipient working in the area(s) 

in which they were trained upon program completion.

Year Target Actual

2018 $32,500 $39,249

2019 32,500 31,291

2020 32,500 36,173

2021 32,500

2022 32,500

2023 32,500

Additional Information: Results on this measure in 2019 were the lowest since 2014. Results 

in 2020 rebounded to slightly below the average Federal cost from 213 through 2019. From 

fiscal year 2014 through fiscal year 2018, the average Federal cost per degree or certification 

recipient increased more than twice as much as average graduate tuition over that same time 

period. Beginning in fiscal year 2018, the Department began to include matching requirements 

in some of its training competitions to address this increase, though such requirements were not 

in place for grantees included in the 2019 or 2020 calculations. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION

86

National activities: Parent information centers

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part D, Subpart 3, Sections 671-673)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

National Activities: Parent Information Centers

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$27,411 $45,152 +$17,741

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Parent Information Centers program is one of the primary vehicles under the Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for providing information and training to parents of 

children with disabilities. The program supports competitive awards to help ensure that:

• Children with disabilities and their parents receive training and information designed to 

assist these children in meeting developmental and functional goals and challenging 

academic achievement goals, and in being prepared to lead productive independent adult 

lives;

• Children with disabilities and their parents receive training and information on their rights, 

responsibilities, and protections under IDEA, in order to develop the skills necessary to 

participate effectively in planning and decision-making relating to early intervention, 

educational, and transitional services; and

• Parents receive coordinated and accessible technical assistance and information to assist 

them in improving early intervention, educational, and transitional services and results for 

their children and families.

The IDEA authorizes three types of competitively awarded projects: parent training and 

information centers, community parent resource centers, and technical assistance for parent 

centers. The award period for these projects is typically 5 years.

Parent training and information centers must serve parents of children of all ages (birth to 26) 

and all types of disabilities. The training and information provided by the centers must meet the 

needs of parents of children with disabilities living in areas served by the centers, particularly 

underserved parents and parents of children who may be inappropriately identified. At least one 

award for a parent training and information center must be made in each State, subject to the 

receipt of acceptable applications. Large and heavily populated States typically have multiple 

centers that serve designated counties.

The centers also play an important role in dispute resolution by sharing information on the 

benefits of alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as mediation, which States are 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

87

required to make available under IDEA. Parent center staff attend or facilitate over 1,000 

alternative dispute resolution sessions every year. As part of that role, parent centers are 

required to meet with parents to explain the IDEA-mandated mediation process. In States where 

parent centers provide this service, they typically do so through contracts with State educational 

agencies.

The Department allocates funds to parent centers through a formula based on three weighted 

indicators of need: State population of ages 0 to 26 (85 percent), child poverty (10 percent), and 

rural school enrollment (5 percent), with most centers receiving a minimum of $200,000. No 

center will receive a reduction of more than 20 percent below the amount of the fiscal year 2014

grant.

Community parent resource centers are parent training and information centers in smaller,

geographically defined areas that are operated by local parent organizations and help ensure 

underserved parents of children with disabilities, including parents with low incomes, parents of 

children who are English learners, and parents with disabilities, have the training and 

information they need to enable them to participate effectively in helping their children. 

Community parent resource centers are required to establish cooperative partnerships with the 

parent training and information centers in their States.

Parent technical assistance centers support parent training and information centers and 

community parent resource centers in areas such as coordinating parent training efforts, 

disseminating evidence-based research and information, and ensuring the effective use of 

technology. The parent technical assistance center network maintains a website with a wide 

variety of information and materials for parents and professionals, as well as a directory of the 

parent centers (http://www.parentcenterhub.org/).

An applicant for a parent center grant must be a parent organization that has a board of 

directors, the majority of which must be parents of children with disabilities under the age of 26. 

The board must also include individuals with disabilities and individuals working in the fields of 

special education, related services, or early intervention. The parent and professional members 

of the board must be broadly representative of the population to be served, including parents 

with low incomes and parents of English learners.

In addition to providing direct resources for parents and families, parent centers also act as 

referral points to other resources such as those available under the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination program, which coordinates its activities with Parent Information Centers to 

ensure that parents participating in parent training projects, as well as other parents, have 

access to valid information that is designed to address their needs.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

88

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $27,411

2019 27,411

2020 27,411

2021 27,411

2022 Estimate 27,411

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $45.2 million for the Parent Information 

Centers program, $17.7 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal 

year 2021 appropriation. This request will support a total of 95 Centers, including 65 

continuation awards for the Parent Training and Information Centers (PTIs), 25 continuation 

awards for the Community Parent Resource Centers (CPRCs), and 5 new awards for the 

Technical Assistance Centers. The increase in funding will be fed into the existing parent 

training and information centers formula, ensuring an equitable distribution of funds amongst the 

existing PTIs to meet needs that have both evolved and increased because of COVID-19.

The training and information provided by the PTIs help ensure that parents and families have 

the opportunity, knowledge, and skills to help their children with disabilities succeed. In addition 

to helping parents and families better understand the nature of their children’s disabilities and 

their educational and developmental needs, the centers provide training and information on how 

parents and families can work with professionals serving their children. For parents of schoolaged children, this includes participating with administrators and teachers in the development of 

their child’s individualized education plans (IEPs), as required by the IDEA. For parents of 

infants and toddlers receiving early intervention services, this means participating with a 

multidisciplinary team in the development of individualized family service plans (IFSPs).

PTIs use a variety of mechanisms to share information with parents, families, and professionals, 

including one-on-one support, training workshops, and dissemination of best practices. In recent 

years, the Department’s Office of Special Education Programs has worked with the parent 

centers to improve their websites and make their resources available in languages other than 

English, particularly Spanish.1 According to data collected by the PTIs, families receiving 

services report a high degree of satisfaction with the services they receive and an increase in 

their capacity to effectively support their children.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted students with disabilities and more families 

than ever require information and assistance to navigate acute and ongoing challenges to 

ensure their children receive the services and supports they need to thrive. For example, during 

the pandemic families have needed additional assistance accessing schools and services 

remotely, understanding their children’s rights as learning environments shifted, and obtaining 

compensatory services when gaps in services occurred. During the pandemic, demand for PTI 

services has increased dramatically. For example, demand for virtual training increased by 

almost 140 percent between fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2020.

1 For examples, see http://parentcenterhub.org/osep-spanish-glossary/ and 

http://www.parentcenterhub.org/resourcelibrary/.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

89

Furthermore, increased investments in PTIs can address longstanding barriers underserved 

families face in ensuring children receive appropriate services, particularly low-income families 

and families of color. For example, a 2019 report from the Government Accountability Office 

(GAO) found that families in low-income school districts were substantially less likely to engage 

in the IDEA dispute resolution process, which families may engage in to secure additional 

services their children require or resolve placement and discipline disputes, than families from 

high-income school districts.1 Reasons for the discrepancy cited in the GAO report include 

challenges low-income families face in paying attorney’s fees and feeling at a disadvantage with 

the school district’s knowledge and financial resources. PTIs can therefore play a pivotal role in 

leveling the playing field by providing families information and direct assistance through the 

dispute resolution process. Therefore, the Administration will work with PTIs to ensure the 

requested increase expands services particularly for underserved families.

Together, the PTIs, CPRCs, and Technical Assistance Centers provide training and information 

to over one million parents and professionals each year. Family involvement in children’s 

learning is critical to ensuring the provision of high-quality education and related services that 

promote positive educational and life outcomes. Decades of research show that positive schoolfamily partnerships can effectively involve families in their children’s learning and improve 

student achievement.2 Studies show that all families can take concrete steps that significantly 

help their children succeed in school, regardless of their income, education, disability status, or 

knowledge of the English language.3

1 https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-22 2 Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family and community 

connections on student learning. Austin, TX: Southwest Education Development Laboratory 

(https://www.sedl.org/connections/resources/evidence.pdf). 3 See Lisa Boonk, Hieronymus J.M. Gijselaers, Henk Ritzen, Saskia Brand-Gruwel (2018). A review of the 

relationship between parental involvement indicators and academic achievement. Educational Research Review 24, 

10–30 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X18301027); S. Wilder (2014). Effects of parental 

involvement on academic achievement: a meta-synthesis. Educational Review 66:3, 377-397 

(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131911.2013.780009?src=recsys).
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

90

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Program Funding:

Parent Training & Information Centers:

New: Parent Training & Info Centers 0 0 0

Continuations: Parent Training & Info Centers $21,176 $21,176 $38,881

Supplements: Parent Training & Info Centers 0 71 0

Subtotal: Parent Training & Info Centers 21,176 21,247 38,881

Community Parent Resource Centers:

New: Community Parent Resource Centers 3,019 0 0

Continuations: Community Parent Resource Centers 0 3,000 2,993

Subtotal: Community Parent Resource Centers 3,019 3,000 2,993

Technical Assistance Centers:

New: Technical Assistance 0 0 2,800

Continuations: Technical Assistance 2,737 2,781 0 

Subtotal: Technical Assistance 2,737 2,781 2,800

Total Program Funding:

New: Total 3,019 0 2,800

Continuations: Total 23,913 26,957 41,874

Supplements: Total 0 71 0

Contracts: Total 383 383 383

Peer Review of new award applications: 

Total

96 0 95

Total 27,411 27,411 45,152

Number of Projects:

Parent Training & Information Centers:

New: Parent Training & Info Centers 0 0 0

Continuations: Parent Training & Info 65 65 65

Community Parent Resource Centers:

New: Community Parent Resource Centers 25 0 0

Continuations: Community Parent Resource Centers 0 25 25

Technical Assistance Centers:

New: Technical Assistance 0 0 5

Continuations: Technical Assistance 5 5 0

Total number of projects:

New: Total 25 0 5

Continuations: Total 70 95 90

Total 95 95 95
SPECIAL EDUCATION

91

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To provide training and information to parents of children with disabilities.

Objective 1: Improve the quality of parent training and information projects.

Objective 2: Parents served by Special Education Parent Information Centers will be 

knowledgeable about their IDEA rights and responsibilities.

Objective 3: Parents served by Special Education Parent Information Centers will be able to 

advocate for scientifically or evidence-based practices for their child.

Six performance measures have been developed for the Parent Information Centers program. 

There are three annual measures, two long-term measures, and one efficiency measure.

Annual performance measures

The three annual measures deal with the quality, relevance, and usefulness of products and 

services provided by the program. These measures were developed as part of a crossdepartmental effort to make measures relating to technical assistance and dissemination 

activities more consistent Department-wide. However, the measures were adapted to reflect the 

unique purposes of the Parent Information Centers program. The measures are:

Measure: The percentage of materials disseminated by Parent Training and Information Center 

Program projects deemed to be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts 

qualified to review the substantive content of the products or services.

Year Target Actual

2018 93% 86%

2019 93 94

2020 93 100

2021 93 93

2022 93

2023 93

Additional Information: Data are collected and analyzed by a contractor, using expert panels 

of reviewers who assess grant implementation by reviewing a randomly selected sample of 

materials disseminated by centers for the purpose of training and informing parents.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

92

Measure: The percentage of Parent Training and Information Center Program products and 

services deemed to be of high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or practice 

by an independent review panel of qualified experts with appropriate expertise to review the 

substantive content of the products or services.

Year Target Actual

2018 93% 97%

2019 93 84

2020 93 97

2021 93 97

2022 93

2023 93

Additional Information: Data are collected and analyzed by a contractor, using panels of 

special education parent stakeholders to review a randomly selected sample of materials 

disseminated by centers for the purpose of training and informing parents.

Measure: The percentage of all Parent Training and Information Center Program products and 

services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful to improve 

educational or early intervention policy or practice.

Year Target Actual

2018 93% 93%

2019 93 77

2020 93 100

2021 93 93

2022 93

2023 93

Additional Information: Data are collected and analyzed by a contractor, using panels of 

special education parent stakeholders to review a randomly selected sample of materials.

Long-term performance measures

Two long-term measures have been developed for the program. Data are collected every 2

years through a survey of parents who received services from the parent centers. Baseline data 

were collected in fiscal years 2017 and 2019 and targets for 2021 were established in late 2019.

Measure: The percentage of parents receiving Special Education Parent Information Centers 

services who report having enhanced capacity to work with schools and service providers 

effectively in meeting the needs of their children.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline 87%

2021 87 90

2023 87
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

93

Additional Information: Data for the measure are collected by the parent centers every two 

years by mail, on-line survey, or telephone interview from a randomized list of parents served by 

each center. Each randomized list must yield responses from at least 1 percent of the parents 

served by each center.

Measure: The percentage of parents receiving Special Education Parent Information Centers 

services who report enhanced knowledge of IDEA rights and responsibilities.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline 94%

2021 93 95

2023 93

Additional Information: Data for the measure are collected by the parent centers every two 

years by mail, on-line survey, or telephone interview from a randomized list of parents served by 

each center. Each randomized list must yield responses from at least 1 percent of the parents 

served by each center.

Efficiency Measure

The calculation of the efficiency measure was modified for the program. The target for 2022 will 

be informed by baseline data from fiscal years 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Measure: An index of the Federal cost per unit of output provided by the Special Education 

Parent Training and Information Centers.

Year Target Actual

2017 1.1 0.8

2018 1.1 0.5

2019 Baseline 23

2020 Baseline 21

2021 Baseline 15

2022 19

Additional Information: The efficiency measure for the PTIs program is “the index of Federal 

cost per unit of output.” The calculation of the Federal index of cost per unit of technical 

assistance is the total Federal cost of PTI grant funding for a given fiscal year divided by the 

sum of the numbers of parents and professionals receiving technical assistance during that 

fiscal year. The Department notes that it is difficult to attribute increases or decreases under this 

measure to the Federal share of funds due to the variability in other sources of funding. The 

result is expressed as an index of cost rather than a cost in dollars.

Prior to fiscal year 2019, the “numbers of parents and professionals receiving technical 

assistance” included four main types of technical assistance: trainings; individual assistance; 

meetings; and outreach. In fiscal year 2019, technical assistance was more narrowly defined to 

exclude outreach. This modification eliminated the overwhelming proportion of outputs 

attributable to outreach (i.e., website hits, social media hits, and newsletter dissemination) and 

gives the Department a more accurate understanding of program impact.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Parent information centers

94

In fiscal year 2021, 1,890,417 services were provided to parents and professionals across the 

three technical assistance categories, and the total amount of program funding was 

$27,411,000, yielding an index of cost of 14.5.
SPECIAL EDUCATION

95

National activities: Educational technology, media, and materials

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part D, Subpart 3, Section 674)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$29,547 $29,547 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Educational Technology, Media, and Materials program is the primary source of support for 

accessible technology and media-related activities under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA). The program supports two broad categories of activities: (1) accessible 

technology, and (2) educational media and materials. 

Technology activities are generally designed to promote the development, demonstration, and 

use of accessible technology. The technology component of the program also supports 

research on using technology to improve outcomes for students with disabilities, as well as 

technical assistance and dissemination activities to enhance the use of technology by students, 

parents, and teachers. Media and materials activities focus on closed captioning, video 

description, timely provision of books and other educational materials in accessible formats, and 

other activities to improve access to education for students with disabilities.

The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 expanded the range of 

media that must be closed captioned and updated accessibility standards to include emerging 

Internet and mobile technologies. However, significant gaps in captioning coverage remain. 

The Educational Technology, Media, and Materials program helps ensure educational media 

that are not otherwise required to be made accessible are available to students with disabilities. 

For example, mandatory captioning only applies to broadcast television, not to video broadcast 

solely over the Internet or video produced for classroom viewing. Funding for this program helps 

increase the accessibility of learning content and materials by supporting the captioning and 

nationwide distribution of thousands of titles of educational media each year.

Video description is used to make video and other media with visual content accessible for 

people who are blind or visually impaired. Audio-narrated descriptions of key visual elements in 

a video or television program are inserted into natural pauses in the spoken dialogue, 

supplementing the regular audio track of the program by providing additional context. Federal 

law requires television broadcast stations affiliated with the top four commercial broadcasting 

corporations (ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC) and licensed to the top 60 Designated Market Areas 

(i.e., unique, county-based geographic areas designated by The Nielsen Company, a television 

audience measurement service based on television viewership) and the five most watched nonbroadcast networks to provide 50 hours of video description per calendar quarter. The video 

description must be of prime time or children's television programming. Educational media and 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Educational Technology, media, and materials

96

materials funds support video description for other video programming, including educational

materials intended for use in the classroom and increasingly popular Internet media, that are not 

subject to description requirements. The IDEA requires that description and captioning funds be 

used only for programs that are suitable for use in classroom settings, and program funds may 

not be used to describe or caption news programs, even when they are suitable for use in 

classrooms. 

Educational materials activities include the preparation of electronic files suitable for efficient 

conversion into specialized accessible formats. The educational materials provided by this 

program are intended to support students’ access to the general curriculum and participation in 

statewide assessments. The single largest grant in this program provides funding for the 

production and distribution of textbooks and other educational materials in accessible formats to 

students with visual impairments and other print disabilities. Due to recent advances in digital 

technologies, these activities can be accomplished more efficiently than ever before. 

The Department makes competitive awards for projects throughout the fiscal year. The duration 

of awards typically varies from 3 to 5 years. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $28,047

2019 28,047

2020 29,547

2021 29,547

2022 CR 29,547

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $29.5 million for the Educational Technology, 

Media, and Materials program, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal 

year 2021 appropriation. Of the request, approximately $4.0 million would be used to support 

new awards for research in educational technology and technical assistance and approximately 

$25.5 million would be used to support continuations for awards made in previous years.

Projects funded under the program support improved access to and participation in the general 

education curriculum, developmentally appropriate activities for preschool children, and 

statewide assessments. By supporting research on and dissemination of accessible 

instructional materials and technology, this program helps ensure students with disabilities 

receive a free appropriate public education, consistent with the requirements of the IDEA. The 

program also funds innovations in accessible technologies and broadens the understanding of 

how technology can be used effectively to increase academic achievement. The Administration 

believes increased access and participation supported by this program results in higher 

expectations and improved opportunities and outcomes for children with disabilities. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Educational Technology, media, and materials

97

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Program Funding:

Technology:

Technology: Research:

Newtechnology research $2,468 $1,500 $814

Continuations technology research 7,838 8,508 8,125

Subtotal technology: research 10,307 10,008 8,938

TechnologyTechnical assistance and dissemination:

Newtechnology: technical assistance and dissemination 0 0 3,150

Continuationstechnology: technical assistance and dissemination 3,667 2,661 491

Subtotal technology: technical assistance and dissemination 3,667 2,661 3,641

TechnologyProjects to address the postsecondary, 

vocational, technical, and adult education 

needs of individuals with deafness:

NewTechnology: Projects to address the postsecondary, vocational, technical, and adult education needs of individuals with deafness: 1,000 0 0

Continuations Technology: Projects to address the postsecondary, vocational, technical, and adult education needs of individuals with deafness: 0 1,000 1,000

Subtotal Technology: Projects to address the postsecondary, vocational, technical, and adult education needs of individuals with deafness: 1,000 1,000 1,000

Subtotal, Technology:

New program funding subtotal, technology 3,468 1,500 3,964

Continuations program funding subtotal, technology 11,505 12,169 9,616

Subtotal program funding subtotal, technology 14,974 13,659 13,580

Media and Materials:

Media and materials Captioned and described accessible 

media:

New media and materials: captioned & described accessible media 3,998 0 0

Continuations media and materials: captioned & described accessible media 0 3,998 4,000

Subtotal media and materials: captioned & described accessible media 3,998 3,998 4,000

Media and materials: Books and other instructional materials in 

accessible formats:

New media and materials: books and other instructional materials in accessible formats 0 9,500 0

Continuations media and materials: books and other instructional materials in accessible formats 9,316 1,106 10,200

Subtotal media and materials: books and other instructional materials in accessible formats 9,316 10,606 10,700

Media and materials: National Instructional Materials Access 

Center (NIMAC):

New Media and materials: National Instructional Materials Access Center (NIMAC) – Statutory earmark 650 0 0

Continuations Media and materials: national instructional materials access center statutory earmark 0 650 650

Subtotal Media and materials: national instructional materials access center statutory earmark 650 650 650
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Educational Technology, media, and materials

98

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Subtotal, Media and Materials:

New program funding subtotal, Media and materials $4,647 $9,500 0

Continuations program funding subtotal, Media and materials 9,316 5,754 $15,350

Subtotal program funding subtotal, Media and materials 13,964 15,253 15,350

Other (e.g. program evaluation contracts):

New other 0 227 0

Continuations other 528 303 532

Subtotal, Other, other 528 530 532

Total Program Funding:

New total program funding 8,116 11,227 3,964

Continuations total program funding 21,349 18,225 25,498

Peer review 82 95 85

Total program funding 29,547 29,547 29,547

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Annual Performance Measures

The three annual measures deal with the relevance, quality, and usefulness of products and 

services provided by the program.

For each of the three annual performance measures that follow, a contractor collects and 

analyzes data based on input from two panels of subject matter experts who review a sample of 

products and services developed by grantees against a listing of evidence-based practices in 

key target areas the Department has identified as critical. The sample of grantees included in 

this measure for each year consists of projects from across all areas of this program. Products 

and services are divided into the categories of policy and practice.

Goal: To promote the development, demonstration, and use of accessible technology 

and media services to improve results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with 

disabilities.

Objective: Improve the quality of products produced by projects in the Special Education 

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials program. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Educational Technology, media, and materials

99

Measure: The percentage of Educational Technology, Media, and Materials projects judged to 

be of high quality.

Year Target Actual

2018 94% 88%

2019 90 93

2020 90 89

2021 90

2022 90

2023 90

Additional Information: Of the 18 products and services reviewed in the sample, 16 were 

reported to be of high quality. The Department is working directly with the grantee whose 

products were deemed not to be of high quality to improve performance. 

Measure: The percentage of Educational Technology, Media, and Materials projects judged to 

be of high relevance to improving outcomes of infants, toddlers, children and youth with 

disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2018 94% 100%

2019 90 93

2020 90 100

2021 90

2022 90

2023 90

Additional Information: Of the 18 products and services reviewed in the sample, all were 

reported to be of high relevance. 

Measure: The percentage of Special Education Educational Technology, Media, and Materials 

projects and services judged by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful in 

improving results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2018 94% 100%

2019 90 100

2020 90 100

2021 90

2022 90

2023 90

Additional information: In fiscal year 2020, 18 of 18 products and services reviewed were 

found to be highly useful. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

National activities: Educational Technology, media, and materials

100

Efficiency Measures

The Department established two efficiency measures for the Educational Technology, Media, 

and Materials program that provide data on accessible book distribution and on video captioning 

and description projects, respectively. 

Measure: The Federal cost per download from the accessible educational materials production 

and distribution project funded by the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials program. 

Year Target Actual

2018 $4.0 $5.0

2019 4.0 4.9

2020 4.0 5.8

2021 4.0

2022 4.0

223 4.0

Additional Information: In fiscal year 2020, there were 1,477,143 accessible materials product 

downloads while the total funding for the grantee (Bookshare, Inc.) was $8,500,000.

Measure: The Federal cost per hour of video description funded by the Educational 

Technology, Media, and Materials program.

Year Target Actual

2018 $2,000 $2,529

2019 2,000 2,547

2020 2,000 2,066

2021 2,200

2022 2,200

2023 2,200

Additional information: The cost of an hour of media description decreased in fiscal year 2020 

to the lowest level since 2012. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

101

Special Olympics education programs

(Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004, Section 3(a))

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: Indefinite

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$23,683 $23,683 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004 authorizes the Department of 

Education to make discretionary grant awards to the Special Olympics to support activities in a 

number of areas related to the Special Olympics. The Department of Education is authorized to 

make awards for:

• activities to promote the expansion of Special Olympics, including activities to increase the 

participation of individuals with intellectual disabilities within the United States; and

• the design and implementation of Special Olympics education programs, including character 

education and volunteer programs that support the purposes of the Special Olympics Sport 

and Empowerment Act of 2004, that can be integrated into classroom instruction and are 

consistent with academic content standards.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $15,083

2019 17,583

2020 20,083

2021 23,683

2022 Estimate 23,683

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $23.7 million for Special Olympics education 

programs, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation. The request would support efforts to promote the expansion of Special Olympics 

and the design and implementation of Special Olympics education programs.

The Special Olympics National Youth Activation Demonstration (Unified Champion Schools, 

previously referred to as Project UNIFY), a national youth sports demonstration and education 

program, is the major activity funded by this direct appropriation. In addition to sports and

physical education in integrated settings, this program also provides opportunities for youth to 

participate in leadership development, service learning, and structured interpersonal 

communication and socialization activities. In general, Special Olympics program activities 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

Special Olympics education programs

102

assist individuals with intellectual disabilities in being productive members of their communities 

by dispelling negative stereotypes and promoting positive and inclusive learning environments.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Unified Champion Schools

Project UNIFY Number of funded State programs 49 49 49

Project UNIFY Number of schools participating 7,329 7,868 7,868

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, 

program goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of 

the progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based 

on the cumulative effect of the Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To increase the inclusion and awareness of students with intellectual disabilities.

Objective: The Special Olympics will improve awareness about students with intellectual 

disabilities.

Measure: The percent of school liaisons who report that Unified Champion Schools helps raise 

awareness about students with intellectual disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2018 70% 76%

2019 70 77

2020 70 68

2021 75 67

2022 75

2023 75

Additional information: Data are collected by external evaluators who survey school liaisons 

at the end of each program year. School liaisons are volunteers, typically teachers, who 

administer Special Olympics programming at the school level. Special Olympics includes those 

survey responses that indicate the program “made a big difference” (scores of 4 or 5 on the 

survey’s Likert scale) in the numerator used to calculate the actual performance.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

Special Olympics education programs

103

Measure: The percent of school liaisons who report that Unified Champion Schools increases 

opportunities for students with intellectual disabilities to be involved in school activities.

Year Target Actual

2018 61% 76%

2019 61 79

2020 65 68

2021 65 67

2022 65

2023 65

Additional information: Data are collected by external evaluators who survey school liaisons 

at the end of each program year. School liaisons are volunteers, typically teachers, who 

administer Special Olympics programming at the school level. Special Olympics includes those 

survey responses that indicate the program “made a big difference” (scores of 4 or 5 on the 

survey’s Likert scale) in the numerator used to calculate actual performance.

Objective: The Special Olympics will increase opportunities for K-12 students with intellectual 

disabilities to participate in inclusive school activities.

Measure: The number of schools participating in Unified Champion Schools.

Year Target Actual

2017 4,500 5,453

2018 5,000 6,493

2019 6,800 7,623

2020 7,000 7,868

2021 7,500 7,329

2022 7,500

2023 7,500

Additional information: The decrease in participation rates from 2020 to 2021 is due to the 

impact of the national COVID-19 pandemic on schools. The Department expects participation 

rates to increase in 2022 and 2023.

Measure: The number of schools participating in a Unified Champion Schools High Activation 

Program.

Year Target Actual

2017 1,765 3,748

2018 3,500 4,998

2019 4,500 4,744

2020 5,000 5,841

2021 5,500 5,265

2022 5,500

2023 5,500

Additional information: High Activation schools feature a higher intensity and variety of 

activities, and, therefore, are likely to have a larger impact on participating students. Building 

Bridges schools offer fewer activities and generally include schools that are new to the program. 
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

Special Olympics education programs

104

The decrease in participation rates from 2020 to 2021 is due to the impact of the national 

COVID-19 pandemic on schools. The Department expects participation rates to increase in 

2022 and 2023.

Efficiency Measures

Objective: The Special Olympics will develop efficient programs at the national, State, and 

school level.

Measure: The average total Federal cost per school.

Year Target Actual

2018 $2,500 $1,938

2019 2,500 1,979

2020 2,500 2,235

2021 2,500 2,740

2022 2,500

2023 2,500

Measure: The percent of Federal funds spent on administration.

Year Target Actual

2018 20% 19%

2019 20 16

2020 20 18

2021 20

2022 20

2023 20

Additional information: The Department believes that these targets will slow cost growth for 

the program in future years.
SPECIAL EDUCATION 

105

Account Summary Table

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FISCAL YEAR 2023 PRESIDENT'S BUDGET

(in thousands of dollars)

Cat

Code

2021

Appropriation 2022 Estimate 2023 Request

2023 Request Compared to

2022 Estimate

Amount Percent

Special Education

1. State grants:

(a) Grants to States (IDEA B-611)

Annual appropriation D 3,654,074 3,654,074 6,975,810 3,321,736 90.91%

Advance for succeeding fiscal year D 9,283,383 9,283,383 9,283,383 0 0.00%

Subtotal 12,937,457 12,937,457 16,259,193 3,321,736 25.68%

(b) Preschool grants (IDEA B-619) D 397,620 397,620 502,620 105,000 26.41%

(c) Grants for infants and families (IDEA C) D 481,850 481,850 932,000 450,150 93.42%

Subtotal, State grants 13,816,927 13,816,927 17,693,813 3,876,886 28.06%

2. National activities (IDEA D):

(a) State personnel development (subpart 1) D 38,630 38,630 38,630 0 0.00%

(b) Technical assistance and dissemination (section 663) D 44,345 44,345 49,345 5,000 11.28%

(c) Personnel preparation (section 662) D 90,200 90,200 250,000 159,800 177.16%

(d) Parent information centers (sections 671-673) D 27,411 27,411 45,152 17,741 64.72%

(e) Educational technology, media, and materials (section 674) D 29,547 29,547 29,547 0 0.00%

Subtotal, National activities D 230,133 230,133 412,674 182,541 79.32%

3. Special Olympics education programs (Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act) D 23,683 23,683 23,683 0 0.00%

Total, Appropriation 14,070,743 14,070,743 18,130,170 4,059,427 28.85%

Current 4,787,360 4,787,360 8,846,787 4,059,427 84.79%

Prior year's advance 9,283,383 9,283,383 9,283,383 0 0.00%

NOTES:

1) D = discretionary program; M = mandatory programs

2) Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

Click here for accessible version