i

Fiscal Year 2014 Budget

Summary and Background Information

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. SUMMARY OF THE 2014 BUDGET.......................................................................................1

II. THE 2014 EDUCATION BUDGET BY PROGRAM AREA....................................................12

A. HIGH-QUALITY EARLY LEARNING................................................................................12

Overview ...............................................................................................................................12

Preschool for All...............................................................................................................13

Preschool Development Grants........................................................................................13

B. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION...........................................................15

Overview ...............................................................................................................................15

Race to the Top................................................................................................................16

Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) ......................................................................................16

STEM Innovation..............................................................................................................17

STEM Innovation Networks ........................................................................................17

STEM Teacher Pathways ...........................................................................................17

STEM Master Teacher Corps .....................................................................................18

Effective Teaching and Learning: STEM.....................................................................18

College- and Career-Ready Students...............................................................................18

School Turnaround Grants ...............................................................................................19

High School Redesign......................................................................................................20

Assessing Achievement ...................................................................................................21

Excellent Instructional Teams...........................................................................................21

Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants ............................................................21

School Leadership......................................................................................................22

Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund.........................................................................22

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy.......................................................................22

Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education ......................................23

College Pathways and Accelerated Learning ...................................................................23

Promise Neighborhoods...................................................................................................24

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students...........................................................................24

21st Century Community Learning Centers.......................................................................25

Expanding Educational Options .......................................................................................25

Supporting Effective Charter Schools .........................................................................26

Promoting Public School Choice.................................................................................26

Magnet Schools Assistance Program...............................................................................26

Fund for the Improvement of Education............................................................................26

English Learner Education ...............................................................................................27

Title I State Agency Programs..........................................................................................27

Migrant Student Education .........................................................................................27

Neglected and Delinquent Children and Youth Education...........................................27

Homeless Children and Youth Education .........................................................................28
ii

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATAION, continued:

Page

Rural Education................................................................................................................28

Indian Student Education .................................................................................................29

Native Hawaiian Student Education .................................................................................30

Alaska Native Student Education .....................................................................................30

Comprehensive Centers...................................................................................................30

Impact Aid........................................................................................................................31

Training and Advisory Services (Title IV of the Civil Rights Act) .......................................32

Supplemental Education Grants (Compact of Free Association Amendments Act) ..........32

C. SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES...........................................33

Overview ...............................................................................................................................33

Special Education..................................................................................................................34

Grants to States ...............................................................................................................34

Preschool Grants .............................................................................................................34

Grants for Infants and Families ........................................................................................35

State Personnel Development..........................................................................................35

Technical Assistance and Dissemination..........................................................................35

Personnel Preparation......................................................................................................36

Parent Information Centers ..............................................................................................36

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials ................................................................36

Special Olympics Education Programs.............................................................................37

PROMISE: Promoting Readiness of Minors in SSI...........................................................37

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research....................................................................38

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants.....................................................................38

Client Assistance State Grants.........................................................................................38

Training............................................................................................................................39

Demonstration and Training .............................................................................................39

Independent Living...........................................................................................................39

Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) .......................................................40

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research .............................................40

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults........................................41

Assistive Technology........................................................................................................41

Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities ...............................................................42

American Printing House............................................................................................42

National Technical Institute for the Deaf .....................................................................42

Gallaudet University ...................................................................................................42

D. CAREER, TECHNICAL, AND ADULT EDUCATION........................................................43

Overview ...............................................................................................................................43

Career and Technical Education ......................................................................................43

Adult Education (Adult Basic and Literacy Education) ......................................................44
iii

Page

E. STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.............................................................................45

Overview ...............................................................................................................................45

Student Aid Summary Tables...........................................................................................47

Tax Benefits for Postsecondary Students.........................................................................49

Pell Grants .......................................................................................................................49

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.................................................................50

Work-Study ......................................................................................................................51

Perkins Loans ..................................................................................................................51

TEACH Grants/Presidential Teaching Fellows .................................................................52

Federal Family Education Loans and Direct Loans ..........................................................53

F. HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS................................................................................56

Overview ...............................................................................................................................56

Race to the Top—College Affordability and Completion .................................................. 16

Title III: Aid for Institutional Development .........................................................................58

Aid for Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs)......................................................................60

International Education and Foreign Language Studies (IEFLS) ......................................61

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)......................................61

First in the World..............................................................................................................61

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions ...............................62

Special Programs for Migrant Students ............................................................................62

Federal TRIO Programs ...................................................................................................63

Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP)........63

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN)...............................................64

Child Care Access Means Parents in School ...................................................................64

GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation ..............................................................................64

Academic Facilities ..........................................................................................................65

Howard University ............................................................................................................65

G. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES .......................................................................66

Overview ...............................................................................................................................66

Research, Development, and Dissemination....................................................................66

Statistics...........................................................................................................................67

Regional Educational Laboratories (REL).........................................................................67

Assessment .....................................................................................................................67

Research in Special Education.........................................................................................68

Statewide Data Systems ..................................................................................................68

Special Education Studies and Evaluations......................................................................69

III. PROGRAMS PROPOSED FOR CONSOLIDATION OR ELIMINATION..............................70
iv

Page

IV. DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................74

History and Background ........................................................................................................74

Salaries and Expenses Overview..........................................................................................75

Department Employment..................................................................................................77

Program Administration ....................................................................................................79

Student Aid Administration................................................................................................79

Office for Civil Rights.............................................................................................................80

Office of Inspector General....................................................................................................80

APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................81

Sequestration and Continuing Resolution at the Department of Education

Summary of Discretionary Funds

Mandatory Funding in the Department of Education

Summary of Mandatory Funds

Advance Appropriations for Department of Education

Total Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary Education in the United States

Detailed Budget Table by Program

For further information on the Department and its activities,

visit us at www.ed.gov, or call 1-800-USA-LEARN
I propose working with States to make high-quality preschool available to every child

in America...and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind.

President Barack Obama

February 12, 2013

I. SUMMARY OF THE 2014 BUDGET

During his first term in office, at the same time he worked with Congress to deliver almost 

$100 billion to help bring students, schools, postsecondary institutions, and States through the 

most severe economic crisis since the Great Depression, President Obama launched a new 

Federal-State partnership to drive the education reforms needed to prepare all Americans for 

the challenges of the 21st century.

While maintaining strong support for traditional State formula grant programs that are the 

foundation of Federal support for State and local efforts to ensure that all students meet collegeand career-ready standards, the President created meaningful incentives to leverage more 

effective use of these funds in support of innovative strategies to improve the Nation’s 

educational outcomes.

President Obama’s signature Race to the Top initiative embodied this new theory of action,

under which the Department of Education is partnering with States, incentivizing innovation, and 

helping to identify what works to close achievement gaps and accelerate learning. Race to the 

Top is now supporting comprehensive State-led reforms in 18 States and the District of 

Columbia, the development and implementation of high-quality early learning systems in 

14 States, and the creation of personalized learning systems with the potential for 

revolutionizing education in 55 school districts in 11 States and the District of Columbia.

In the absence of reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the 

President has given States the option to replace the obsolete, prescriptive requirements of No 

Child Left Behind with their own next generation education accountability systems built on a 

solid foundation of college- and career-ready standards and aligned assessments, differentiated 

accountability systems that target improvement efforts to our lowest-performing schools and 

schools with the largest achievement gaps, and improved systems for evaluating and supporting 

the effectiveness of teachers and school leaders. Thirty-four States and the District of Columbia 

already are implementing approved ESEA flexibility plans. Requests from an additional 

11 States, Puerto Rico, and the Bureau of Indian Education are currently under review.

One important lesson of the past decade, however, is just how difficult it is to close longstanding 

achievement gaps experienced by students from low-income families, students with disabilities, 

English Learners, and racial and ethnic minorities. We know from research that these gaps 

often start during the first years of life, even before children enter our education system, with 

children from low-income families starting kindergarten, on average, 12 to 14 months behind 

their peers in language development and pre-reading skills.

We also know that high-quality early learning programs can provide life-transforming 

opportunities for children, preparing them to take their place at the same starting line when they 

enter kindergarten. High-quality preschool can reduce placements in special education, lower 

grade retention, and raise graduation rates. Over the long-term, high-quality preschool reduces 

teen pregnancy rates, lowers crime, and improves employment outcomes. Not surprisingly, 
2

decades of research show that these multiple and compounding benefits can result in an 

average return of more than $7 for every $1 invested in high-quality preschool. With only 

3 children in 10 enrolled in high-quality preschool, the only surprise is that we have waited so 

long to make this critical, proven investment in the future of our children and our Nation. 

President Obama strongly believes we can wait no longer, which is why the centerpiece of his 

2014 budget for education is a $75 billion mandatory request, over 10 years, to support 

Preschool for All, a new Federal-State cost-sharing partnership aimed at making high-quality 

public preschool available to all 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income children while also 

providing incentives for States to serve additional children from middle-class families.

Preschool for All is essential to leveraging the maximum return on other new investments in 

education proposed for 2014, which include efforts to improve teaching and learning in science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); redesigning American high schools; helping 

school districts turn around their lowest-performing schools; making our schools safer and 

creating positive learning environments; improving higher education outcomes; and lifting up 

communities suffering from concentrated poverty. 

The Administration is requesting $71.2 billion in discretionary 

appropriations for the Department of Education in fiscal year 2014, an 

increase of $3.1 billion, or 4.5 percent, over the fiscal year 2012 level.

The 3-year table below displays the Department’s discretionary request without Pell Grants, the 

net discretionary request for the Pell Grant program, and the total discretionary request. The 

2013 numbers shown below were preliminary and do not reflect either the final 2013 

appropriation signed March 26 or the March 1, 2013 sequester required by the Budget Control 

Act of 2011.

Department of Education Discretionary Appropriations

(in billions of dollars)

Breakdown of Department 

discretionary appropriations 2012 2013

2014 

Request

Change

from 2012

Discretionary

(without Pell Grants)

$45.3 $45.4 $48.4 +$3.1

Pell Grants

(net discretionary request)

$22.8 $22.8 $22.8 0.0

Total $68.1 $68.4 $71.2 +$3.1

The overall 2014 request also includes additional mandatory funds for Pell Grants and new 

initiatives. Most of the Department’s programs receive discretionary funding that is appropriated 

annually for each program within the limits established by authorizing legislation and 

discretionary spending caps. Mandatory funding generally does not require annual 

appropriations because the authorizing legislation establishes a fixed funding level or a method 

for calculating automatic appropriations without further congressional action. The largest 

mandatory programs in the Department's budget are Federally subsidized loans for 

postsecondary students, the costs of which are estimated based on assumptions about interest 

rates, origination fees, repayments, defaults, and collections. Other education programs funded 

in whole or in part through mandatory appropriations include Pell Grants and Vocational 
3

Rehabilitation State Grants. The total request for Pell Grants, for example, is $29.9 billion, 

including $22.8 billion in discretionary funds and $7.0 billion in mandatory funds. 

From fiscal years 2010-2012, the Department of Education successfully streamlined and 

consolidated programs to save taxpayer dollars, improve efficiency, reduce administrative 

burdens, and better serve States, schools, students, and families. Congress eliminated or 

consolidated 49 ineffective, outdated, or duplicative programs for a total annual savings of more 

than $1.2 billion, in many instances following the Administration’s recommendations. To 

achieve the greatest efficiencies, Congress must also provide the proposed consolidated ESEA 

program structure that will enable the Department to drive the reforms that are needed to help 

improve student outcomes in the Nation’s schools. In addition, in 2010, the Administration 

replaced decades of costly subsidies to banks for guaranteed student loans with more efficient 

Direct Loans, a change that the Congressional Budget Office estimated would save taxpayers 

$68 billion over 10 years and which helped to increase the maximum Pell Grant from $4,731 in 

award year 2008-2009 to $5,645 in award year 2013-2014.

Note on the Presentation of the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request for Education

At the time the President’s fiscal year 2014 Budget was prepared for submission to the 

Congress, final action on the fiscal year 2013 appropriations act funding Department of 

Education programs had not yet been completed. Consequently, the 2014 request assumed 

that the final 2013 appropriations act would provide funding for Department of Education 

programs at the same levels as in fiscal year 2012. Supplementary information on fiscal year 

2013 funding is included in the appendix section of this document, but this information was not 

available when the 2014 budget was prepared.

The fiscal year 2013 funding level in effect at the time of budget preparation was the Continuing 

Resolution ending March 27, 2013, which included an across-the-board discretionary increase 

of 0.612 percent over the 2012 level. The Department’s budget documents include the acrossthe-board increase at the account level, but this amount was not distributed at the program 

level.

In addition, determination of final fiscal year 2013 funding levels for Department programs 

depends on the implementation of the March 1, 2013 sequester order required by the Budget 

Control Act of 2011 (BCA). Sequestration requires an across-the-board reduction of 5.0 percent 

for each Department program, project, and activity funded through discretionary appropriations 

in fiscal year 2013, as well as a 5.1 percent reduction for each mandatory program in the 

Department. The Pell Grant program, which is funded through a combination of discretionary 

and mandatory appropriations, is exempted from sequestration by the BCA.

Another reason that the Department’s 2014 budget documents do not reflect the final fiscal year 

2013 levels is that they are not based on the appropriations levels in the full-year Continuing 

Resolution signed into law on March 26, 2013, which included a separate across-the-board 

reduction of 0.2 percent to discretionary programs. The bottom line is that the final 2013 level is 

approximately 5.23 percent less than the 2012 level, but this final 2013 level is not reflected in 

the 2014 request.

Also note that uncertainty regarding estimated, post-sequester fiscal year 2013 allocations for 

Department formula grant programs prevented the Department from including State allocation 

tables in its fiscal year 2014 Congressional Budget Justifications. The Department will post 

these tables on the “Budget and Performance” page of its Web site once they are available.
4

MAJOR INITIATIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

The 2014 budget request for the Department of Education is focused on six priorities: (1) highquality early learning opportunities for all children, (2) improving teaching and learning in K-12 

education, (3) making our schools safer and creating positive learning environments, (4) careerreadiness for all, (5) improving affordability and quality in postsecondary education, and 

(6) supporting the Administration’s Ladders of Opportunity initiative for high-poverty 

communities.

High-Quality Early Learning Opportunities for All Children

The President’s 2014 request supports a robust early learning agenda aimed at ensuring that all 

children enter kindergarten ready to succeed in school and in life. Research demonstrates that 

high-quality early learning programs and services can improve young children’s health, socialemotional, and cognitive outcomes; enhance school readiness; and help close the school 

readiness gap that exists between children with high needs and their peers at the time they 

enter kindergarten. The centerpiece of the President’s early learning request is a historic new 

investment in preschool education that supports universal access to high-quality preschool for 

all 4-year olds from low- and moderate-income families and creates an incentive for States to 

serve additional middle-class children. The request also includes a proposal that would help 

build State capacity to provide high-quality preschool opportunities for all children, while 

maintaining support for other key investments in early learning, especially for young children 

with special needs. 

• $1.3 billion in 2014 and $75 billion over 10 years in mandatory funding for Preschool for All, 

a new Federal-State partnership that will support the implementation of high-quality 

preschool programs that are aligned with elementary and secondary education systems and 

help ensure that all children arrive in kindergarten ready to learn. The Federal Government 

would provide funding through a cost-sharing model with States to serve all children from 

low- and moderate-income families, create an incentive for States to expand access to highquality preschool for additional middle-class families, and promote access to full-day 

kindergarten and high-quality early learning programs for children under the age of four.

• $750 million for competitively awarded Preschool Development Grants to help build State 

capacity to implement high-quality preschool programs. Funds would be awarded to States 

with preschool systems at various stages of development and would support activities 

needed to ensure that every State has the high-quality system needed to implement the 

Preschool for All program.

• $462.7 million for the Grants for Infants and Families program under the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), an increase of $20 million to help States implement 

statewide systems of early intervention services for all eligible children with disabilities from 

birth through age 2 and their families.

• $372.6 million for IDEA Preschool Grants to help States provide a free appropriate public 

education in the least restrictive environment to all children with disabilities ages 3 through 5 

to help ensure that young children with disabilities succeed in school.
5

Improving Teaching and Learning in K-12 Education

The 2014 request also would make significant investments to help States, school districts, and 

schools meet key challenges such as putting a great teacher in every classroom and a great 

leader in every school; building local capacity to support successful school turnarounds; and 

improving teacher preparation and classroom instruction in science, technology, engineering, 

and mathematics (STEM). Key elements of the 2014 budget, which assumes reauthorization of 

the ESEA consistent with the Administration’s reauthorization plan, include the following:

• $3.0 billion for the new Excellent Instructional Teams program, which would provide both 

formula grants and competitive awards to help States and LEAs increase the effectiveness 

of teachers and principals:

− $2.5 billion for Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants to provide flexible, formulabased support for States and LEAs that commit to improving their teacher and principal 

evaluation systems and ensuring that low-income and minority students have equitable 

access to teachers and principals who are effective at raising student achievement. The 

request includes a 25 percent national activities set-aside totaling nearly $617 million 

that would allow the Department to build evidence on how best to recruit, prepare, and 

support effective teachers and school leaders and to invest in efforts to enhance the 

teaching and leadership professions.

− $400 million for the Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund, an increase of $100 million, to 

help States and LEAs improve the effectiveness of teachers and leaders in high-need 

LEAs and schools, in particular by creating the conditions to identify, recruit, prepare, 

support, retain, and advance effective and highly effective teachers, principals, and 

school leadership teams in those schools.

− $98 million for a redesigned School Leadership Program (SLP) that would more than 

triple the Federal investment in training for principals. The 2014 competition would focus

on evidence-based professional development for current school leaders aimed at 

strengthening essential leadership skills—such as evaluating and providing feedback to 

teachers, analyzing student data, developing school leadership teams, and creating a 

positive school climate—and deepening school leaders’ understanding of college- and 

career-ready standards and effective instruction aligned to those standards.

• $190 million in mandatory funding for a new Presidential Teaching Fellows program that 

would provide formula grants to States to fund scholarships of up to $10,000 for students 

attending high-performing teacher preparation programs. The new program would limit 

eligibility to teacher preparation programs with a record of success, and to students who are 

further advanced in their program of study, to help ensure that scholarship recipients will be 

more likely to not only enter and remain in the teaching profession but also to become 

effective teachers.

• $5 billion in one-time mandatory funds for the RESPECT Project, which would help States 

and districts reshape the teaching profession through grants to States and consortia of 

districts with the most ambitious plans and policies for reforming the teaching profession. 

Funds would be used to reform teacher and principal preparation programs; strengthen 

teacher and principal evaluation and professional development systems; redesign educator 

career ladders and compensation systems to attract and retain top talent; and create 
6

conditions in schools that support effective teaching, including greater autonomy, shared 

leadership and responsibility for student outcomes, and time for collaboration.

• $1.3 billion for 21st Century Community Learning Centers, an increase of $100 million to 

support competitive grants to States, LEAs, non-profit organizations, or local governmental 

entities for projects that provide the additional time, support, and enrichment activities 

needed to improve student achievement, including projects that support expanding learning

time by significantly increasing the number of hours in a regular school schedule and by 

comprehensively redesigning the school schedule for all students in a school.

• $265 million in new funding for a comprehensive STEM Innovation proposal to improve the

delivery and impact of Federal investments in science and technology, engineering and 

mathematics (STEM) education. Scientists and engineers are innovators—developing new 

industries and opportunities that create jobs and spur economic growth. Our Nation 

depends on this innovation economy, and we must make sure that America’s capacity to 

build and create is never limited by a shortage of talent in the STEM fields. The 

Administration is proposing a comprehensive reorganization of Federal STEM education 

programs to support a cohesive national STEM education strategy. The goal is to increase

the impact of Federal investments in high priority areas, including K-12 instruction and 

informal education activities. This proposal, which is part of a Government-wide realignment 

that would reorganize or restructure 114 programs across 13 agencies, will also help 

support the President’s goal of producing 100,000 effective STEM teachers over the next 

decade. Key activities include:

− $150 million for STEM Innovation Networks involving consortia of school districts, 

institutions of higher education, research institutions, museums, community partners, 

and business and industry that would develop comprehensive plans for identifying, 

developing, testing, and scaling up evidence-based practices to provide rich STEM 

learning opportunities in participating LEAs and schools. These networks will employ a 

wide range of strategies, depending on local needs, in areas such as the recruitment, 

preparation, and professional development of effective STEM educators; the 

development and testing of teaching and learning models that enable students to 

successfully meet STEM-focused college- and career-ready standards; and increasing 

student engagement in STEM subjects. Networks will also include the development of 

STEM “platform schools” that would serve as testing grounds for innovations in STEM 

curricula and instruction for dissemination both inside and outside funded networks. 

− $80 million for STEM Teacher Pathways, which would support the President’s goal of 

developing 100,000 new effective STEM teachers through competitive grants for 

recruiting, training, and placing talented recent college graduates and mid-career 

professionals in the STEM fields in high-need schools.

− $35 million to establish a new STEM Master Teacher Corps, with teachers who would be 

selected based on their expertise, leadership, and service in improving teaching and 

learning in STEM subjects. Corps members would make a multi-year commitment to 

build a community of teaching practice where they live, help students excel in math and 

science while taking on leadership and mentorship roles in their schools and

communities and the broader STEM field, and receive annual stipends on top of their 

base salaries for their service in the Corps.
7

• $659 million for School Turnaround Grants (STG), including an increase of $125 million to 

support and sustain local efforts to turn around low-performing schools. The increase would 

be used for competitive awards to help school districts build their capacity to provide 

comprehensive supports for persistently lowest-achieving schools or priority schools that are 

implementing STG intervention models or interventions aligned with the turnaround 

principles of ESEA flexibility, and to sustain progress in schools that have successfully 

completed a 3-year STG project. The Department could use up to $25 million of these 

funds to build district capacity by expanding the School Turnaround AmeriCorps initiative, a 

partnership with the Corporation for National and Community Service that places 

AmeriCorps members in low-performing schools to support their school turnaround efforts.

• $215 million for Investing in Innovation (i3), an increase of $66 million, to expand support for 

using an evidence-based approach to test new ideas, validate what works, and scale up the 

most effective approaches in high-need areas, including identifying and supporting effective 

teachers and leaders, improving low-performing schools, and encouraging parent 

engagement. The request would provide up to $64 million for the Advanced Research 

Projects Agency for Education (ARPA-ED), an initiative modeled on similar entities at the 

Departments of Defense and Energy that would aggressively pursue technological 

breakthroughs with the potential to dramatically improve the effectiveness and productivity 

of teaching and learning.

• $85 million for Statewide longitudinal data systems (SLDS), an increase of $47 million, to 

expand the ways that States are currently using data to support broader education reforms,

including kindergarten readiness, secondary and postsecondary transitions, teacher 

evaluation, and linking labor market outcomes to educational inputs. The request would 

support the development of P-20 reports and tools to inform policy-making at the State and 

local levels, as well as the development of in-house analytic capacity for States and school 

districts.

Making Our Schools Safer and Creating Positive Learning Environments

In January of 2013, President Obama released his plan to reduce gun violence, make schools 

safer, and increase access to mental health services. The 2014 request includes new 

investments in support of that plan’s common-sense proposals. These investments, which 

would be coordinated with related proposals at the Department of Justice and the Department of 

Health and Human Services, are intended not only to make schools safer by helping to ensure 

they are prepared to respond to emergencies, but also to create safer and more nurturing 

school climates that help prevent school violence. Key proposals include the following:

• $50 million for School Climate Transformation Grants to help create positive school climates 

that support effective education for all students. Funds would support the use of multi-tiered 

decision-making frameworks, which research shows can be effective in reducing problem 

behaviors, decreasing bullying and peer victimization, improving organizational health and 

perceptions of school as a safe setting, and increasing academic performance in reading 

and math.

• $30 million for improved emergency management planning, providing one-time grants to 

SEAs to help their LEAs develop, implement, and improve emergency management plans

designed to enable districts and schools to prepare for, prevent and mitigate, respond to, 
8

and recover from emergencies and crisis events. These grants will build on the model 

emergency management plans being developed by the Departments of Education, Justice, 

Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security.

• $25 million for Project Prevent grants to help LEAs in communities with pervasive violence 

break the cycle of violence. Research shows that both direct and indirect exposure to 

community violence can affect children’s mental health and development. Funds would 

support mental health services to students suffering from trauma or anxiety (including 

PTSD), conflict resolution programs, and other school-based strategies to prevent future 

violence.

• $5 million for Project SERV (School Emergency Response to Violence) to ensure that the 

Department has sufficient reserve funding to award grants to help restore the learning 

environment following a natural disaster or violent incident at or near a school or institution 

of higher education.

Career-Readiness for All

President Obama has set the ambitious goals that all adult Americans commit to at least one 

year of higher education or career training and that America once again lead the world in 

college graduates by 2020. To support these goals, the 2014 request provides essential 

support for initiatives that link education to the career training and skills development needed for 

the United States to out-innovate and out-compete the rest of the world. 

• $1.1 billion for a reauthorized Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education (CTE) 

program, which would strengthen alignment among secondary and postsecondary CTE 

programs and business and industry; create a better accountability system for improving 

academic outcomes, technical skills, and employability outcomes; and provide i3-type 

competitive funding to develop, validate, and scale up effective practices, promoting

innovation and reform in CTE.

• $300 million for a new High School Redesign program, which would promote a redesign of 

the high school experience by funding competitive grants to districts partnering with 

employers (including business, industry, non-profits, and community-based organizations) 

and postsecondary institutions. Grantees would redesign high schools in innovative ways to 

prepare students for college and career success so that all students graduate from high 

school with (1) college credit, earned through dual enrollment, Advanced Placement 

courses, or other postsecondary learning opportunities; and (2) career-related experiences 

or competencies, obtained through organized internships and mentorships, structured workbased learning, and other related experiences.

• $42 million for a demonstration and evaluation of Dual Enrollment programs that would 

make grants to establish or expand dual enrollment programs aligned with career pathways 

and local workforce needs that offer high school and adult students the opportunity to earn 

college credits while enrolled in a high school or GED program. Research has shown that 

participation in dual-enrollment programs is linked to increased high school graduation, 

higher rates of college enrollment and persistence, and higher college credit accrual rates.
9

• $4 billion in mandatory funds, beginning in fiscal year 2015, for a Community College to 

Career Fund that would support community college-based training programs and other 

activities that help prepare workers for jobs in high-growth and high-demand sectors. For 

example, funds could be used to (1) identify pressing workforce needs and develop 

solutions such as standardizing industry certifications, development of new training 

technologies, and competency-based assessments that can give credit for prior learning and 

accelerate time to credential; (2) expand work-based training and other “earn and learn” 

opportunities that allow students to earn credit while gaining relevant employment 

experience in a high-wage, high-skill field; and (3) promote the availability of and access to 

data on student outcomes, including employment and earnings, by program of study.

Affordability and Quality in Postsecondary Education

President Obama’s elementary and secondary education reforms share the overall goal of 

ensuring that all students leave high school college- and career-ready, a key requirement for 

reaching the President’s goal that America will once again have the highest proportion of 

college graduates in the world by 2020. A highly educated workforce is essential for continued 

American competitiveness in the global economy. However, this growing need for higher 

education comes at the same time that paying for college is a challenge for many American 

families. President Obama delivered significant increases in the postsecondary financial 

assistance available to students and families over the past 4 years, but student aid cannot keep 

pace with rising college costs indefinitely. To address these concerns, the President’s fiscal 

year 2014 request proposes comprehensive reforms to increase affordability and quality in 

higher education, including the following:

• $1 billion for a new Race to the Top–College Affordability and Completion competition that 

would drive change in State higher education policies and practices in order to improve 

college access, affordability, completion, and quality. This proposal would create a strong 

incentive for States to implement reforms such as maintaining fiscal support for higher 

education while modernizing funding policies to constrain costs and improve outcomes, 

removing barriers preventing the creation of innovative methods of student learning and new 

degree pathways, empowering consumer choice through increased transparency, and 

smoothing transitions for students from high school into college and between colleges. 

• $260 million for a First in the World fund, under the Fund for the Improvement of 

Postsecondary Education, that would make competitive awards to encourage innovation in 

higher education to tackle and improve college completion rates, increase the productivity of 

higher education, build evidence of what works, and scale up proven strategies. Key 

activities would include an i3-type program focused on improving college completion; 

creating quality validation systems run by independent parties that would identify 

appropriate competencies, assessments, and curricula for high-need fields; and Pay for 

Success rewards to innovative providers that successfully produce free degrees tied to 

these validation systems.
10

• Linking student loan interest rates to market rates. The scheduled July 1, 2013, increase in 

Subsidized Stafford Loan interest rates from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent would take place at a 

time when the economy is still recovering and market rates remain low. The 2014 request 

proposes to change the structure of interest rates on Federal student and parent loans to 

reflect prevailing market interest rates at the time loans are made, with rates remaining fixed 

for the life of the loans. The request also would expand repayment options to ensure that 

loan repayments for all student borrowers do not exceed 10 percent of a borrower’s 

discretionary income and that any remaining balances would be forgiven after 20 years of 

repayments.

• Expanding and reforming the Campus-Based Aid programs—Supplemental Educational 

Opportunity Grants, Federal Work-Study, and Perkins Loans—to provide $10 billion in 

student financial aid for use at those colleges that demonstrate a commitment to providing 

their students a high-quality education at a reasonable price and provide good value. These 

reforms would address next year’s expiration of the Perkins Loans program and include a 

$150 million increase for Work-Study to help double the number of participants over 5 years 

while encouraging institutions to place students in jobs that complement and reinforce 

students’ educational programs or future career goals.

Building Ladders of Opportunity

Too many communities in America—urban, rural, and, increasingly, suburban—suffer from the 

negative effects of concentrated poverty, including developmental delays among young 

children, poor educational outcomes, high rates of crime and incarceration, health problems, 

and low employment. A key goal for President Obama’s second term in office is developing, 

testing, and implementing comprehensive strategies for addressing the many challenges faced 

by communities with concentrated poverty. One new strategy is the designation of Promise 

Zones, high-poverty communities where Federal agencies will partner with local leaders to 

break down barriers and coordinate the resources and expertise they need to create jobs, 

leverage private investment, increase economic activity, reduce violence, and improve 

educational opportunities. This interagency effort will explore opportunities to make better use 

of all available resources—Federal, State, and local—to address the negative effects of 

concentrated poverty. The President’s budget would support Promise Zones through significant 

requests in his signature place-based programs, including $300 million for the Department of 

Education’s Promise Neighborhoods, a $400 million request for the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development’s Choice Neighborhoods program, and $35 million for the Department of 

Justice’s Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Grants program, as well as tax incentives to 

promote investment and economic growth.

• $300 million for Promise Neighborhoods, an increase of $240 million, to dramatically 

increase the number of and level of support for high-need communities that develop plans 

combining effective, cradle-to-career services for children and families with comprehensive 

reforms centered on high-quality schools.

• $75 billion in mandatory funding over 10 years for Preschool for All, a Federal-State costsharing partnership that would support implementation of high-quality preschool programs 

that are aligned with elementary and secondary education systems and offer universal 

access to high-quality preschool for children from low- and moderate-income families.
11

• $750 million for Preschool Development Grants, a new program specifically targeted to 

building State and local capacity to develop or expand high-quality preschool programs, with 

the goal of preparing States and local communities for participation in Preschool for All. 

This program would play a critical role in giving States and communities the resources they 

need to improve school readiness in high-poverty communities.
12

II. THE 2014 EDUCATION BUDGET BY PROGRAM AREA

A. HIGH-QUALITY EARLY LEARNING

Overview

President Obama’s 2014 budget request for education reflects a new determination to decisively 

move America’s education system in the direction of equity and excellence. Three decades of 

Federal, State, and local efforts to significantly improve the performance of our schools and 

students have produced mostly modest gains, at a time when we need to rapidly accelerate the 

pace of learning and achievement in order to maintain our economic competitiveness and 

ensure that prosperity is widely shared in our increasingly diverse society.

The Federal role in education has long been dedicated to closing the achievement gaps 

experienced by students from low-income families, students with disabilities, English Learners, 

and racial and ethnic minorities. While we have seen some progress in recent years, these 

gaps remain unacceptably wide, diminishing the life prospects for far too many of our fellow 

citizens, often denying them their full share of the American dream, and at the same time 

slowing the growth and progress of our Nation.

We know from research that these achievement gaps often begin well before most children start 

school: children from low-income families start kindergarten, on average, 12 to 14 months 

behind their peers in language development and pre-reading skills.

Similar research findings provide strong justification for Federal investment in high-quality 

preschool programs, demonstrating that children who attend high-quality preschool are better 

prepared for school, less likely to be retained in grade, score higher on reading and math 

assessments in the elementary grades, and more likely to graduate from high school than 

children who do not attend such programs. Moreover, these benefits are particularly strong for 

children from low-income families. 

And the educational gains of high-quality preschool lead to solid economic benefits. A review of 

various long-term studies show that for every $1 invested in high-quality preschool, taxpayers 

saved an average of more than $7 in future costs due to reduction in remedial education costs, 

increased labor productivity, and reduced crime. 

Many States have taken note of these facts and have taken the lead in translating this research 

into action. As of 2013, 39 States and the District of Columbia have at least one publicly-funded 

State preschool program in place. Nevertheless, roughly one third of 4-year-olds from lowincome families are not enrolled in any preschool program, and the high costs of private 

preschool and lack of public programs also narrow options for middle class families. Moreover, 

the quality of existing programs varies widely from State to State, community to community, and 

provider to provider. Fewer than 3 in 10 4-year-olds are enrolled in high-quality programs.

For all of these reasons, President Obama began his second term of office by calling on 

Congress to expand access to high-quality preschool to every child in America, beginning with a 

Federal-State cost-sharing partnership that would guarantee universal access to high-quality 

preschool for every four-year-old from low- and moderate-income families and create incentives 

for States to provide access to additional children from middle class families. The President’s 
13

2014 budget request includes two proposals to make this vision a reality: a mandatory 

investment of $75 billion over 10 years in a new Preschool for All program and a $750 million 

discretionary investment in Preschool Development Grants.

Preschool for All

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $1,300.0

The 2014 request includes $1.3 billion to launch a 10-year, $75 billion mandatory investment in 

the Preschool for All program, which would support State efforts to provide access to highquality preschool for all 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income families. This 

groundbreaking proposal recognizes that high-quality preschool can provide the foundation for 

children’s success in school and eliminate the school readiness gap between children from lowand higher-income families. The Preschool for All program would award Federal funds as an 

incentive for States to provide universal access to high-quality preschool, which includes the 

following elements: (1) high staff qualifications, including a bachelor of arts degree for teachers; 

(2) professional development for teachers and staff; (3) low staff-child ratios and small class 

sizes; (4) a full-day program; (5) developmentally appropriate, evidence-based curricula and 

learning environments that are aligned with State early learning standards; (6) employee 

salaries that are comparable to K-12 teaching staff; (7) on-going program evaluation to ensure 

continuous improvement; and (8) on-site comprehensive services for children. Participating 

States would be required to contribute non-Federal matching funds, with a reduced match in 

exchange for serving additional children from middle class families if States reach benchmarks 

related to the percentage of children from low- and moderate-income families served.

Allocations to States would be based on States’ relative share of 4-year-olds from families at or 

below 200 percent of the Federal poverty level. States that already provide universal highquality preschool for 4-year-old children from families up to 200 percent of the Federal poverty 

level would be able to use program funds to provide high-quality, full-day kindergarten for 

children from low- and moderate-income families or, if this is already provided, to provide highquality preschool programs for 3-year-olds from families at or below 200 percent of the Federal 

poverty level. The Federal Government would assume a significant share of the program costs 

in the first years of the program with States gradually assuming more responsibility over time.

Preschool Development Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $750.0

The request includes $750 million in discretionary funding for Preschool Development Grants to 

pave the way for the successful implementation of Preschool for All by providing competitive 

grants to the States most willing to commit to creating or expanding a high-quality preschool 

system that can serve all of their 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income families. The 

grants would address fundamental needs like facility creation and workforce development, as 

well as quality improvement efforts and the scale-up of proven preschool models. Eligible 

applicants would include (1) low-capacity States (those with small State-funded preschool 
14

programs and those without any State-funded preschool programs) seeking to develop the 

critical physical and program quality infrastructure needed to enable them to partner with the 

Federal Government in the Preschool for All program and (2) States with more robust Statefunded preschool systems that commit to improving the quality of existing programs and 

supporting the expansion of high-quality local programs that could serve as models for the 

Preschool for All initiative.
15

B. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

Overview

The 2014 request for elementary and secondary education programs supports the 

Administration’s comprehensive plan for reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act (ESEA), as outlined in A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act, released in March 2010 and available on the Department of 

Education website at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf. 

The reauthorization plan recognizes that addressing stubborn achievement gaps and helping all 

children to excel requires more than just tinkering around the edges; rather, we need to rethink 

the Federal role to support innovation while at the same time leveraging more effective uses of 

existing resources to improve teaching and learning. The Blueprint creates incentives for 

States, school districts, and schools to make the changes needed to improve educational 

outcomes so that by 2020 America once again leads the world in college completion. 

The $14.5 billion request for the College- and Career-Ready Students program, which would 

replace Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), would remain the foundation of the 

reauthorized ESEA under the Administration’s reauthorization plan, continuing to help LEAs 

ensure that some 23 million students in high-poverty schools meet challenging State academic 

standards. The reauthorized Title I would restructure State accountability systems to target 

rigorous interventions on a State’s lowest-performing schools, with support from the $659 million 

School Turnaround Grants (STG) program, which includes $125 million for a new competition 

aimed at building local capacity to intervene effectively in our lowest-performing schools and 

sustaining effective turnarounds following the completion of STG-funded interventions.

A reauthorized Race to the Top would continue to provide tools and incentives for wide-ranging 

State- and locally directed innovation and reform, with the $1 billion 2014 request for Race to 

the Top dedicated to a new College Affordability and Completion competition. A $215 million 

request for Investing in Innovation (i3) would maintain strong support for developing, validating, 

and scaling effective education practices and strategies, while also launching a new Advanced 

Research Projects Agency-Education (ARPA-ED) that would have the flexibility to pursue ideas 

and technologies with the potential to revolutionize the productivity and effectiveness of 

education systems.

Other key initiatives in the 2014 request for elementary and secondary education include 

$415 million for STEM Innovation, a comprehensive, networked strategy for improving K-12 

STEM instruction through a combination of recruiting and training effective STEM teachers, 

strengthening instructional practices, and increasing student engagement in STEM subjects; 

$300 million for a new High School Redesign program that would provide students with 

challenging and relevant academic and career-related learning experiences that prepare them 

to transition to postsecondary education and careers; $300 million to significantly expand the 

Promise Neighborhoods program as part of the Administration’s Ladders of Opportunity 

initiative; and $280 million for a Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students program that responds 

to the President’s common-sense proposals to protect our children from gun violence and make 

our schools safer.
16

Race to the Top

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $549.0 $549.0 $1,000.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

First authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, this signature 

Administration reform program has provided incentives for comprehensive State and local 

reforms and innovations designed to close achievement gaps and produce significant 

improvements in student achievement, develop and implement high-quality early learning 

systems, and promote district-led personalized learning strategies and technologies. Race to 

the Top competitions also have encouraged the broad identification, dissemination, adoption, 

and use of effective policies and practices and the cessation of ineffective ones.

 

In 2014, the Department is requesting $1 billion for a new Race to the Top—College 

Affordability and Completion competition aimed at catalyzing State efforts to pursue systemic 

higher education reforms and promote innovations to improve college affordability, access, 

completion, and quality; achieve better student outcomes; and increase institutional capacity to 

graduate more students with high-quality credentials. The request would allow the Department 

make awards to up to 10 States that can demonstrate a commitment to reforms in areas such 

as (1) sustaining fiscal support for higher education while modernizing funding policies to 

constrain costs and improve outcomes, (2) removing barriers preventing the creation of 

innovative methods of student learning and new degree pathways, (3) empowering consumer 

choice through increased transparency, and (4) smoothing transitions into college and between 

institutions of higher education.

Investing in Innovation Fund (i3)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ......................................... $149.4 $149.4 $215.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request would support grants under a new ESEA authority based on the existing i3 

program, which helps to improve educational outcomes for students by developing, validating, 

and scaling up effective practices. The program’s emphasis on supporting projects with either 

evidence of effectiveness or a strong research-based framework increases the likelihood that 

funded projects succeed and that we learn more about what works. In addition, the program 

garners significant non-Federal investment to support educational innovation; to date, private 

institutions have made commitments of nearly $150 million to assist in the implementation of 

grantee projects. The i3 program continues to see significant demand across the Nation, with 

the 2012 competition generating over 700 applications for projects to expand or scale up proven 

practices and pre-applications for projects to develop and evaluate promising practices. The 

funding requested for 2014 would allow the Department to continue to build on the success of 

the program in fostering educational innovation, while growing an evidence base in areas of 

high need and generating private-sector investment to complement the Federal investment.
17

In addition, the request would support the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Education 

(ARPA-ED), a new entity modeled after similar agencies in the Department of Defense and 

Department of Energy that would pursue breakthrough developments in educational technology 

and tools.

STEM Innovation

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

STEM Innovation Networks

Innovation Networks............................... — — $150.0

Teacher Pathways ................................. — — 80.0

Master Teacher Corps............................ — — 35.0

Subtotal............................................ — — 265.0

Effective Teaching and Learning: STEM ...... — — 149.7

Mathematics and Science Partnerships ....... $149.7 $149.7 — 

Total ................................................. 149.7 149.7 414.7

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The STEM Innovation initiative, which is part of a Government-wide realignment that would 

consolidate or restructure 114 programs across 13 agencies, would help improve K-12 STEM

instruction and support the President’s goal of generating 100,000 effective STEM teachers 

over the next decade.

The proposed STEM Innovation Networks program would provide competitive awards to LEAs 

in partnership with institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, other public 

agencies, and businesses to transform STEM teaching and learning by developing and 

validating evidenced-based practices in a set of “platform schools” and implementing them 

across broader, regional networks of participating schools following validation of effectiveness. 

Projects would include a wide range of activities—dependent on local needs and available 

regional and Federal resources—in areas such as the recruitment, preparation, placement, and 

professional development of effective STEM educators; the development and testing of teaching 

and learning models that enable students to successfully meet STEM-focused college- and 

career-ready standards; providing meaningful and engaging student learning opportunities; and 

supporting broad adoption of effective STEM innovations and instructional technologies. A key 

goal of the networks would be to leverage regional STEM assets—such as research facilities, 

local nonprofits, regional industry partners, human capital assets from STEM professional 

organizations and IHEs, and the rich array of Federal STEM resources and assets, including 

information and opportunities generated by the science mission agencies—to promote effective 

teaching and learning of STEM subjects

The STEM Teacher Pathways proposal would lay the groundwork for producing 100,000 new 

effective and highly effective STEM teachers over the next 10 years, providing competitive 

grants to create or expand high-quality pathways to teacher certification and other innovative 

approaches for recruiting, training, and placing talented recent college graduates and midcareer professionals in the STEM fields in high-need schools.
18

The request also includes $35 million to establish the first cohort of the STEM Master Teacher 

Corps, which would identify, recognize, and reward some of the Nation’s most talented STEM 

teachers, enlisting them in a national network to assist in building local and regional 

communities of practice that would help transform STEM teaching and learning while raising the 

profile of the STEM teaching profession.

Finally, the Administration’s ESEA reauthorization proposal would create an Effective Teaching 

and Learning: STEM program that would build on the experience of the current Mathematics 

and Science Partnerships program, making awards to SEAs, alone or in partnership with other

entities, to implement a comprehensive strategy for the provision of high-quality STEM 

instruction and support to students. States would be permitted to reserve up to 20 percent of 

grant funds for State-level activities to support the development and implementation of a 

coherent approach to providing high-quality, evidence-based STEM instruction in high-need 

schools.

College- and Career-Ready Students

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $14,516.5 $14,516.5 $14,516.5

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request supports the Administration’s reauthorization plan for Title I, Part A of the ESEA 

(Title I Grants to LEAs under current law), which would include changes in the areas of 

standards and assessments, accountability and support for schools and LEAs, and teacher and 

leader effectiveness. States would adopt statewide standards that build toward college- and 

career-readiness (CCR) and implement high-quality assessments that are aligned with these 

CCR standards and capable of measuring individual student growth toward CCR. These new 

standards and assessments would give families and communities the information they need to 

determine whether their students are on track to college- and career-readiness and to evaluate 

their schools' effectiveness.

The reauthorization proposal would replace the adequate yearly progress (AYP) measure in 

current law, which is based primarily on a single, static snapshot of student proficiency on 

academic assessments, with a broader, more accurate measure of school performance that 

looks at student achievement, student growth, and school progress. Performance targets would 

be aligned with the objective of ensuring that by 2020 all students are graduating or on track to 

graduate from high school ready for college and a career. States would differentiate school 

improvement assistance across schools and, in a shift from current law, local officials would 

have flexibility to determine the appropriate improvement and support strategies for most 

schools.

A new Title I Rewards authority would create incentives, including financial rewards for staff and 

students and additional flexibility for LEAs and schools in the use of ESEA funds, for schools 

that reach performance targets, significantly increase student performance for all students, 

close achievement gaps, or, at the district and State levels, turn around the lowest-performing 

schools.
19

States and LEAs would be required to implement one of four rigorous school turnaround models 

in the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools in each State as well as research-based, locally

determined strategies in schools that fall between the fifth and tenth percentiles in performance. 

In other schools that are not closing significant, persistent achievement gaps, LEAs would be 

required to implement data-driven interventions—which could include expanded learning time, 

supplemental educational services, or other strategies—to support those students who are 

farthest behind and help close those achievement gaps.

In addition, both States and LEAs would be required to develop meaningful plans to achieve the 

equitable distribution of effective teachers and leaders, based on the definitions of effectiveness 

that each State would be required to develop under the Administration’s reauthorization 

proposal. LEAs would use up to 20 percent of their Title I, Part A allocations to implement 

effective school improvement strategies and carry out strategies designed to ensure the 

equitable distribution of effective teachers and school leaders.

Title I funds would continue to be awarded to LEAs through the existing Basic Grants, 

Concentration Grants, Targeted Grants, and Education Finance Incentive Grants formulas. The 

ESEA proposal would strengthen Title I “comparability” requirements to ensure that the highpoverty schools in each LEA receive State and local funding for both personnel and nonpersonnel expenditures comparable to those received by the LEA’s low-poverty schools. States 

would be required to measure and report on resource disparities and to develop a plan to 

reduce those disparities.

The Administration’s reauthorization proposal also would permit the Department to reserve up to 

0.5 percent of Title I, Part A formula grant funds under a broad ESEA evaluation authority aimed 

at supporting the comprehensive evaluation of the implementation, outcomes, impact, and costeffectiveness of ESEA programs, including the Title I, Part A College- and Career-Ready 

Students program. The request expands upon this proposal by including appropriations 

language in the General Provisions that authorizes the Department to reserve up to 0.5 percent 

in a number of its accounts to allow for additional, more flexible resources to evaluate programs 

agency-wide.

School Turnaround Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $533.6 $533.6 $658.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The reauthorized School Turnaround Grants program (School Improvement Grants under 

current law) would play a critical role in the new Title I statewide accountability systems that 

would be created under the Administration’s ESEA reauthorization plan by providing significant 

resources for LEAs to implement rigorous school intervention models in their lowest-performing 

schools. While States and LEAs would have new flexibility under the reauthorized ESEA to 

develop their own improvement strategies and interventions for most schools, they would be 

required to implement specific, meaningful intervention models in their very lowest-performing 

schools.
20

States would receive formula grants and would subgrant most funds to LEAs and their partners

to implement fully and effectively the Turnaround model, the Restart model, School Closure, or 

the Transformation model in identified schools (the same four models currently required for 

persistently lowest-achieving schools under the School Improvement Grants program). LEAs 

would receive 3-year awards totaling up to $6 million for each identified school and would be 

eligible for 2 additional years of funding to support a school's ongoing improvement if the school 

is showing progress. With the exception of the closure model, each of these models allows 

flexibility for locally designed plans that recognize and meet a broad range of student needs and 

local circumstances.

States would be permitted to reserve a portion of their allocations to build their capacity to 

improve low-performing schools, including by developing and implementing effective school 

quality review teams to assist schools in identifying school needs and in supporting school 

improvement, and by reviewing and ensuring the effectiveness of external partners. The 

Department also would be authorized to reserve funds for national activities designed to 

enhance State, district, and nonprofit capacity to turn around low-performing LEAs and schools. 

The proposed $125 million increase for School Turnaround Grants would fund a new 

competitive grant program that would strengthen formula grant implementation by building 

district-level capacity to support school turnaround efforts and to sustain improvements in 

schools that have used funds to successfully implement a school intervention model. Up to 

$25 million of these funds also could be used to expand the School Turnaround AmeriCorps, an 

initiative launched in partnership with the Corporation for National and Community Service in 

2013 that uses AmeriCorps volunteers to help build local capacity to implement effective school 

turnarounds.

High School Redesign

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $300.0

The proposed High School Redesign program would promote the whole school transformation 

of the high school experience in order to provide students with challenging and relevant 

academic and career-related learning experiences that prepare them to transition to 

postsecondary education and careers. Funds would support competitive grants to LEAs in 

partnership with institutions of higher education and employers—including business and 

industry as well as non-profit and community-based organizations—for projects that (1) leverage 

existing Federal, State, and local resources to engage students in personalized learning 

opportunities tied to real world experience (such as career-based learning); (2) provide students 

with rigorous, challenging academic content aligned with college-level expectations, including 

programs that offer students access to college-level coursework and opportunities to gain 

postsecondary credit while still in high school; (3) help students learn not only academic content 

but also pertinent career-related competencies and employability and technical skills; and 

(4) offer meaningful college and career exploration opportunities and high-quality advisory 

services. The new program would give priority to partnerships in areas with limited access to 

quality career and college opportunities, such as high-poverty or rural LEAs.
21

Assessing Achievement

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

State Grants................................................. $380.0 $380.0 $380.0

Enhanced Assessment Instruments............. 9.2 9.2 9.2

Total ................................................. 389.2 389.2 389.2

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request for a reauthorized Assessing Achievement (State Assessments under current law) 

program would help States pay the costs, including technology-related costs, of developing and 

implementing assessments aligned with college- and career-ready (CCR) standards. Formula 

and competitive funds would support continued implementation of the assessments currently 

required by the ESEA, as well as the transition to CCR-based standards and assessments that 

would capture a fuller picture of what students know and are able to do. Grantees also could 

use funds to develop and implement CCR standards and assessments in other subjects, such 

as science and history, needed to ensure that all students receive a well-rounded education, as 

well as to acquire, and to train teachers and other staff to use, the educational technology 

needed to implement new, computer-based assessments. 

Excellent Instructional Teams

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Effective Teachers and Leaders 

State Grants........................................... — — $2,466.6

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ...... $2,466.6 $2,466.6 —

Transition to Teaching.................................. 26.1 26.1 —

Teacher Quality Partnership......................... 42.8 42.8 —

School Leadership ....................................... 29.1 29.1 98.0

Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund .......... — — 400.0

Teacher Incentive Fund ............................... 299.4 299.4 — 

Total ................................................. 2,864.0 2,864.0 2,964.6

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The proposed Excellent Instructional Teams initiative would have two components: the 

Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants program and the Teacher and Leader Innovation 

Fund.

Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants would provide formula grants to States and 

districts to support the Administration’s ESEA reauthorization proposal, which would require 

States to develop definitions of “effective” and “highly effective” teachers and principals that
22

would be used in the development of State and local teacher and principal evaluation systems. 

States and LEAs would have flexibility in how they use formula grant funds, but would be 

accountable for improving their teacher and principal evaluation systems and for ensuring that 

low-income and minority students have equitable access to teachers and principals who are 

effective at raising student achievement. In addition, the Department would reserve up to 

25 percent of the appropriation to recruit, train, and support effective teachers and school 

leaders; fund competitive grants to States and LEAs to improve educator evaluation and 

licensure systems and develop rigorous accountability systems for educator preparation 

programs; and to invest in other efforts to enhance the teaching and leadership professions. 

The request also would more than triple funding for the School Leadership program, allowing 

the Department to dramatically expand efforts to train highly effective leaders for high-need 

schools and districts.

The proposed Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund would make competitive awards to States 

and LEAs willing to implement bold approaches to improving the effectiveness of the education 

workforce in high-need schools and districts by creating the conditions needed to identify, 

reward, retain, and advance effective teachers, teacher leaders, principals, and school 

leadership teams in those schools, and enabling schools to build the strongest teams possible.

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy.... — — $186.9

Ready-To-Learn Television.......................... $27.2 $27.2 —

Striving Readers .......................................... 159.7 159.7 —

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy program, proposed as part of the 

Administration’s ESEA reauthorization plan, would provide competitive grants to State 

educational agencies (SEAs), alone or in partnership with other entities, for comprehensive 

State and local efforts to improve literacy instruction, especially in high-need schools, for 

children and youth from preschool through grade 12. The program would build on the revised 

Striving Readers program, which replaced literacy programs segmented by age and grade level 

with a more comprehensive program that serves children from birth through 12th grade. The 

reauthorized program would strengthen education for literacy by (1) ensuring that all the 

elements of a comprehensive literacy program are embedded in State and local strategies; 

(2) strengthening performance expectations; (3) supporting the identification and scaling-up of 

innovative methods of teaching reading, writing, and language arts; and (4) giving States and 

school districts the flexibility to target resources based on identified needs. 
23

Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Effective Teaching and Learning for a

Well-Rounded Education........................ — — $75.0

Arts in Education.......................................... $25.0 $25.0 —

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education program would support 

competitive grants to SEAs and high-need LEAs, alone or in partnership with other entities, to 

develop and expand innovative practices for improving teaching and learning in the arts, health 

education, foreign languages, civics and government, history, geography, environmental 

education, economics and financial literacy, and other subjects.

College Pathways and Accelerated Learning

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

College Pathways and Accelerated

Learning................................................. — — $102.2

High School Graduation Initiative ................. $48.8 $48.8 —

Advanced Placement ................................... 30.1 30.1 —

Total ................................................. 78.9 78.9 102.2

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program would focus on increasing graduation rates and preparation for college 

matriculation and success by supporting college-level and other accelerated courses and 

instruction, including gifted and talented programs, in high-poverty schools. Grantees would 

implement such strategies as expanding the availability of Advanced Placement and 

International Baccalaureate courses, dual-enrollment programs that allow students to take 

college-level courses and earn college credit while in high school, and “early college high 

schools” that allow students to earn a high school degree and an Associate’s degree or 2 years 

of college credit simultaneously. The program would fund accelerated learning opportunities for 

students across the performance spectrum, including those who exceed proficiency standards, 

in high-poverty elementary schools. Grants also would support projects that re-engage out-ofschool youth or students who are not on track to graduate.

The Department would be authorized to reserve funds to make grants to States to pay for the 

cost of advanced test fees for students from low-income families.
24

Promise Neighborhoods

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $59.9 $59.9 $300.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request provides a significant increase, as part of the Administration’s Ladders of 

Opportunity initiative, for the development and implementation of comprehensive, 

neighborhood-based plans for meeting the cradle-to-career educational, health, and social 

service needs of children in high-poverty communities. The core belief behind Promise 

Neighborhoods is that providing both effective, achievement-oriented schools and strong 

systems of support to children and youth in poverty will offer them the best hope for overcoming 

poverty and building a better life. In coordination with the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD), the Department would reserve a portion of 2014 funds for planning grants 

to communities that intend to apply for funding under both the Promise Neighborhoods and 

HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods programs. The request will also target a portion of funds to 

newly designated Promise Zones—communities with highly concentrated poverty in which 

Federal agencies will partner with local leaders to break down barriers and coordinate the 

resources and expertise they need to create jobs, leverage private investment, increase 

economic activity, reduce violence, and improve educational opportunities.

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students....... — — $280.0

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities National Activities ............. $64.9 $64.9 —

Elementary and Secondary School

Counseling ............................................. 52.3 52.3 —

Physical Education Program ........................ 78.7 78.7 —

Total ................................................. 195.9 195.9 280.0

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Under this proposed consolidation of several narrowly targeted programs, the Department 

would award grants to increase the capacity of States, districts, and schools to create safe, 

healthy, and drug-free environments in a comprehensive manner, so that students are able to 

focus on learning and teachers on teaching. Further, it would provide increased flexibility for 

States and local educational agencies to design strategies that best reflect the needs of their 

students and communities, including programs to (1) improve school climate by reducing drug 

use, alcohol use, bullying, harassment, or violence; (2) improve students’ physical health and 

well-being through comprehensive services that improve student nutrition, physical activity, and 
25

fitness; and (3) improve student’s mental health and well-being through expanded access to 

comprehensive services, such as counseling, health, mental health, and social services.

The new program would also include a national activities authority, under which the Department 

would reserve funds for several initiatives that are included in Now Is The Time, the President’s 

common-sense plan to make our schools safer and protect our children from gun violence. 

These initiatives include $30 million for grants to SEAs to help their LEAs develop, implement, 

and improve their emergency management plans; $50 million for School Climate Transformation 

Grants and related technical assistance to help schools train their teachers and other school 

staff to implement evidence-based behavioral intervention strategies to improve school climate; 

and $25 million for Project Prevent grants to LEAs to help schools in communities with 

pervasive violence break the cycle of violence. Funds requested under National Activities would 

also be used to help LEAs and IHEs recover from emergencies under Project SERV (School 

Emergency Response to Violence), and for data collection, dissemination, outreach, and related 

forms of technical assistance for other activities that promote safe and healthy students.

21st Century Community Learning Centers

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $1,151.7 $1,151.7 $1,251.7

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Administration’s reauthorization proposal for 21st Century Community Learning Centers 

would support State and local efforts to implement in-school and out-of-school strategies for 

providing students (and, where appropriate, teachers and family members), particularly those in 

high-need schools, the additional time, support, and enrichment activities needed to improve 

student achievement. The Administration’s reauthorization proposal would continue to allow 

funds to be used for before- and after-school programs, summer enrichment programs, and 

summer school programs, and would also permit States and eligible local entities to use funds 

to support expanded-learning-time programs as well as full-service community schools.

Projects could also provide teachers the time they need to collaborate, plan, and engage in 

professional development within and across grades and subjects. The increased funding 

requested for fiscal year 2014 would enable grantees to support this expanded menu of 

programs and strategies and to provide high-quality programming for students and their 

families.

Expanding Educational Options

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Expanding Educational Options ................... — — $294.8

Charter Schools Grants................................ $254.8 $254.8 —

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
26

The Administration’s Expanding Educational Options proposal includes two authorities: 

Supporting Effective Charter Schools grants and Promoting Public School Choice grants. The 

Supporting Effective Charter Schools grants program would support competitive grants to SEAs, 

charter school authorizers, charter management organizations, LEAs, and other nonprofit 

organizations to start or expand effective charter and other autonomous public schools. Funds 

would also be available for competitive grants for charter schools facilities programs. The 

Promoting Public School Choice grants program would support competitive grants to LEAs, 

individually or in a consortium, and to SEAs in partnership with one or more high-need LEAs, to 

develop and implement a comprehensive choice program that increases the range of highquality educational options available to students in high-need schools. In fiscal year 2014, the 

Department would fund only the Supporting Effective Charter Schools program, with the 

proposed $40 million increase focused on the replication and expansion of high-quality charter 

schools.

Magnet Schools Assistance Program

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $96.7 $96.7 $99.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Under the Magnet Schools Assistance program, the Department makes competitive grants to 

LEAs implementing a desegregation plan for the support of high-quality magnet schools. The 

Administration’s reauthorization proposal would expand and improve options for students and 

increase diversity by placing a greater emphasis on funding magnet school programs 

(particularly whole-school programs) or models that have a record of effectiveness in raising 

student achievement and reducing racial isolation. The Department also would reserve funds 

for evaluation and dissemination activities.

Fund for the Improvement of Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $40.8 $40.8 $46.3

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE) supports nationally significant activities to 

improve the quality of elementary and secondary education at the State and local levels and 

help all students meet challenging State academic achievement standards. The request 

includes $30 million to fund a math initiative, to be administered jointly with the National Science 

Foundation, to develop, validate, and scale up evidence-based approaches to improve student 

learning at the K-12 level through the transition to postsecondary education. The request also 

would provide $10 million to support interagency strategies to strengthen services to 

disconnected youth, $1.3 million to continue the Data Quality Initiative, which helps ensure that 

program management decisions are based on sound information, and $5 million for a Youth 

Data Pilot that would enhance communities’ tracking of and performance on multiple outcomes 
27

for youth. The Department would use the funding for disconnected youth in close cooperation 

with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Labor.

English Learner Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $732.1 $732.1 $732.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Currently authorized under Title III of the ESEA, this program awards formula grants to States 

based on each State’s share of the Nation’s English Learners (ELs) and recent immigrant 

students. Grants help States design and implement statewide activities to meet the educational 

needs of their ELs. The Administration’s reauthorization proposal supports strengthened 

professional development for educators, improved accountability, and the development and 

implementation of innovative and effective programs. The proposal also would strengthen the 

conditions governing States’ receipt of formula funds and permit the Department to use more 

funds for competitive grants in order to support the development and implementation of highquality programs for ELs, including dual-language and transitional bilingual programs. 

Title I State Agency Programs 

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Migrant Student Education........................... $393.2 $393.2 $393.2

Neglected and Delinquent Children

and Youth Education.............................. 50.2 50.2 50.2

Total ................................................. 443.5 443.5 443.5

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0. 2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Migrant Student Education State Grants provide formula-based assistance in meeting the 

special educational needs of approximately 223,000 children of migrant agricultural workers by 

helping States identify and pay the higher costs associated with serving those children. The 

Department also uses a portion of funding to improve inter- and intra-State coordination of 

migrant education activities, including State exchange of migrant student data records through 

the Migrant Student Information Exchange system. The Administration’s reauthorization 

proposal would change the State allocation formula so that it better reflects shifts in State 

counts of migrant students, improve the targeting of services to high-need migrant students, and 

require States to track and report on the academic achievement of migrant students.

The Title I Neglected and Delinquent Children and Youth Education program provides formula 

grants to States in order to support education services for neglected and delinquent children 

and youth in local and State-run institutions, attending community day programs, and in 

correctional facilities. The request would help an estimated 107,000 neglected and delinquent 
28

students return to and complete school and obtain employment after they are released from 

State institutions.

Homeless Children and Youth Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $65.2 $65.2 $65.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides formula grants to States, which subgrant most funds to local educational 

agencies for services that help homeless children enroll in, attend, and succeed in school. In 

addition to academic instruction, the program helps ensure access for these children to 

preschool programs, special education, and gifted and talented programs. The Administration’s 

reauthorization proposal would improve the funding formula so it better reflects shifts in State 

counts of homeless students and targets funds where they are most needed. The proposal also 

would require States to track and report on the academic achievement of homeless students. 

Rural Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $179.2 $179.2 $179.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) authorizes two programs to assist rural 

school districts in carrying out activities to help improve the quality of teaching and learning in 

their schools. The Small, Rural School Achievement program provides formula funds to rural 

school districts that serve small numbers of students, and the Rural and Low-Income School 

program provides funds to rural school districts that serve concentrations of poor students, 

regardless of the district’s size. Funds appropriated for REAP are divided equally between 

these two programs. The request would maintain support for rural, often geographically 

isolated, districts that face significant challenges in meeting ESEA requirements. The 

Administration’s reauthorization proposal would address technical problems with the current 

authority, extend an existing flexibility authority to all subgrantees, and align the authorized 

activities with national priorities.
29

Indian Student Education

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Grants to Local Educational Agencies.......... $105.9 $105.9 $105.9

Special Programs for Indian Children........... 19.0 19.0 19.0

National Activities......................................... 5.9 5.9 5.9

Total ................................................. 130.8 130.8 130.8

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Indian Student Education programs supplement the efforts of State and local educational 

agencies and Indian tribes to improve educational opportunities for Indian children. The 

programs link these efforts to broader educational reforms underway in States and localities in 

order to ensure that Indian students benefit from those reforms and achieve to the same 

challenging academic standards as other students. The Administration’s reauthorization 

proposal would simplify the process of identifying eligible Indian students and would give 

grantees additional flexibility to conduct programs that can improve the achievement of Indian 

students, including language immersion and language restoration programs and activities 

aligned with the Administration’s broader ESEA reauthorization priorities.

Grants to Local Educational Agencies provide formula grants to local educational agencies and 

to schools operated and supported by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian 

Education for activities to improve the educational achievement of Indian students. Special 

Programs for Indian Children includes (1) $8.2 million in competitive grants for the American 

Indian Teacher Corps and the American Indian Administrator Corps to support training of 

Indians to become teachers and administrators in schools that serve concentrations of Indian 

children, and (2) $10.8 million for competitive demonstration grants to improve educational 

opportunities for Indian children in such areas as early childhood education and college 

preparation.

The request also provides $5.9 million for National Activities, which funds research, evaluation, 

and data collection designed to fill gaps in our understanding of the educational status and 

needs of Indians and to identify educational practices that are effective with Indian students. 

The fiscal year 2012 appropriations act included funding for grants to tribal educational agencies 

in order to build their capacity to assume certain administrative responsibilities for ESEA 

programs under arrangements with State educational agencies. These grants would be 

continued in fiscal year 2014.
30

Native Hawaiian Student Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $34.2 $34.2 $34.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports the provision of supplemental education services to the Native Hawaiian 

population by awarding competitive grants to eligible applicants for a variety of authorized 

activities in such areas as teacher training, family-based education, gifted and talented 

education, special education, higher education, and community-based education learning 

centers. The reauthorized program would promote greater alignment of these activities with the 

Administration’s broader education reform goals. The program also supports the activities of 

the Native Hawaiian Education Council, which helps coordinate the educational and related 

services and programs available to Native Hawaiians. 

Alaska Native Student Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $33.2 $33.2 $33.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program awards competitive grants to eligible applicants for a variety of authorized 

activities, including the development and implementation of curricula and educational programs, 

professional development activities for educators, the development and operation of home 

instruction programs that help ensure the active involvement of parents in their children’s 

education, family literacy services, student enrichment programs in science and mathematics, 

and dropout prevention programs. The reauthorized program would promote greater alignment 

of these activities with the Administration’s broader education reform goals and would eliminate 

the program’s statutory earmarks.

Comprehensive Centers

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $51.1 $51.1 $51.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Comprehensive Centers provide intensive technical assistance to increase the capacity of 

State educational agencies (SEAs) to help districts and schools implement ESEA programs and 

requirements and meet State targets for student achievement. The current system includes 

15 regional centers that work with SEAs within specified geographic regions to help them 

implement ESEA school improvement measures and objectives. In addition, 7 content centers 

provide in-depth, specialized support in key areas, with separate centers focusing on 
31

(1) standards and assessment, (2) great teachers and leaders, (3) school turnaround,

(4) enhancing early learning outcomes, (5) college- and career-readiness and success,

(6) building State capacity and productivity, and (7) innovations in learning. Each content center 

pulls together resources and expertise to provide analyses, information, and materials in its 

focus area for use by the network of regional centers and SEAs. The 2014 request would 

support third-year awards to the current centers as well as an evaluation of the centers.

Impact Aid

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Payment for Federally Connected Children:

Basic Support Payments ........................ $1,153.5 $1,153.5 $1,153.5

Payments for Children with Disabilities... 48.4 48.4 48.4

Facilities Maintenance.................................. 4.8 4.8 4.8

Construction................................................. 17.4 17.4 17.4

Payments for Federal Property .................... 66.9 66.9 —

Total ................................................. 1,291.2 1,291.2 1,224.2

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Impact Aid program provides financial support to school districts affected by Federal 

activities. The property on which certain children live is exempt from local property taxes, 

denying districts access to the primary local source of revenue used by most communities to 

finance education. Impact Aid helps to replace the lost local revenue that would otherwise be 

available to districts to pay for the education of these children.

The $1.15 billion request for Basic Support Payments would provide formula grants for both 

regular Basic Support Payments and Basic Support Payments for Heavily Impacted LEAs.

The $48.4 million request for Payments for Children with Disabilities would provide formula 

grants to help eligible districts meet their obligations under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act to provide a free appropriate public education for federally connected children 

with disabilities. The $4.8 million request for Facilities Maintenance would fund essential repair 

and maintenance of the 13 school facilities serving large numbers of military dependents that 

are owned and operated by the Department of Education, while also supporting the transfer of 

these schools to local school districts. Under the Administration’s ESEA reauthorization 

proposal, the entire $17.4 million proposed for Construction would be used for competitive 

grants to the LEAs with the greatest need and would provide sufficient assistance to enable 

those LEAs to make major repairs and renovations. The Administration requests no funds for 

Payments for Federal Property because these payments compensate LEAs for lost property tax 

revenue due to the presence of Federal lands without regard to whether those districts educate 

any federally connected children as a result of the Federal presence.
32

Training and Advisory Services (Title IV of the Civil Rights Act)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $7.0 $7.0 $7.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports 10 regional Equity Assistance Centers, selected competitively, that 

provide services to school districts on issues related to discrimination based on race, gender, 

and national origin. Typical activities include disseminating information on successful practices 

and legal requirements related to nondiscrimination, providing training to educators to develop 

their skills in specific areas, such as in the identification of bias in instructional materials, and 

technical assistance on selection of instructional materials. The request would support the first 

year of funding for a new cohort of Equity Assistance Center grantees, as well as the annual 

administration of a customer satisfaction survey and an analysis of its results.

Supplemental Education Grants (Compact of Free Association Amendments Act)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $17.6 $17.6 $17.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request would maintain support for Supplemental Education Grants to the Federated States 

of Micronesia (FSM) and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), as authorized by the 

Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-188). Under this program, the 

Department transfers funds and provides recommendations on the uses of those funds to the 

Department of the Interior, which makes grants to the FSM and the RMI for educational services 

that augment the general operations of the educational systems of the two entities.

P.L. 108-188 eliminated RMI and FSM participation in most domestic formula grant programs 

funded by the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor, and created 

this program to supplement separate education support programs under the Compact. The 

request would allow the RMI and the FSM to support programs that focus on improving the 

educational achievement of students in the two Freely Associated States.
33

C. SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES

Overview

The Administration is committed to providing Americans with disabilities the opportunities and 

services they need to succeed in school, in the workplace, and in the community. The 2014 

request funds a wide range of programs that can improve educational, employment, and 

independent living outcomes for people with disabilities. 

The $12.7 billion request for Special Education programs focuses on improving educational and 

early intervention outcomes for children with disabilities. For the Grants to States program, the 

Administration is requesting $11.6 billion, the same as the 2012 level, to maintain the Federal 

contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special education at approximately 15 percent of 

the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) and provide an estimated average of $1,767 

per student for about 6.5 million children ages 3 through 21. Funding for the Preschool Grants 

program would be maintained at its 2012 level. Funding for the Grants for Infants and Families 

program would increase by $20 million above the 2012 level.

The $236.1 million request for Special Education National Activities, $1.4 million below the 2012 

level, supports technical assistance, dissemination, training, and other activities that assist 

States, local educational agencies, parents, and others in improving results for children with 

disabilities. 

For Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research, the budget provides $3.7 billion to support 

comprehensive and coordinated vocational rehabilitation and independent living services for 

individuals with disabilities through research, training, demonstration, technical assistance, 

evaluation, and direct service programs. 

The $3.3 billion request for the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program includes an

increase of $71.1 million over the fiscal year 2013 mandatory level to assist States and tribal 

governments in increasing the participation of individuals with disabilities in the workforce. The 

request includes the inflation increase specified in the authorizing statute, which would more 

than offset the reduction in funds ($35.7 million) resulting from the Administration’s proposal to 

eliminate separate funding authorities for the smaller VR-related programs under the 

Rehabilitation Act. The Administration believes that the proposed eliminations would reduce 

duplication of effort and administrative costs, streamline program administration at the Federal 

and local levels, and improve accountability. 

The 2014 request also includes language that would allow the Secretary to use amounts under 

the VR State Grants program that would otherwise return to the Treasury to support innovative 

activities aimed at improving outcomes for individuals with disabilities, including activities under 

the Promoting Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE) program, and 

that would provide authority for these funds to remain available for Federal obligation until 

September 30, 2015. 

The budget also provides $137.3 million for the three independent living programs, the same as 

the 2012 level. These programs provide independent living services through formula grants to 

designated State agencies and competitive grants to centers for independent living. The 

$110 million request for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research includes 

an increase of $1.2 million over the 2012 level for research activities in the employment domain 
34

under a new regulatory framework that NIDRR intends to have in place by 2014. The budget 

also includes $207.4 million for special institutions for persons with disabilities, including 

$24.5 million for the American Printing House for the Blind, $65.4 million for the National 

Technical Institute for the Deaf, and $117.5 million for Gallaudet University.

Special Education

Grants to States

Program Information

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ....................................... $11,577.9 $11,577.9 $11,577.9

Estimated average Federal share

per child (in whole dollars).............. $1,766 $1,766 $1,767

Note: The budget authority shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent 

across-the-board decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Grants to States program, which is authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA), makes formula grants that help States pay the additional costs of 

providing special education and related services to children with disabilities aged 3 through 

21 years. The request would provide a per-child average of $1,767 for an estimated 6,543,000 

children with disabilities, which represents a Federal contribution of about 15 percent of the 

national average per pupil expenditure. 

Under the IDEA, States are required to provide a free appropriate public education to all 

children with disabilities. Services are provided in accordance with individualized education 

programs that are developed by teams that include the child’s parents; a special educator; a 

representative of the local educational agency; a regular educator, if appropriate; and others. In 

addition, services must be provided—to the maximum extent appropriate—in the least restrictive 

environment, which for most children means in classes with children who are not disabled. 

Students with disabilities also must be included in general State and district-wide assessments, 

including the assessments required under ESEA, and States must provide appropriate 

accommodations, where necessary, to enable children with disabilities to participate in these 

assessments, or alternate assessments for those children who cannot participate in regular 

assessments. 

The request includes $15.0 million that would be reserved for technical assistance to improve 

the capacity of States to meet the data collection requirements of the IDEA. 

Preschool Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .......................................... $372.6 $372.6 $372.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides formula grants to help States make a free appropriate public education 

available to all children with disabilities ages 3 through 5. The request would provide an 
35

estimated $500 per child for approximately 745,000 children to supplement funds provided 

under the Grants to States program and help to ensure that young children with disabilities are 

ready to learn when they enter school.

Grants for Infants and Families

Program Information

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .......................................... $442.7 $442.7 $462.7

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides formula grants to help States implement statewide systems of early 

intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, so that State and 

local agencies identify and serve children with disabilities early in life when interventions can be 

most effective in improving educational outcomes. The $20 million increase proposed for 2014 

would raise the average State allocation by approximately $325,000, enabling States to provide 

high quality early intervention services to approximately 360,000 infants and toddlers with 

disabilities and their families, and would permit the Department to award incentive grants to 

States to facilitate a seamless system of services for children with disabilities from birth up to 

age 5.

State Personnel Development

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $43.9 $43.9 $45.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides competitive grants to help States reform and enhance their systems for 

personnel preparation and professional development in the areas of early intervention, 

educational, and transition services in order to improve outcomes for children with disabilities. 

The $1.1 million increase proposed for 2014 would help cover the cost of approximately 40 new 

and continuation awards to State educational agencies to improve the knowledge and skills of 

special education and regular education teachers serving children with disabilities and help 

recruit and retain highly qualified personnel providing services to children with disabilities.

Technical Assistance and Dissemination

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $46.8 $46.8 $46.8

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program funds competitive grants for technical assistance and dissemination of materials 

based on knowledge gained through research and practice. The request, which is in addition to 
36

the separate $15 million set-aside under the Grants to States program to help States meet data 

collection requirements, includes more than $34 million for continuation costs, with the 

remainder of funds covering the cost of new technical assistance and dissemination projects. 

The 2012 and 2013 amounts exclude $8 million used to support the Special Olympics, which 

would be funded under a separate line item in 2014.

Personnel Preparation

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ......................................... $88.3 $88.3 $85.8

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program helps ensure that there are adequate numbers of personnel with the skills and 

knowledge necessary to help children with disabilities succeed educationally. Program activities 

focus both on meeting the demand for personnel to serve children with disabilities and 

improving the qualifications of these personnel, with particular emphasis on incorporating 

knowledge gained from research and practice into training programs. The Department is 

required to support (1) training for leadership personnel and personnel who work with children 

with low-incidence disabilities, (2) at least one activity in the broadly defined area of personnel 

development, and (3) enhanced support for beginning special educators. 

Parent Information Centers

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $28.9 $28.9 $28.9

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

These funds support centers that provide parents with the training and information they need to 

work with professionals to meet the early intervention and special education needs of their 

children with disabilities. The request would support new competitive grants and continuation 

awards for about 109 centers as well as awards to provide technical assistance to the centers.

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $29.6 $29.6 $29.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program (formerly known as the Technology and Media Services program) makes 

competitive awards for research, development, and other activities that promote the use of 

technology, including universal design features, in providing special education and early 

intervention services. Funds also support media-related activities, such as providing video 
37

description and captioning of films and television for use in classrooms for individuals with visual 

and hearing impairments and increasing the availability of books in accessible formats for 

individuals with visual impairments and other print disabilities. The request includes

$26.3 million for continuation awards.

Special Olympics Education Programs

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $8.0 $8.0 $8.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports the expansion of Special Olympics and the design and implementation of 

Special Olympics education programs. The request includes funds to support Project UNIFY, a 

school-based education program designed to develop teamwork skills and increase awareness 

and social acceptance of individuals with intellectual disabilities. Funding for this activity in 

fiscal years 2012 and 2013 was provided under Technical Assistance and Dissemination.

PROMISE: Promoting Readiness of Minors in SSI

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $2.0 $2.0 —

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The goal of this collaborative demonstration program is to improve outcomes of children who 

receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), including completion of postsecondary education 

and employment, as well as to improve family or household outcomes through improved 

services and support for the families of SSI recipients, such as education and job training for 

parents.

The Administration is not requesting funds for PROMISE under the Special Education account 

in fiscal year 2014. The fiscal year 2012 appropriation under the Rehabilitation Services and 

Disability Research account allowed the Secretary to use amounts that remained unobligated 

subsequent to the reallotment of funds to States under the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State 

Grants program to support PROMISE grants. These funds, which became available for 

obligation for the PROMISE program October 1, 2012, and remain available through September 

30, 2013, are sufficient to support the first year and a significant portion of the second year of 

project funding for a small number of grants to States. In addition, the fiscal year 2014 request 

includes language that would allow the Secretary to use remaining funds subsequent to the 

reallotment of VR funds to support innovative activities aimed at improving outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities, including, if needed, the PROMISE program. 
38

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $3,121.7 $3,231.0 $3,302.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the sequester reduction of 5.1 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides formula grants to State VR agencies to help individuals with disabilities 

become gainfully employed. A wide range of services are provided each year to over 1 million 

individuals with disabilities, including vocational evaluation, counseling and guidance, work 

adjustment, diagnosis and treatment of physical and mental impairments, education and 

vocational training, job placement, and post-employment services. States that are unable to 

serve all eligible individuals with disabilities who apply must give priority to individuals with the 

most significant disabilities. Services are provided according to an individualized plan for 

employment. In 2012, the VR program helped over 180,000 individuals with

disabilities―91 percent with significant disabilities―achieve employment outcomes.

The request for the VR State Grants program reflects the Administration’s proposal to eliminate 

separate funding authorities for the smaller VR-related programs under the Rehabilitation Act in 

order to reduce duplication of effort and administrative costs, streamline program administration 

at the Federal and local levels, and improve accountability. Direct service programs proposed 

for elimination include Supported Employment State Grants and the Migrant and Seasonal 

Farmworkers program. To lessen the potential impact of these eliminations, the Administration 

is proposing language that would ensure that no State's fiscal year 2014 allocation under the 

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program would be less than the total amount allocated to 

a State under the distribution formulas for the VR State grants program and the Supported 

Employment State Grants program for fiscal year 2013. The Administration is also proposing 

language that would override the requirement to reserve the portion of the Training program 

funds currently provided to State VR agencies to support in-service training for agency 

personnel. In addition, the Administration is seeking authority to pay the fiscal year 2014 

continuation costs of the remaining four Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers projects from funds 

appropriated for the VR State Grants program. The request also includes $40.1 million for 

grants to Indian tribes.

Client Assistance State Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $12.2 $12.2 $12.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program makes formula grants to States for activities to inform and advise clients of 

benefits available to them under the Rehabilitation Act, to assist them in their relationships with 

service providers, and to ensure the protection of their rights under the Act. The request would 

support advocacy services for approximately 59,400 individuals with disabilities.
39

Training

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................ $35.5 $35.5 $30.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Training program makes competitive grants to State and other public or nonprofit agencies 

and organizations, including institutions of higher education, to help ensure that personnel with 

adequate skills are available to provide rehabilitation services to persons with disabilities. The 

request includes a reduction of $5.3 million from the 2012 level, reflecting the elimination of the 

funding reservation for the In-Service Training program. VR State Grant funds can be used for 

training State agency personnel, consistent with the agency’s Comprehensive System of 

Personnel Development (CSPD) plan under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act. The proposal would 

eliminate the administrative costs involved in making small grants each year to State VR 

agencies under the Training program and improve the efficiency of training delivered under the 

Rehabilitation Act.

Demonstration and Training

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $5.3 $5.3 $5.8

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports competitive grants and contracts to expand and improve the provision 

and effectiveness of programs and services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act or to further 

the purposes of the Act in promoting the employment and independence of individuals with 

disabilities in the community. Funds would be used to support model demonstrations, technical 

assistance, and projects designed to improve program performance and the delivery of 

vocational rehabilitation (VR) and independent living services. The requested increase would 

support technical assistance activities for VR State agencies to improve the provision of VR 

services. 

Independent Living

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

State Grants................................................. $23.4 $23.4 $23.4

Centers ........................................................ 80.0 80.0 80.0

Services for Older Blind Individuals.............. 34.0 34.0 34.0

Total ................................................. 137.3 137.3 137.3

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
40

The Independent Living programs provide services to individuals with disabilities to maximize 

their independence and productivity and to help them integrate into the mainstream of American 

society. The State Grant program awards formula grants to States to expand and improve 

independent living services and to support the operation of centers for independent living. The 

Centers for Independent Living program makes competitive grants to support a network of 

independent living services. The formula-based Services for Older Blind Individuals program 

assists individuals aged 55 or older whose severe visual impairments make competitive 

employment difficult to obtain, but for whom independent living goals are feasible. The request 

would directly support 77 designated State units under the State Grants program and 

56 grantees under the Services for Older Blind Individuals program.

Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $18.0 $18.0 $18.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This formula grant program funds systems in each State to protect and advocate for the legal 

and human rights of individuals with disabilities, helping them to pursue legal and administrative 

remedies to secure their rights under Federal law. The PAIR systems also provide information 

on, and referrals to, programs and services for individuals with disabilities. The request would 

support advocacy services to approximately 57,000 individuals with disabilities.

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $108.8 $108.8 $110.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) helps improve the lives 

of persons of all ages with disabilities through a comprehensive and coordinated program of 

research, demonstration projects, and related activities, including training of persons who 

provide rehabilitation services or conduct rehabilitation research. NIDRR awards discretionary 

grants that support Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers; Rehabilitation Research and 

Training Centers; Model Systems projects for Spinal Cord Injury, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), 

and Burn Injury; and field-initiated research and development projects. NIDRR funds also 

support a wide range of additional research, demonstration, and training projects that address 

diverse issues affecting educational, employment, and independent living opportunities for 

persons with disabilities. The request includes an increase of $1.2 million over the 2012 level 

for research activities in the employment domain under a new regulatory framework that NIDRR 

intends to have in place by 2014. At least $82 million of the request would be needed for 

continuation of grants made in previous years.
41

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $9.1 $9.1 $9.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program serves individuals who are deaf-blind, their families, and service providers through 

a national headquarters center with a residential training and rehabilitation facility and a network 

of 10 regional offices that provide referral, counseling, training, and technical assistance

services. At the request level, the Center would provide direct services for approximately 

81 clients in its residential training and rehabilitation program and serve an estimated 

1,500 individuals, 350 families, and 1,000 agencies and organizations through its regional 

offices. 

Assistive Technology

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $32.8 $32.8 $30.8

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Assistive Technology (AT) programs support grants to States to increase access to and funding 

for assistive technology devices and services for individuals with disabilities of all ages. The 

request includes $25.6 million for the AT State grant program, $4.3 million for the Protection and 

Advocacy for Assistive Technology program, and $1.0 million for technical assistance required 

under the AT Act’s National Activities authority. The proposed decrease reflects the elimination 

of funding for a separate alternative financing program (AFP) that was authorized in the 2012 

appropriations act. When Congress reauthorized the AT Act, it eliminated the separate AFP 

and required States to conduct State financing activities, including alternative financing loan 

programs, under the AT State grant program. Therefore, no funds are requested in fiscal year 

2014 for this duplicative competitive grant program. 
42

Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

American Printing House for the Blind.......... $24.5 $24.5 $24.5

National Technical Institute for the Deaf....... 65.4 65.4 65.4

Gallaudet University..................................... 125.5 125.5 117.5

Total ................................................. 215.4 215.4 207.4

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The American Printing House for the Blind (APH) manufactures and distributes specially 

adapted educational materials for students who are visually impaired, offers advisory services 

for consumers and educational agencies, and conducts applied research related to the 

development of new products. At the request level, APH would provide free educational 

materials to approximately 60,000 persons with visual impairments at an average per student 

allotment of $298, continue funding for initiatives to improve its technical assistance and 

outreach services, and support a variety of new and continuing research projects. 

The National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID) provides postsecondary technical education 

and training for students who are deaf as well as graduate education and interpreter training for 

persons who are deaf or hearing. NTID also conducts research and provides training related to 

the education and employment of individuals who are deaf. The request would support 

education and training for approximately 1,281 undergraduate and technical students, 

106 graduate students, and 65 interpreters for persons who are deaf. The request would 

increase construction funding to $2.0 million for the purpose of supporting a deferred 

maintenance account and reduce operations funding by $2.0 million to account for the increase 

in construction.

Gallaudet University offers undergraduate, continuing education, and graduate programs for 

persons who are deaf and hearing. Gallaudet also maintains and operates the Kendall 

Demonstration Elementary School and Model Secondary School for the Deaf (MSSD). The 

request provides $117.5 million for operations, including funds that may be used for the 

Endowment Grant program. The $8 million decrease reflects the elimination of funds 

specifically earmarked for construction. The request would help Gallaudet serve an estimated 

1,789 undergraduate and graduate students and 275 elementary and secondary education 

students in the 2013-14 school year.
43

D. CAREER, TECHNICAL, AND ADULT EDUCATION

Overview

Programs in the Career, Technical, and Adult Education account provide formula grants to 

States to support State and community efforts to improve career and technical education, adult 

education and literacy systems, and competitive grants and contracts for evaluation, 

performance measurement and improvement, technical assistance, research and development, 

innovative programs, and other national activities. For 2014, the Administration is proposing to 

reauthorize the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act programs to increase the 

rigor and relevance of what students learn in school to more closely align them with the 

demands of the 21st century economy and workforce while creating stronger linkages between 

secondary and postsecondary education. The 2014 request also would support innovation and 

reform in Career and Technical Education (CTE).

Career and Technical Education

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Career and Technical Education

State Grants........................................... $1,123.0 $1,123.0 $1,123.0

National Leadership Activities ...................... 7.8 7.8 17.8

Total ................................................. 1,130.9 1,130.9 1,140.9

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Funds for the CTE program would support the first year of activity under a reauthorized Carl D. 

Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. In April of 2012 the Administration released 

Investing in America’s Future: A Blueprint for Transforming Career and Technical Education, 

which outlined the Administration’s proposal for reauthorizing the Perkins Act in order to ensure 

that all CTE programs become viable and rigorous pathways to postsecondary and career 

success. The blueprint calls for transforming CTE by promoting:

• Effective alignment between high-quality CTE programs and labor market needs to 

equip students with 21st-century skills and prepare them for in-demand occupations in 

high-growth industry sectors;

• Strong collaboration among secondary and postsecondary institutions, employers, and 

industry partners to improve the quality of CTE programs;

• Meaningful accountability for improving academic outcomes and building technical and 

employability skills in CTE programs for all students;

• Increased emphasis on innovation through development and implementation of new 

practices and models at the local level and systemic reform of State policies and 

practices.
44

The request for CTE State Grants includes up to $100 million for a competitive CTE innovation 

fund, including $10 million for “Pay-for-Success” projects. Initial investments under this setaside might include projects to develop programs or strategies to (1) provide services that help 

disconnected youth access career pathways in high-skill, high-wage jobs; (2) expand the 

capacity of rural and remote communities to provide access to articulated pathways to industryrecognized postsecondary credentials or degrees for in-demand industry sectors and 

occupations; or (3) use technology to improve service delivery and provide learning experiences 

to students through the use of virtual simulations of workplace equipment.

CTE National Programs would support implementation of a reauthorized Perkins Act through 

research, evaluation, data collection, technical assistance, and other national leadership 

activities aimed at improving the quality and effectiveness of career and technical education. 

The request includes $10 million, along with up to $32 million that the Department is requesting 

under the GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation program in the Higher Education account, to 

create a $42 million fund to support and evaluate dual-enrollment programs that target local 

workforce needs.

Adult Education (Adult Basic and Literacy Education)

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Adult Basic and Literacy Education

State Grants........................................... $595.0 $595.0 $595.0

National Programs ....................................... 11.3 11.3 14.3

Total ................................................. 606.3 606.3 609.3

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Adult Basic and Literacy Education State Grants assist adults without a high school diploma or 

equivalent to become literate and obtain the knowledge and skills necessary for postsecondary 

education, employment, and economic self-sufficiency. The forthcoming reauthorization of the 

Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, which is Title II of the Workforce Investment Act, 

provides the opportunity to better align the Adult Education program with Federal job training 

programs and the postsecondary education system. The request for State Grants includes 

$74.7 million for the English Literacy/Civics Education set-aside to help States and communities 

provide adults learning English with expanded access to high-quality English literacy programs 

linked to civics education. 

Funds proposed for National Leadership Activities would continue to support efforts to increase 

the literacy and workforce skills of our Nation’s native-born adult population, as well as the 

ongoing need to address the English language acquisition, literacy, and workforce skills gaps of 

the immigrant population. The proposed $3.0 million increase would be used for new awards to 

support reentry education models, building on the fiscal year 2013 Promoting Reentry Success 

through Continuity of Educational Opportunities competition.
45

E. STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

Overview

Providing students and their families with grant and loan assistance to help pay for 

postsecondary education is indispensable to ensuring that by 2020 America once again has the 

highest proportion of college graduates in the world. But making college affordable is only part 

of the story; we must also acknowledge that the quality of a postsecondary education is just as 

important as its cost. The 2014 request would support these twin goals—affordability and 

quality—by providing additional low-cost loans and grants to students who need it most and by 

directing a greater share of Federal support for postsecondary student financial aid to 

institutions that demonstrate success in serving low-income students, restrain growth in tuition, 

and provide good value.

Overall, the 2014 budget includes a combination of discretionary and mandatory funding that 

would make available $155 billion in new grants, loans, and work-study assistance—an 

increase of more than $57 billion, or 59 percent, over the amount available in 2008—to help 

nearly 14.7 million students and their families pay for college. Key proposals include:

• Reforming the campus-based aid programs by targeting campus-based aid funds to 

institutions with a demonstrated commitment to providing their students a high-quality 

education at a reasonable price while also emphasizing linkages between a student’s 

area of study and work-study experiences. The request would revise current allocation 

formulas for Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants and Work-Study to reward 

institutions that keep their tuition and tuition increases low, enroll and graduate high 

numbers of Pell-eligible students, and provide good value.

• Expanding the Perkins Loans program—the third “campus-based” student aid 

program—to provide $8.5 billion in new loan volume annually—eight and a half times the 

current Perkins volume. The expanded program would support Perkins Loans at up to 

2,700 additional postsecondary education institutions, thereby providing more students 

who may need additional financing options with increased access to affordable loan 

funds that carry important protections and benefits. The new Perkins loan program 

would replace the existing program, which under current law is scheduled to expire in 

2014, and savings from the new program would be reinvested in the Pell Grant program 

to help maintain the maximum Pell award.

• Restructuring student loan interest rates. The 2014 request proposes to change the 

structure of interest rates on Federal student and parent loans to provide borrowers with 

market-based rates. Interest rates on new loans would be set at the beginning of each 

academic year based on the then-prevailing cost of Government borrowing, and remain 

fixed at that rate for the life of the loans. Rates would be determined based on the 

10-year Treasury note rate with add-ons of 0.93 percentage points for Subsidized 

Stafford Loans, 2.93 percentage points for Unsubsidized Stafford loans, and 

3.93 percentage points for PLUS Loans. 

• Extending the availability of the Pay As You Earn repayment plan to all student 

borrowers. All Stafford and Grad PLUS loan borrowers, as well as Consolidation loan

borrowers who repaid Stafford and Grad PLUS loans made under the Direct Loan or 

FFEL programs, who are not in default would be eligible for participation in the Pay As 
46

You Earn program. As a result, all borrowers, regardless of when they borrowed, would 

be assured that their student loan payments need not exceed 10 percent of their 

discretionary income and, after 20 years of repayment, that any remaining balances 

would be forgiven.

These reforms are intended to complement and strengthen the Pell Grant program—the 

cornerstone of Federal efforts to help make a postsecondary education affordable for lowincome students. The 2014 request would provide a total of $29.9 billion in funding for Pell 

Grants, including $22.8 billion in discretionary funds, and $7.0 billion in mandatory funds. The 

total request would provide Pell Grant awards to nearly 9.4 million students during the 

2014-2015 award year while increasing the maximum Pell Grant award to $5,785.

In addition to $155 billion in Pell Grants, low-interest student loans, and the campus-based 

student aid programs, the Federal Government also provides tax relief to American students 

and families through several credits, exclusions, and deductions. These benefits, in comparison 

with the amounts provided by the student financial aid programs, are displayed below.

Federal Student Aid and Tax Benefits for College Students

Federal Assistance to 

College Students

Fiscal Year Change

2008 2014 Request Dollars Percent

Student Aid Available $97.7 billion $154.9 billion $57.2 billion 59%

Selected Tax Benefits $7.5 billion $9.6 billion $2.1 billion 28%

Note: Data for selected tax benefits does not reflect enactment of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which renewed

the American Opportunity Tax Credit, a significant postsecondary education-related tax benefit.

Finally, the budget proposes to reconfigure the FFEL loan rehabilitation program to reduce costs 

for both the Federal Government and borrowers. Under this proposal, the maximum collection 

fee guaranty agencies may charge borrowers to rehabilitate their defaulted FFEL loans would 

be reduced from 18.5 percent to 16.0 percent and the guaranty agencies would be required to 

return 100 percent of the Federal default payment received when the borrower originally 

defaulted on the loan. In addition, if a guaranty agency is unable to locate a private sector 

lender willing to purchase a rehabilitated loan, the guaranty agency would be required to 

transfer the loan to the Department of Education, while continuing to earn a 16 percent 

collection fee. This proposal would save $3.7 billion over 10 years, which would be invested in 

maintaining the Pell Grant program maximum award.

In addition to traditional student aid, a new Presidential Teaching Fellows program would 

support K-12 education by recruiting and preparing talented students for the teaching profession 

through top-tier teacher preparation programs. This program would replace the current TEACH 

Grants program and would provide formula grants to States to fund scholarships for students 

attending high-performing teacher preparation programs. Students would receive scholarships 

of up to $10,000 to cover the cost of program participation for the final year of their teacher 

preparation program (either an undergraduate or post-graduate program). By limiting eligibility 

to teacher preparation programs with a record of success, and to students who are further 

advanced in their program of study, the Presidential Teaching Fellows program would be 

targeted to students who have a greater likelihood of not only entering and remaining in the 

teaching profession but also of becoming effective teachers.
47

Student Aid Summary Tables

Budget Authority (dollars in millions)

2012 20131

2014

Request

Pell Grants

Discretionary funding .......................................... $22,824.0 $22,824.02 $22,824.02

Mandatory funding .............................................. 18,745.0 12,441.22 7,044.02

Subtotal, Pell Grants ........................................ 41,569.0 35,265.2 29,868.0

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants .......... 734.6 734.6 734.6

Work-Study ............................................................... 976.7 976.7 1,126.7

TEACH Grants 3 ........................................................ 34.5 3.5 1.4

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants ......................... 0.2 0.2 0.2

Presidential Teaching Fellows ................................... — — 190.0

Federal Family Education Loans ............................... -15,011.24 -6,843.64 -3,657.24

Federal Direct Loans ................................................. -21,534.55 -34,292.35 -26,301.45

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ..................................... — — -1,408.56

Total ............................................................. -6,769.3 4,155.7 -553.8

1 The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, 

and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the 

Budget Control Act of 2011. The Pell Grant program is exempted from sequestration.

2 Amounts appropriated for Pell Grants for 2012, 2013, and 2014 include mandatory funding provided by 

the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011; the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012; and the Budget 

Control Act of 2011.

3 For budget and financial management purposes, this program is operated as a credit program under the 

Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990. Budget authority reflects the estimated net present value of future Federal nonadministrative costs for awards made in a given fiscal year. Budget amounts for 2012 and 2013 include new loan 

subsidy and upward re-estimates and exclude downward re-estimates. The downward re-estimate for 2013 was 

$17.4 million. The amount for 2014 reflects new loan subsidy. The budget proposes elimination of this program at 

the end of the 2013-2014 academic year. 4 Budget authority requested for FFEL does not include the Liquidating account. The 2012 amount 

includes a net downward re-estimate of $16.1 billion primarily related to revised interest rates; and a net upward 

modification of $153.0 million resulting from the Special Direct Consolidation Loan program, which operated from 

January through June 2012, and from giving lenders the option, beginning on April 1, 2012, to calculate their special 

allowance payments based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), as provided for in the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2012. The 2013 amount includes a net downward re-estimate of $9.9 billion primarily related to 

revised interest rate assumptions. The 2014 amount includes a net downward modification of $3.7 billion as a result 

of the proposed guaranty agency loan retention policy. These re-estimates and modifications reflect the impact of 

changes on an outstanding FFEL portfolio of over $322 billion.

5 The 2012 amount includes a net upward re-estimate of $5.6 billion primarily related to revised interest 

rates. The 2013 amount includes a net downward re-estimate of $8.2 billion, primarily related to revised interest 

rates. The 2014 amount includes a net upward modification of $2.9 billion for the proposed interest rate policy. (Reestimates and modifications reflect the impact of changes on an outstanding Direct Loan portfolio of nearly 

$473 billion.)

6 Amount in 2014 reflects proposal to shift Perkins Loan to a mandatory credit program.
48

Aid Available to Students (dollars in millions)

2012 20131

2014

Request

Pell Grants ................................................................ $32,798.2 $33,728.1 $35,325.1

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants........... 982.0 982.0 982.0

Work-Study ............................................................... 1,162.0 1,162.0 1,349.6

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants ......................... 0.3 0.2 0.3

Presidential Teaching Fellows ................................... — — 149.0

New Student Loans:

Federal Direct Loans ........................................... 105,351.4 106,433.7 112,061.8

Perkins Loans ..................................................... 856.8 856.8 856.8

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ............................... — — 4,113.4

TEACH Grants .................................................... 110.7 116.2 87.0

Subtotal, Student Loans ................................ 106,318.92 107,406.72 117,119.02

Total .............................................................. 141,261.33 143,279.03 154,925.03

1 The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, 

and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the 

Budget Control Act of 2011. The Pell Grant program is exempted from sequestration.

2 In addition, consolidation loans for existing borrowers will total $36.0 billion in 2012, $27.0 billion in 2013, 

and $27.9 billion in 2014.

3 Shows total aid generated by Department programs, including Perkins Loan capital from institutional 

revolving funds, statutory, institutional, and State matching funds.

Number of Student Aid Awards

(in thousands)

2012 20131

2014

Request

Pell Grants ................................................................ 8,965.0 9,171.0 9,373.0

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants .......... 1,583.9 1,583.9 1,583.9

Work-Study ............................................................... 696.6 696.6 809.1

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants 2 ....................... — — —

Presidential Teaching Fellows ................................... — — 14.9

New Student Loans: 3

Federal Direct Loans ........................................... 22,181.3 21,205.2 21,890.8

Perkins Loans ..................................................... 460.6 460.6 460.6

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ............................... — — 751.2

TEACH Grants .................................................... 37.2 39.0 29.8

Total awards ........................................................ 33,924.6 33,156.3 34,913.3

1 The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, 

and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the 

Budget Control Act of 2011. The Pell Grant program is exempted from sequestration.

2 Less than 1,000 recipients in each year.

3 In addition, consolidation loans for existing borrowers will total 2,579,000 in 2012, 690,000 in 2013, and 

600,000 in 2014.
49

Number of Postsecondary Students Aided by Department Programs

2012 2013 2014

Unduplicated Count (in thousands) ................ 13,941 14,257 14,694

Note: The figure shown for 2013 excludes the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 

0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 

5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Tax Benefits for Postsecondary Students and Their Families

In addition to the Department of Education’s grant, loan, and work-study programs, significant 

support for postsecondary students and their families is available through tax credits and 

deductions for higher education expenses, including tuition and fees. For example, in fiscal 

year 2012, students and families claimed an estimated $15.6 billion for the American 

Opportunity Tax Credit—which provides a credit equaling 100 percent of the first $2,000 of 

tuition and fees, and 25 percent of the remaining tuition and fees, up to a total credit of $2,500—

and another $2 billion under the Lifetime Learning tax credit, which allows a credit of up to 

$2,000 for undergraduate and graduate tuition and fees. Additionally, another $1.45 billion was 

claimed in above-the-line deductions for interest paid on postsecondary student loans.

Pell Grants

Program Information

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions

Discretionary budget authority................ $22,824.0 $22,824.0 $22,824.0

Mandatory budget authority.................... 4,950.0 4,854.2 6,456.0

Definite mandatory funding..................... 13,795.0 7,587.0 588.0

Total ................................................. 41,569.0 35,265.2 29,868.0

Program costs (dollars in millions)................ 32,843.0 33,774.0 35,372.0

Aid available (dollars in millions) .................. 32,798.2 33,728.1 35,325.1

Recipients (in thousands)............................. 8,965 9,171 9,373

Maximum grant (in whole dollars)

Maxi mum grant Discretionary portion .............................. $4,860 $4,860 $4,860

Maxi mum grant Mandatory add-on .................................. 690 785 925

Total ........................................ 5,550 5,645 5,785

Average grant (in whole dollars)................... 3,658 3,678 3,769

The Pell Grant program helps ensure financial access to postsecondary education by providing 

grant aid to low-income undergraduate students. The program is the largest need-based 

postsecondary student grant program, with individual awards varying according to the financial 

circumstances of students and their families. The 2014 request of $29.9 billion for Pell Grants 

would continue to make college more affordable for 9.4 million students by increasing the 

maximum Pell award by $140, from $5,645 in award year 2013-2014 to $5,785 in award year 

2014-15, while also fully funding the program through award year 2015-2016.
50

In addition to fully funding the Pell program in fiscal year 2014, the budget proposes making a 

down payment toward addressing the long-term Pell funding gap by including measures that will 

secure funding to maintain the critical investment in Pell Grants, including reforming and 

expanding the Perkins Loan program and reducing the costs associated with providing 

defaulted loan borrowers opportunities to repair their credit standing. The savings associated 

with these proposals would help offset the growing costs of the Pell Grant program in future 

years while still ensuring that aid is available to the neediest college students.

Campus-Based Programs

The Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (SEOG), Work-Study, and Perkins Loan 

programs are collectively referred to as the “campus-based” programs because they make 

grants directly to participating institutions, which have considerable flexibility to package awards 

to best meet the needs of their students. The 2014 request would reform these programs to 

assist students attending those institutions that demonstrate success in serving low-income 

students, restrain growth in tuition, and provide good value. The proposed $150 million 

increase for the Work-Study program would put the program on track to double the number of 

Work-Study jobs over 5 years while also encouraging schools to provide Work-Study 

opportunities to students that are aligned with their academic programs. In addition, the request 

would address the scheduled 2014 expiration of the Perkins Loans program by expanding and 

reforming Perkins Loans to significantly increase both lending authority and the number of 

participating institutions. The request also would modify the formulas used to allocate funding to 

institutions, which currently are based primarily on institutions’ longevity in the programs. These 

reforms, collectively, seek to provide increased access to college by making it more affordable, 

while also helping to ensure that students are well-prepared for work and life after graduation. 

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants

Program Information

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $734.6 $734.6 $734.6

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. 982.0 982.0 982.0

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ 1,584 1,584 1,584

Average award (in whole dollars)................. $620 $620 $620

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent acrossthe-board decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides grant assistance of up to $4,000 per academic year to undergraduate 

students with demonstrated financial need. The $734.6 million request would leverage 

$247 million in institutional matching funds to make available a total of nearly $982 million in 

grants to an estimated 1.6 million recipients. Program funds are allocated to institutions 

according to a statutory formula and require a 25 percent institutional match. Awards are 

determined at the discretion of institutional financial aid administrators, although schools are 

required to give priority to Pell Grant recipients and students with the lowest expected family 

contributions. The request would reform the institutional allocation formula to direct funding 

toward institutions that keep net tuition down, provide good value, and serve low-income 

students effectively.
51

Work-Study

Program Information

2013 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $976.7 $976.7 $1,126.7

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. 1,162.0 1,162.0 1,349.6

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ 697 697 809

Average award (in whole dollars)................. $1,668 $1,668 $1,668

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent acrossthe-board decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Work-Study program provides grants to participating institutions to pay up to 75 percent of 

the wages of eligible undergraduate and graduate students working part-time to help pay their 

college costs. The school or other eligible employer provides the balance of the student’s 

wages. The budget proposes an increase of $150 million for this program to help double the 

number of participants over 5 years. The total request of more than $1.1 billion, when combined 

with institutional aid, would make available more than $1.3 billion to an estimated 809,000 

Work-Study students in the 2014-15 award year. Funds are allocated to institutions according 

to a statutory formula and individual award amounts to students are determined at the discretion 

of institutional financial aid administrators. The 2014 request also would change the allocation 

formula for Work-Study to benefit institutions that keep net tuition down, serve low-income 

students effectively, and provide good value to students, in part by offering them more 

meaningful work-study opportunities that will help to prepare them for work and life after 

graduation.

Perkins Loans

Program Information

2012 2013

2014

Request

Perkins Loans (current program):

Current program Aid available (dollars in millions) ........... $856.8 $856.8 $856.8

Current program Recipients (in thousands) ...................... 461 461 461

Current program Average loan (in whole dollars).............. $1,860 $1,860 $1,860

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans:

Unsubsi dized Perki ns Loan subsidies (BA in millions) .............. — — $1,408.5

Unsubsi dized Perki ns Aid available (dollars in millions) ............ — — 4,113.4

Unsubsi dized Perki ns Recipients (in thousands) ...................... — — 751

Unsubsi dized Perki ns Average loan (in whole dollars) .............. — — $5,476

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent acrossthe-board decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Perkins Loan program provides long-term, low-interest loans to undergraduate and 

graduate students with demonstrated financial need at roughly 1,700 institutions. Perkins Loan 
52

borrowers pay no interest during in-school, grace, and deferment periods and are charged 

5 percent interest during the principal repayment period. Annual borrowing limits are $5,500 for 

undergraduate students and $8,000 for graduate and professional students. The Administration 

is proposing to create an expanded, modernized Perkins Loan program as part of its overall 

effort to improve and strengthen the campus-based programs. The proposal would provide 

$8.5 billion in new loan volume annually—eight and a half times the current annual Perkins 

volume—and reach students at up to 2,700 additional postsecondary education institutions. 

These reforms would also address the scheduled expiration of the program. Under the 

Administration’s proposal, Unsubsidized Perkins Loans would carry the same annuallydetermined fixed interest rate as that proposed for Unsubsidized Stafford Loans. Loan limits for 

both undergraduate and graduate students would remain the same as in the current Perkins 

program. The Department of Education, rather than institutions, would service Perkins Loans. 

Lending authority would be allocated among institutions in the same manner as the other 

campus-based programs.

TEACH Grants/Presidential Teaching Fellows

2012 2013

2014

Request

TEACH Grants

BA in millions......................................................... $34.5 1 $3.5 1 $1.4 1

TEACH Grants Recipients (in thousands) ................................ 37.2 39.0 29.8

TEACH Grants Aid available to students (in millions)............... $110.7 $116.2 $87.0

TEACH Grants Maximum grant (in whole dollars) .................... $4,000 $4,000 $4,000

TEACH Grants Average grant (in whole dollars) ...................... $2,979 $2,979 $2,925

Presidential Teaching Fellows

BA in millions......................................................... — — $190.0

PTF Number of State formula grants ...................... — — 35-56

PTF Total aid available (in millions) ........................ — — $149.0

PTF Minimum State award (in thousands) .............. — — $600

PTF Maximum scholarship amount (in whole $)...... — — $10,000

PTF Number of Fellows (in thousands)................... — — 14.9

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the sequester reduction of 5.1 percent required by 

the Budget Control Act of 2011.

1 Amounts for 2012 and 2013 include new loan subsidy and upward re-estimates, and exclude downward 

re-estimates. The downward re-estimate for 2013 was $17.4 million. Amount for 2014 reflects new loan subsidy. 

The 2014 request would replace the TEACH Grant program with the new Presidential Teaching 

Fellows program, which is specifically focused on ensuring that recipients enter, remain, and 

thrive in the field of teaching. The new program would provide formula grants to States to fund 

scholarships of up to $10,000 for students attending “high-performing” teacher preparation 

programs. The program would limit participation to teacher preparation programs with a record 

of success, and to students who are further advanced in their program of study, to help ensure 

that scholarship recipients will be more likely to not only enter and remain in the teaching 

profession but also to become effective teachers. Fellows will have to be trained to teach a 
53

high-need subject, such as mathematics or science, and commit to teach in a high-need school 

at least 3 out of 6 years after their fellowship begins.

The current TEACH Grant program awards annual grants of up to $4,000 to eligible 

undergraduate and graduate students who agree to serve as a full-time mathematics, science, 

foreign language, bilingual education or other English language program, special education, or 

reading teacher at a high-need school for not less than 4 years within 8 years of graduation. 

For students who fail to fulfill this service requirement, grants are converted to Direct 

Unsubsidized Stafford Loans with interest accrued from the date the grants were awarded.

For budget and financial management purposes, the TEACH program is operated as a loan 

program with 100 percent forgiveness of outstanding principal and interest upon completion of a 

student’s service requirement. Grants are converted to Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loans if 

students do not complete the required service. Consistent with the requirements of the Credit 

Reform Act of 1990, budget authority for this program reflects the estimated net present value of 

all future non-administrative Federal costs associated with awards made in a given fiscal year.

Federal Family Education Loans and Direct Loans

(in millions)

2012 2013

2014

Request

Federal Family Education Loans

FFEL Net modification of existing loans......... $153.0 1 — -$3,657.2 1

FFEL Net re-estimate of existing loans.......... -$15,164.1 2,3 -$6,843.6 2,3 —

Total, FFEL program BA................ -15,011.2 -6,843.6 -3,657.2

Direct Loans

Direct Loans New loan subsidies (BA)...................... -27,100.9 2 -26,140.6 2 -29,172.7 2

Ne Net modification of existing loans......... — — 2,871.3

Direct Loans Net re-estimate of existing loans .......... 5,566.3 3 -8,151.7 3 —

Total, new budget authority............ -21,534.5 -34,292.3 -26,301.4

Total, student loans (BA)................ -36,545.7 -41,135.9 -29,958.6

1 Under Credit Reform, costs or savings related to the impact of policy changes on existing loans are reflected in 

the current year. The amount of 2012 FFEL modification reflects the impact of the Special Direct Consolidation Loan 

program, which operated from January through June 2012, as well as the option for lenders, beginning April 1, 2012, 

to calculate their special allowance payments based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), as permitted by 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012; the 2014 FFEL modification reflects the impact of the proposed guaranty 

agency rehabilitated loan retention policy. The 2014 Direct Loan modification reflects the impact of the proposed 

interest rate change for new student loans.

2 Total includes amount for Consolidation Loans.

3 Under Credit Reform, the subsidy amounts needed for active loan cohorts are re-estimated annually in both 

Direct Loans and FFEL to account for changes in long-term projections. Re-estimates and modifications reflect the 

impact of changes on outstanding portfolios of $322 billion for FFEL, $95 billion for ECASLA, and $473 billion for 

Direct Loans.
54

New loan volume (in millions)

2012 2013

2014

Request

Direct Loans

Stafford loans ................................ $33,612.4 $28,645.4 $29,345.7

Unsubsidized Stafford loans .......... 53,887.6 59,185.9 62,729.1

PLUS loans ................................... 17,851.4 18,602.4 19,987.0

Total ........................................ 105,351.4 1 106,433.7 1 112,061.8 1

Number of new loans (in thousands)

Direct Loans

Stafford loans ................................ 9,911 8,941 9,153

Unsubsidized Stafford loans .......... 10,924 10,973 11,420

PLUS loans ................................... 1,347 1,291 1,318

Total ........................................ 22,182 1 21,205 1 21,891 1

1 In addition, Consolidation Loans for existing borrowers will total $36.0 billion and 2,579,000 loans in 2012, 

$27.0 billion and 690,000 loans in 2013, and $27.9 billion and 600,000 loans in 2014.

The Department of Education operates two major student loan programs—the Federal Family

Education Loan (FFEL) program and the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) 

program—but since July 1, 2010 the Department has made new loans only through the Direct 

Loan program. The legacy FFEL program made loan capital available to students and their 

families through private lenders, with State and private nonprofit guaranty agencies 

administering the Federal guarantee protecting FFEL lenders against losses related to borrower 

default, collecting on defaulted loans, and providing other services to lenders. Under the Direct 

Loan program, the Federal Government provides the loan capital and schools disburse loan 

funds to students. The Department carries out its loan origination and servicing functions under 

Direct Loans through private and non-profit entities.

The Direct Loan program features four types of loans with set fees and maximum borrowing 

amounts:

• Stafford Loans are subsidized, low-interest loans based on financial need. The Federal 

Government pays the interest while the student is in school and during certain grace and 

deferment periods. The current interest rate for undergraduate loans made on or after July 

1, 2011 is 3.4 percent and is scheduled to rise to 6.8 percent on July 1, 2013. As of July 1, 

2012, only undergraduate students are eligible for subsidized Stafford loans. Additionally, 

interest will accrue during a student’s grace period for Stafford Loans originated between 

July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014.

• Unsubsidized Stafford Loans have a fixed interest rate of 6.8 percent, but the Federal 

Government does not pay interest for the student during in-school, grace, and deferment 

periods.
55

• PLUS Loans are available to parents of dependent undergraduate students and graduate 

and professional students. The interest rate is 7.9 percent and the Federal Government 

does not pay interest during in-school, grace, and deferment periods.

• Consolidation Loans allow borrowers with multiple student loans who meet certain criteria to 

combine their loans and extend their repayment schedules. The rate for both FFEL and 

Direct Consolidation Loans is based on the weighted average of loans consolidated rounded 

up to the nearest 1/8th of 1 percent. The resulting rate for the consolidated loan is then fixed 

for the life of the loan.

The 2014 request proposes to change the interest rate structure for new student and parent 

loans to market-based rates that better reflect current economic conditions. This proposal 

maintains the current policy of providing a lower rate on Subsidized Stafford loans, which are 

awarded on the basis of financial need, than on other Federal student and parent loans. These 

market-based rates for newly originated loans also would maintain the current policy of 

providing a lower rate on loans based on the financial need of students and families, with 

somewhat higher rates for student and parent loans made regardless of need. These rates 

would be determined annually and fixed for the life of the loan. Under the proposal, new rates 

would be equal to the 10-year Treasury note rate with add-ons of 0.93 percentage points for 

subsidized Stafford loans, 2.93 percentage points for Unsubsidized Stafford loans, and 

3.93 percentage points for PLUS loans. The proposal does not include a cap on interest rates, 

and the existing cap of 8.25 percent on new consolidation loans would be eliminated.

The Administration also proposes to expand eligibility for the Pay As You Earn plan to all 

borrowers. The benefits of this program are currently only available to borrowers who had no 

outstanding loans as of October 1, 2007, and had received a Direct Loan disbursement on or 

after October 1, 2011. The Budget proposes to expand this to all borrowers beginning July 1, 

2014, regardless of when their loans were originated. All Stafford, Grad PLUS, and 

Consolidation loans that repaid Stafford and Grad PLUS loans made under the Direct Loan or 

FFEL programs, and that are not in default, are eligible for this program. Borrowers who take 

part in the Pay As You Earn plan would be eligible to have their student loan payments capped 

at 10 percent of their prior-year discretionary income, and to have any remaining balances 

forgiven after 20 years of repayments.

Finally, the President’s 2014 Budget proposes to reconfigure the FFEL loan rehabilitation 

program to reduce costs for both the Federal government and borrowers. Under the proposal, 

the maximum collection fee guaranty agencies may charge borrowers to rehabilitate their 

defaulted FFEL loans would be reduced from 18.5 percent to 16 percent and the guaranty 

agencies would be required to return 100 percent of the Federal default payment received when 

the borrower originally defaulted on the loan. In addition, if a guaranty agency is unable to 

locate a private sector lender willing to purchase a rehabilitated loan, the guaranty agency will 

send the loan to the Department of Education instead, while continuing to earn a 16 percent 

collection fee. This proposal saves $3.7 billion over 10 years, which will be invested in 

maintaining the Pell Grant program maximum award.
56

F. HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Overview

The Administration’s 2014 request includes $2.2 billion for Higher Education Programs to help 

achieve the President’s goal of significantly increasing the percentage of Americans with 

postsecondary degrees or industry-recognized certificates. 

The Administration’s budget invests in systemic State reform in postsecondary education 

through a $1 billion request for a new Race to the Top–College Affordability and Completion 

competition that would be funded in the Innovation and Instructional Teams account. This 

competition would drive comprehensive change in State higher education policies and practices 

in order to improve college affordability, access, and quality. The new program would create a 

strong incentive for States to implement key reforms such as maintaining fiscal support for 

higher education while modernizing funding policies to constrain costs and improve outcomes,

removing barriers preventing the creation of innovative methods of student learning and new 

degree pathways, empowering consumer choice through increased transparency, and 

smoothing transitions for students from high school into college and between colleges. 

The Administration’s budget invests in innovation at the institutional level through a $260 million

request for the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), which would 

support the first year of the First in the World fund. This proposal includes approximately 

$175 million for an evidence-based grant competition, modeled after the Investing in Innovation 

(i3) program for K-12 education, which would provide incentives for innovation and building 

evidence of what works to reduce costs and improve outcomes in postsecondary education. 

The competition would include a priority for projects designed to improve college access and 

selection for high-need secondary school students. In addition, up to $75 million, to be available 

until expended, would be used to support (1) projects to develop third-party validation systems 

that identify competencies, assessments, and curricula for specific fields; and (2) Pay for 

Success awards to providers of free two-year degrees, especially in field supported by 

validation systems.

The request includes $67.6 million, an increase of $67 million, for GPRA data/HEA program 

evaluation. Funding would support the on-going evaluation of Pell Grant expansions under the 

Experimental Sites Study, a study of dual enrollment programs, and other research on 

strategies for effectively delivering student aid.

To help close gaps between racial and socioeconomic groups in college enrollment and degree 

attainment, the request provides $431.1 million in discretionary funding for the Aid for 

Institutional Development programs, the same as the 2012 level. The request would strengthen 

institutions of higher education that serve high proportions of minority and disadvantaged 

students, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Historically Black 

Graduate Institutions (HBGIs), by improving their academic programs, institutional capacity, and 

student support services. The budget also provides $109.4 million in discretionary funding for 

the Aid for Hispanic-serving Institutions programs.

The request would provide $839.9 million to maintain college preparation and completion 

activities for participants in the Federal TRIO Programs, as well as $302.2 million to assist 

middle and high school students in preparing for college through Gaining Early Awareness and 
57

Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). These programs, together with the 

$150 million in mandatory funds provided through the College Access Challenge Grants 

program, provide significant investments that are crucial for helping to meet the President’s 

college completion goal by getting more students into and through postsecondary education.

In addition, the request includes $80.9 million, an increase of $6.9 million over the 2012 level, 

for the International Education and Foreign Language Studies programs, which help meet the 

Nation's security and economic needs through the development of expertise in foreign 

languages and area and international studies. The budget also provides $30.9 million for meritand need-based scholarships and fellowships to postsecondary students under Graduate 

Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) programs.
58

Title III: Aid for Institutional Development

(BA in millions)

 

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Strengthening Institutions (SIP) ......................... $80.6 $80.6 $80.6

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges 

and Universities (TCCUs) ............................ 25.7 25.7 25.7

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges

and Universities (mandatory TCCUs)........... 30.0 1 30.0 1 30.0 1

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native

Hawaiian-serving Institutions (ANNHs) ........ 12.9 12.9 12.9

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native

Hawaiian-serving Institutions (mandatory

ANNHs) ....................................................... 15.0 1 15.0 1 15.0 1

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges

and Universities (HBCUs) ............................ 228.0 228.0 228.0

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges

and Universities (mandatory HBCUs)........... 85.0 1 85.0 1 85.0 1

Strengthening Historically Black Graduate

Institutions (HBGIs)...................................... 59.0 59.0 59.0

Master’s Degree Programs at HBCUs

and PBIs (mandatory HBCUs/PBIs)............. 11.5 2 11.5 2 11.5 2

Strengthening Predominantly Black

Institutions (PBIs)......................................... 9.4 9.3 9.3

Strengthening Predominantly Black

Institutions (mandatory PBIs)....................... 15.0 1 15.0 1 15.0 1

Strengthening Asian American and Native

American Pacific Islander-serving

Institutions (AANAPISIs) .............................. 3.1 3.1 3.1

Strengthening Asian American and Native

American Pacific Islander-serving

Institutions (mandatory AANAPISIs) ............ 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 1

Strengthening Native American-serving

nontribal institutions (NASNTIs) ................... 3.1 3.1 3.1

Strengthening Native American-serving

nontribal institutions (mandatory NASNTIs) . 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 1

Minority Science and Engineering

Improvement (MSEIP) ................................. 9.5 9.5 9.5

Total....................................................... 597.6 597.6 597.6

Discretionary .................................... 431.1 431.1 431.1

Mandatory ........................................ 166.5 166.5 166.5

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, 

and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the 

Budget Control Act of 2011.

1 Mandatory appropriations provided under Section 371 of the HEA, as amended by the Student Aid and 

Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA) within the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-152).

2 These funds are mandatory appropriations provided under Section 897 of the HEA.
59

The request for Title III maintains support for institutions that serve large percentages of minority 

and disadvantaged students. Title III funding, which is awarded both competitively and by a 

formula that directs aid to specified institutions, helps provide equal educational opportunity and 

strong academic programs for these students and enhances the financial stability of the 

institutions that serve them. Funds may be used to plan, develop, and implement activities that 

support faculty development; funds and administrative management; development and 

improvement of academic programs; joint use of libraries and laboratories; construction, 

maintenance, and renovation of instructional facilities; student services; and endowment funds.

Strengthening Institutions supports institutions that provide educational opportunities to 

low-income and minority students. This funding level would support 126 continuation grants 

and would enable the Department to award new individual development grants.

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) supports 33 Tribal 

Colleges and Universities located primarily in remote areas not served by other postsecondary 

education institutions. These institutions offer a broad range of degree and vocational certificate 

programs to students for whom these educational opportunities would otherwise be 

geographically and culturally inaccessible. TCCUs also would benefit from $30 million in 

mandatory funds available under section 371. 

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving Institutions supports institutions with 

undergraduate enrollments that are at least 20 percent Alaska Native and at least 10 percent 

Native Hawaiian students, respectively. The request would fund 14 continuation grants for 

these institutions, which typically are located in remote areas not served by other institutions. 

The Department also will use $15 million in fiscal year 2014 mandatory funds to award 

15 continuation grants.

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities supports any accredited, legally 

authorized HBCU that was established prior to 1964 and which retains a principal mission of 

educating African-Americans. Fiscal year 2014 funding would support 96 HBCUs. In 2014, 

$85 million in mandatory funding is available for HBCUs. 

Strengthening Historically Black Graduate Institutions supports 24 institutions with schools of 

law, medical schools, or other graduate programs. 

Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs) are primarily urban and rural 2-year colleges that have 

an enrollment of undergraduate students that is at least 40 percent African-American and that 

serve at least 50 percent low-income or first-generation college students. The request would 

support the fourth year of funding for 35 PBI grantees. In addition, $15 million in mandatory 

funding is available in 2014 for continuation awards to 27 grantees.

Strengthening Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving Institutions

supports institutions with undergraduate enrollments that are at least 10 percent Asian 

American and Native American Pacific Islander. This funding level would support 8 continuation 

grants for institutions serving this diverse population. In addition, mandatory funding of 

$5 million is available in 2014 to support 11 continuation awards for these institutions.
60

Strengthening Native American-serving Nontribal Institutions supports institutions that are not 

designated as TCCUs, yet enroll at least 10 percent Native American students and serve at 

least 50 percent low-income students. The discretionary request would support 6 continuation 

awards and an additional $5 million in mandatory funds will support 13 continuation grants.

The Minority Science and Engineering Improvement program would fund 31 continuation grants 

that support improvement in science and engineering education at predominantly minority 

institutions and increase the participation of underrepresented ethnic minorities, particularly 

minority women, in scientific and technological careers.

 

Aid for Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs)

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Developing HSIs ................................................ $100.4 $100.4 $100.4

Mandatory Developing HSI STEM

and Articulation Programs ............................ 100.0

1

100.0

1

 100.0

1

Promoting Postbaccalaureate

Opportunities for Hispanic Americans

(discretionary) ........................................ 9.0 9.0 9.0

(mandatory)............................................ 11.5 2 11.5 2 11.5 2

Total ....................................................... 220.9 220.9 220.9

Discretionary..................................... 109.4 109.4 109.4

Mandatory ........................................ 111.5 111.5 111.5

Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by P.L. 113-6, 

and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory funding required by the 

Budget Control Act of 2011.

1 These funds are mandatory appropriations provided under the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act 

(SAFRA) within the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-152). 2 These funds are mandatory appropriations provided under Title VIII, Part AA, Section 898 of the HEA.

The Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) program funds competitive grants to 

expand and enhance the academic quality, institutional management, fiscal stability, and selfsufficiency of colleges and universities that enroll large percentages of Hispanic students. In 

2014, $100.4 million in discretionary funding would support approximately 155 new and 

continuation awards, while $100 million in mandatory funds available under section 371 of the 

HEA would support 111 continuation awards under the HSI Science, Technology, Engineering, 

and Mathematics (STEM) and Articulation program.

The Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans program provides 

funds to eligible HSIs that offer a post baccalaureate certificate or post baccalaureate degreegranting program. The program is designed to help Hispanic Americans gain entry into and 

succeed in graduate study, a level of education in which they are underrepresented. In 2014, 

$9.0 million in discretionary funding would support 20 continuation awards, while $11.5 million in 

mandatory funding provided under section 898 of the HEA would support an additional 

22 continuation awards. 
61

International Education and Foreign Language Studies (IEFLS)

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Domestic Programs ..................................... $66.6 $66.6 $73.5

Overseas Programs ..................................... 7.5 7.5 7.5

Total ................................................. 74.1 74.1 80.9

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

These programs support comprehensive language and area study centers within the United 

States, research and curriculum development, and opportunities for American scholars to study 

abroad. In addition to promoting general understanding of the peoples of other countries, the 

Department’s international programs also serve important economic, diplomatic, defense, and 

other national security interests. The request would enable the Department to help maintain the 

national capacity in teaching and learning less commonly taught languages and associated area 

studies and to continue to work toward increasing the global competency of all U.S. students. 

The proposed $6.9 million increase for Domestic Programs in 2014 will support these 

objectives.

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

First in the World Awards ............................. — — $247.2

International Consortia................................. $2.1 TBD —

Training for Realtime Writers........................ 1.1 TBD —

Model Transition Programs .......................... — — 11.0

Other............................................................ 0.3 $0.3 1.5

Total ................................................. 3.5 3.5 260.0

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

FIPSE awards competitive grants to support exemplary, locally developed projects that are 

models for innovative reform and improvement in postsecondary education. The 2014 request

would provide approximately $260 million for the First in the World (FITW) fund. Up to 

$175 million of FITW funds would be used to support an evidence-based grant competition, 

which would apply the lessons of the successful Investing in Innovation (i3) program for K-12 to 

the challenge of improving college attainment and productivity. First in the World would provide 

“venture capital” to encourage innovative approaches to improving college completion, research 

support to build the evidence of effectiveness needed to identify successful strategies, and 

resources to scale up and disseminate proven strategies. The competition would include a 

priority for projects designed to improve college access and selection for high-need secondary 

school students. In addition, up to $75 million, to be available until expended, would be used to
62

support (1) projects to develop third-party validation systems that identify competencies, 

assessments, and curricula for specific fields, and (2) Pay for Success awards to providers of 

free 2-year degrees, especially in fields supported by validation systems. These initiatives build 

alternative pathways for programs that are non-accredited, and therefore do not qualify for 

Federal grants and student loans, to receive Federal support if they can demonstrate positive

student outcomes.

The request also includes funding that would be used to cover continuation costs for projects 

previously funded under Model Transition Programs for Students with Intellectual Disabilities in 

Higher Education.

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $8.1 $8.1 $8.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request would fund awards to tribally controlled postsecondary career and technical 

institutions that meet the program’s eligibility requirements to fund instructional and student 

support services under a reauthorized Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act.

Special Programs for Migrant Students

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $36.5 $36.5 $36.5

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Special Programs for Migrant Students include the High School Equivalency Program (HEP), 

which funds competitively selected projects to help low-income migrant and seasonal farm 

workers gain high school diplomas or equivalency certificates, and the College Assistance 

Migrant Program (CAMP), which makes competitive grants to provide stipends and special 

services, such as tutoring and counseling, to migrant students who are in their first year of 

college. The 2014 request would support approximately 45 HEP projects and 40 CAMP 

projects, as well as outreach, technical assistance and professional development activities.
63

Federal TRIO Programs

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

Talent Search .............................................. $136.0 $135.9 $135.5

Upward Bound ............................................. 268.1 266.4 266.7

Veterans Upward Bound .............................. 14.4 14.1 13.8

Upward Bound Math-Science....................... 44.1 43.1 43.1

Educational Opportunity Centers ................. 45.9 46.9 46.9

Student Support Services ............................ 290.3 291.2 291.2

McNair Post Baccalaureate Achievement .... 37.3 35.9 35.7

Staff Training ............................................... 1.4 1.4 1.4

Evaluation ................................................... — 3.2 TBD

Administration/Peer Review ......................... 2.4 1.7 TBD

Undistributed................................................ — — 4.3

Total ................................................. 839.9 839.9 839.9

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The TRIO programs are among the Department’s largest investments aimed at getting more 

students prepared for, into, and through postsecondary education. The request would maintain 

overall funding at the 2012 level for these college preparation and student support programs, 

including approximately 2,792 TRIO projects serving middle school, high school, and college 

students and adults. 

Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $302.2 $302.2 $302.2

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

GEAR UP provides funds to States and partnerships for early college preparation and 

awareness activities to help low-income elementary and secondary school students prepare for 

and pursue postsecondary education. Several features of GEAR UP, including targeting entire 

grades of students, partnering with local organizations and businesses, and matching Federal 

funds with local contributions, allow projects to serve large numbers of students. The request 

maintains funding at the 2012 level and would support new and continuation awards for 

approximately 35 States and 87 Partnerships in fiscal year 2014.
64

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN)

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $30.9 $30.9 $30.9

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

GAANN provides fellowships, through competitive grants to postsecondary institutions, to 

graduate students with superior ability and high financial need studying in areas of national 

need. Participating graduate schools must provide assurances that they will seek talented 

students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds. The 2014 request would support 

approximately 683 fellowships, including continuation awards for Javits fellowship recipients.

Child Care Access Means Parents in School

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $16.0 $16.0 $16.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This competitive grant program supports the participation of low-income parents in 

postsecondary education through campus-based childcare services. Grants made to 

institutions of higher education must be used to supplement childcare services or start a new 

program, not to supplant funds for current childcare services. The program gives priority to 

institutions that leverage local or institutional resources and employ a sliding fee scale. The 

2014 request would support approximately 155 projects.

GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $0.6 $0.6 $67.6

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request would support the collection and analysis of performance data and the evaluation 

of Higher Education Act programs that either lack funding set-asides to conduct these activities 

or where such set-asides are not sufficient to cover the costs of the activities. The request 

includes $32 million to support a demonstration and evaluation of dual enrollment programs, to 

be co-funded with $10 million from Career and Technical Education National Programs. Funds 

would be used to establish or expand dual enrollment programs aligned with career pathways 

and local workforce needs that offer high school and adult students the opportunity to earn 

college credits while enrolled in a high school or GED program. In addition, funds would 

support an on-going evaluation of the Pell grant expansions under the Experimental Sites 
65

Study, and a number of other studies of strategies for providing student aid in ways that improve 

postsecondary access and outcomes.

Academic Facilities

(BA in millions)

Programs

2012 2013

2014

Request

HBCU Capital Financing Program............ $20.5 $20.5 $20.5

CHAFL Federal Administration................. 0.5 0.5 0.5

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

These programs support the construction, reconstruction, and renovation of academic facilities 

at institutions of higher education. The request for the HBCU Capital Financing Program would 

support the management and servicing of loan guarantees on previously issued loans, and 

includes $20.2 million in loan subsidy that would allow the program to guarantee $320.4 million 

in new loans in 2014. Funds also would be used to continue technical assistance services to 

help HBCUs increase their fiscal stability and improve their access to capital markets. The 

Administration is seeking legislative authority to raise the limits on total loan authority and the 

sub-limits on authority for loans to public and private HBCUs.

Funding for CHAFL Federal Administration is used solely to manage and service existing 

portfolios of facilities loans and grants made in prior years.

Howard University

(BA in millions)

Programs 2012 2013

2014

Request

General Support........................................... $205.2 $205.2 $205.2

Howard University Hospital .......................... 28.8 28.8 28.8

Total ................................................. 234.1 234.1 234.1

Note: The amounts shown for FY 2013 exclude the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The 2014 request would maintain support for Howard University’s academic programs, research 

programs, construction activities, and the Howard University Hospital at the 2012 level. Howard 

University has played a historic role in providing access to postsecondary educational 

opportunities for students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds, especially AfricanAmericans. The request includes $3.6 million for Howard University’s endowment. The direct 

Federal appropriation accounts for approximately 39 percent of Howard University’s operating 

costs. 
66

G. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Overview

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) supports sustained programs of research, evaluation, 

and statistics to inform and provide solutions to the problems and challenges faced by schools 

and learners. Investment in research and statistics activities is critical in order to identify 

effective instructional and program practices, track student achievement, and measure the 

impact of educational reform. Through its four centers—the National Center for Education 

Research, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National Center for 

Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, and the National Center for Special Education 

Research—IES ensures that the Federal investment in education research, statistics, and 

evaluation is well-managed and relevant to the needs of educators and policymakers.

For 2014, the Administration is seeking $671.1 million for IES activities, an increase of 

$77.4 million over the 2012 appropriation. This request would enable IES to award at least 

$53.5 million in new research and development grants in early learning and elementary, 

secondary, and postsecondary education and at least $5 million for new research and 

development awards in special education. NCES would receive an additional $14 million to 

support State participation in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and to 

collect certain National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) data every 2 years. In 

addition, the Statewide Data Systems program would receive an additional $46.9 million for 

initiatives to improve information on students as they move from high school to postsecondary 

education and the workforce and for new grant awards.

The request would continue the Administration’s commitment to supporting the Regional 

Educational Laboratories, the Assessment program, and Special Education Studies and 

Evaluations.

Research, Development, and Dissemination

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $189.8 $189.8 $202.3

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request includes an increase of $12.5 million over the 2012 level to support critical 

investments in education research, development, dissemination, and evaluation that provide 

parents, teachers, and schools with evidence-based information on effective educational 

practice. The request would enable IES to conduct competitions for new awards across 

education research areas that would support the development and testing of practical 

approaches to improve education outcomes for all students. The request also includes funds to 

support a new program, Partnerships and Collaborations Focused on Problems of Practice or 

Policy, which would support research focused on understanding strategies intended to support 

continuous improvement at the level of education systems.
67

Statistics

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................ $108.7 $108.7 $122.7

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Department’s statistics program—operated primarily through competitively awarded 

contracts administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)—provides 

general statistics about trends in education, collects data to monitor reform and measure 

educational progress, and informs the IES research agenda. The 2014 request, an increase of 

$14 million, would support the collection, analysis, and dissemination of education-related 

statistics in response both to legislative requirements and to the particular needs of data 

providers, data users, and educational researchers. The increase would provide $6 million to 

support State participation in a pilot Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) study 

that would allow States to benchmark the performance of their 15-year-old students against 

international standards and $8 million to begin collecting certain National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) data every 2 years, providing more timely information on 

educational costs, financial aid, enrollment, and student progress.

Regional Educational Laboratories (REL) 

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $57.4 $57.4 $57.4

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The requested funds would be used to support the third year of the 5-year REL contracts. The 

RELs serve as a necessary bridge between the research community and State and local 

educational agencies by providing expert advice, including training and technical assistance, to 

bring the latest and best research and proven practices into school improvement efforts. Key 

priorities include providing technical assistance on data analysis, evaluating programs, and 

using data from State longitudinal data systems for research and evaluation that addresses 

important issues of policy and practice.

Assessment

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $138.3 $138.3 $132.3

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The request would fund the ongoing National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and 

the National Assessment Governing Board. NAEP measures and reports on the status of and 

trends in student learning over time, on a subject-by-subject basis, and makes objective 
68

information on student performance available to policymakers, educators, parents, and the 

public. NAEP is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what American 

students know and can do, and it has become a key measure of our Nation’s educational 

performance. NAEP activities are conducted through contracts.

The assessments currently scheduled for 2014 are U.S. history, civics, and geography, as well 

as a technology and engineering literacy assessment. The Administration believes that the 

funds requested are sufficient to enable NAEP to fulfill its mission and continue to provide 

important information on student achievement over time.

Research in Special Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $49.9 $49.9 $59.9

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports discretionary grants and contracts for research to address gaps in 

scientific knowledge in order to improve special education and early intervention services for 

infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities. The request includes a $10 million increase over 

the 2012 level to provide support for programs of research on families of children with 

disabilities; technology for special education; developmental outcomes and school readiness of 

infants, toddlers, and young children with disabilities; educational outcomes in core subject 

areas for children with disabilities; and social and behavioral outcomes. 

Statewide Data Systems

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $38.1 $38.1 $85.0

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports competitive awards to State educational agencies to foster the design, 

development, and implementation of longitudinal data systems that enable States to use data 

on student learning, teacher performance, and college- and career-readiness to enhance the 

provision of education and close achievement gaps. Up to $25 million would be used for 

awards to public or private agencies and organizations to support activities to improve data 

coordination, quality, and use at the local, State, and national levels. The proposed 

$46.9 million increase includes $36 million for new grants emphasizing early childhood data 

linkages and better use of data in analysis and policymaking and $10 million for postsecondary 

data initiatives designed to improve information on students as they progress from high school 

to postsecondary education and the workforce.
69

Special Education Studies and Evaluations

Program budget authority (BA)

2012 2013

2014

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $11.4 $11.4 $11.4

Note: The amount shown for FY 2013 excludes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-theboard decrease required by P.L. 113-6, and the sequester reduction of 5 percent required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program supports studies to assess the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act and the effectiveness of State and local efforts to provide special education and 

early intervention programs and services to infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities. The 

request would support an evaluation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, a 

school-wide approach to address problem behaviors, as well as the development of options for 

evaluating the implementation of IDEA and the effectiveness of programs and services 

supported by IDEA programs.
70

III. PROGRAMS PROPOSED FOR CONSOLIDATION OR ELIMINATION

The current Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) authorizes numerous programs 

with similar purposes, creating fragmented and inefficient funding streams that often lead to a 

greater focus on complying with program requirements rather than improving student outcomes. 

The Administration’s reauthorization proposal would consolidate 38 of these programs into 

11 new authorities that would allow the Department to direct funding to proven or promising 

practices while providing greater flexibility to grantees. Similarly, as part of a proposal to 

reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), the Administration’s 2013 request would 

consolidate 5 programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act into 2 programs. As of 2013, 

Congress had eliminated funding for 24 of these programs, but had not provided the more 

flexible, consolidated program structure proposed by the Administration, which would allow 

continued support for some of the eliminated activities while reducing duplication and 

administrative costs and improving program management and accountability.

Overall, Congress eliminated funding for 49 programs in fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012 for a 

total annual savings of more than $1.2 billion. The table shown below is followed by a brief 

summary of each program, in alphabetical order, that would be consolidated or eliminated under 

the 2014 request.

Discretionary Program Consolidations or Eliminations by Funding Level

Program (2012 BA in millions)

Advanced Placement ................................................................................. $30.1

Arts in Education........................................................................................ 25.0

Charter School Grants ............................................................................... 254.8

Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities ...................................... —

Elementary and Secondary School Counseling.......................................... 52.3

High School Graduation Initiative ............................................................... 48.8

Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property................................................. 66.9

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants .................................................... 2,466.6

Mathematics and Science Partnerships ..................................................... 149.7

Vocational Rehabilitation Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers ................. 1.3

Model Transition Programs for Students with Intellectual

Disabilities into Higher Education ......................................................... 11.0

Physical Education Program ...................................................................... 78.7

Ready-to-Learn Television ......................................................................... 27.2

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Activities............. 64.9

Striving Readers ........................................................................................ 159.7

Supported Employment State Grants......................................................... 29.1

Teacher Incentive Fund ............................................................................. 299.4

Teacher Quality Partnership....................................................................... 42.8

Training for Realtime Writers...................................................................... 1.1

Transition to Teaching................................................................................ 26.1

Total ............................................................................................... 3,835.5
71

Programs Proposed for Consolidation or Elimination in Fiscal Year 2014

(2012 BA in millions)

Advanced Placement ............................................................................................... $30.1

This program supports State and local efforts to increase access to Advanced Placement and International 

Baccalaureate classes and tests for low-income students. Such activities would be supported under the proposed 

College Pathways and Accelerated Learning authority.

Arts in Education...................................................................................................... $25.0

This program supports grants for the development of model arts education programs and for professional 

development for arts educators. The proposed Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education 

authority would support similar activities.

Charter Schools Grants.......................................................................................... $254.8

This program makes competitive grants to State educational agencies and charter school developers to support the 

planning, design, initial implementation, and dissemination of information regarding charter schools. A portion of the 

funding supports State efforts to assist charter schools in obtaining facilities. The proposed Expanding Educational 

Options authority would continue and expand support for charter and other autonomous public schools.

Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities ..........................................................—

This program, currently funded through the Charter Schools appropriation, provides assistance to help charter 

schools meet their facility needs. The new Expanding Educational Options authority would continue to make 

available such assistance.

Elementary and Secondary School Counseling........................................................ $52.3

This program makes competitive grants to assist local educational agencies in developing or expanding elementary 

and secondary school counseling programs. These activities could be supported under the proposed Successful, 

Safe, and Healthy Students program.

High School Graduation Initiative ............................................................................. $48.8

This program provides assistance to help schools implement comprehensive efforts to increase high school 

graduation rates. Such activities would be supported under the proposed College Pathways and Accelerated 

Learning authority, as well as by other reauthorized programs such as Title I College- and Career-Ready Students 

and School Turnaround Grants.

Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property............................................................... $66.9

This authority provides payments to LEAs without regard to the presence of federally connected children and 

therefore, these payments do not necessarily support the provision of educational services for federally connected 

children.

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ............................................................. $2,466.6

This program, which provides funds to States and LEAs to develop and support a high-quality teaching force through 

activities that are grounded in scientifically based research, would be consolidated into the proposed Effective 

Teachers and Leaders State Grants program, which would emphasize the identification of effective teachers and 

leaders and improve access to such teachers and leaders across high- and low-poverty schools.
72

Program Consolidations and Eliminations, continued (2012 BA in millions)

Mathematics and Science Partnerships ................................................................. $149.7

This program, which supports State and local efforts to improve students’ academic achievement in mathematics and 

science by promoting strong teaching skills for elementary and secondary school teachers, would be replaced by the 

proposed Effective Teaching and Learning: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) program. 

The new program would support State implementation of comprehensive, evidence-based strategies and

professional development that aligns Federal, State, and local resources to provide high-quality STEM instruction.

Vocational Rehabilitation Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers................................... $1.3

This program makes comprehensive vocational rehabilitation (VR) services available to migrant and seasonal 

farmworkers with disabilities, with the goal of increasing their employment opportunities. To reduce duplication and 

administrative inefficiencies, this program would be eliminated to support a stronger Federal focus on increasing the 

employment opportunities for all eligible individuals, including migrant and seasonal farmworkers with disabilities.

Model Transition Programs for Students with Intellectual Disabilities

Into Higher Education......................................................................................... $11.0

This program supports competitive grants awarded to institutions of higher education or consortia of such institutions 

to create or expand model comprehensive transition and postsecondary programs for students with intellectual 

disabilities. In place of this program, the Administration is requesting increased funding for the Fund for the 

Improvement of Postsecondary Education, which can support projects to improve college access and completion for 

individuals with disabilities.

Physical Education Program .................................................................................... $78.7

This program makes grants to local educational agencies and community-based organizations to pay for initiating, 

expanding, and improving physical education programs for students in kindergarten through 12th grade, activities that 

would continue to be supported under the proposed Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students program.

Ready-to-Learn Television ....................................................................................... $27.2

This program makes competitive awards to support the development and distribution of educational television and 

video programming and related outreach materials for preschool and elementary school children and their parents 

that are designed to improve school readiness and academic achievement. Competitive funding for such activities 

could be available under two new broader programs: Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy; and Effective 

Teaching and Learning: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Activities........................... $64.9

This program supports competitive grants and other discretionary activities to foster a safe, secure, and drug-free 

learning environment, facilitate emergency management and preparedness, and prevent drug use and violence by 

students at all educational levels. The proposed Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students program would continue to 

make available funding for such activities.

Striving Readers .................................................................................................... $159.7

This program supports efforts to improve the literacy skills (including pre-literacy skills), reading, and writing of 

students from birth through grade 12. Similar activities would be a key focus of the new Effective Teaching and 

Learning: Literacy authority.
73

Program Consolidations and Eliminations, continued (2012 BA in millions)

Supported Employment State Grants....................................................................... $29.1

This formula grant program, which provides supplemental funds to State VR agencies for supported employment 

services for individuals with the most significant disabilities participating in the VR State Grants program, would be 

eliminated, as it has accomplished its goal. State VR agencies recognize supported employment as an integral part 

of the VR State Grants program and a viable employment option for individuals with the most significant disabilities.

Teacher Incentive Fund ......................................................................................... $299.4

This program makes competitive awards to improve student achievement by increasing teacher and principal 

effectiveness; reform teacher and principal compensation systems so that teachers and principals are rewarded for 

gains in student achievement; increase the number of effective teachers teaching low-income, minority, and 

disadvantaged students in hard-to-staff subjects; and create sustainable performance-based compensation systems. 

These activities would continue to be supported through the proposed Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund.

Teacher Quality Partnership..................................................................................... $42.8

This program supports the development and implementation of model teacher preparation and teaching residency 

programs to improve the quality of teaching in high-need schools and early childhood education programs. The 

proposed set-aside in Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants would support similar activities.

Training for Realtime Writers...................................................................................... $1.1

This program promotes training and placement of individuals as realtime writers. This program is narrowly focused 

and the Administration believes limited Federal resources should be focused on building evidence of what works to 

improve postsecondary success under the First in the World fund in the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary 

Education.

Transition to Teaching.............................................................................................. $26.1

This program supports competitive grants to develop and implement comprehensive approaches to training, placing, 

and supporting teacher candidates through alternative routes to teacher certification or licensure. The proposed setaside in Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants would support similar activities.
74

IV. DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

History and Background

Congress established the Department of Education as a Cabinet level agency in 1980. Today, 

the Department supports programs that touch on every area and level of education. The 

Department's early learning, elementary, and secondary education programs annually serve 

approximately 16,000 school districts and 49 million students attending more than 98,000 public 

schools and 28,000 private schools. Department programs also provide grant, loan, and workstudy assistance to nearly 14 million postsecondary students.

The Department of Education is responsible for administering education programs authorized by 

Congress and signed into law by the President. This responsibility involves developing 

regulations and policy guidance that determine exactly how programs are operated, determining 

how program funds are awarded to recipients, ensuring that programs are operated fairly and in 

conformance with both authorizing statutes and laws prohibiting discrimination in federally 

funded activities, collecting data and conducting research on education, and helping to focus 

attention on education issues of national importance.

Most Federal funds for education are distributed using one of three methods: a statutory 

formula based on certain eligibility requirements, such as the number of low-income students in 

a school district; a competitive process aimed at identifying the most promising proposals or 

projects targeting a particular educational purpose; or an assessment of financial need, such as 

the ability of a student or family to pay for college.

Key programs administered by the Department include Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA), which under the President’s 2014 request would deliver $14.5 billion to 

help 23 million students in high poverty schools make progress toward State academic 

standards; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Part B Grants to States, which would 

provide $11.6 billion to help States and school districts meet the special educational needs of

6.5 million students with disabilities; Federal Pell Grants, which would make available nearly 

$35.4 billion in need-based grant assistance to 9.4 million students enrolled in postsecondary 

institutions; and the postsecondary student loan programs, which would help provide roughly 

$140 billion in new and consolidated Direct Loans to help students and families pay for college.

The Department’s programs and responsibilities have grown substantially over the past decade. 

There have been fundamental education reforms such as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 

which reauthorized the ESEA, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 

which provided first-time funding for the Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation (i3) 

programs. In the postsecondary area, the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 

2008 (ECASLA) supported uninterrupted access by students to Federal student loans 

throughout the 2008-2009 financial crisis, while the SAFRA legislation of 2010 ended Federal 

subsidies to private lenders, saving $68 billion that was redirected in large part to help Pell 

Grants keep pace with rising college costs, reduce the burden of loan repayment for college 

graduates, expand career training opportunities at local community colleges, and increase

support for minority-serving institutions.

At the same time, the Administration has succeeded in eliminating or consolidating 49 programs 

that had served their purpose, proven ineffective, or were more effectively supported through 
75

other, broader authorities. These eliminations are saving more than $1.2 billion per year in

discretionary appropriations and, as the programs wind down following the completion and 

close-out of existing awards, will reduce administrative workload and permit the reassignment of 

staff to other, higher-priority activities. 

While the Department is administering fewer programs, it also has taken on new, complex 

statutory, regulatory, and administrative responsibilities. Laws and Presidential directives such 

as Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 and the Federal Information Security 

Management Act of 2002 have required significant ongoing resources to address physical and 

information security technology issues. There has been an enhanced focus from the Office of 

Management and Budget on prudent financial management through instruments such as OMB 

Circular A-123 on internal controls. Finally, the Department has needed to devote more 

resources to information technology management (e.g., OMB Exhibits A-53 on IT investment 

portfolio and A-300 on the management of capital assets). 

Despite the dramatic increase in its workload over the past decade, the Department has been 

able to control its administrative costs by reducing headcount and improving its acquisition and 

financial management. The following chart compares the cumulative percentage increases, 

from 2002 to 2012, of the Department’s discretionary budget, total loan originations, and FAFSA 

applications, with the Department’s total full-time equivalent (FTE) usage.

Salaries and Expenses Overview
76

2012 Footnote 2013 Footnote

2014

RequestFootnote

Departmental Management

(BA in millions)

Program Administration $446.3 $446.3 $463.51

Office of Civil Rights 102.6 102.6 107.5

Office of Inspector General 59.8 59.8 62.3

Student Aid Administration 1,043.42 1,043.42, 1,050.12

Other 9.93 9.83 8.83

Total 1,662.0 1,661.9 1,692.2

Full-time equivalent employment (FTE)

Program Administration 2,053 2,035 2,051

Office of Civil Rights 582 598 598

Office of Inspector General 265 269 277

Student Aid Administration 1,325 1,326 1,321

Other 18 19 19

Subtotal 4,243 4,247 4,266

Recovery Act (Office of Inspector General) 33 0 0

Total 4,2764 4,2474 4,2664

 Note: The figures shown for 2013 exclude the impact of the 0.612 percent across-the-board discretionary 

increase provided in P.L. 112-175, the 0.2 percent across-the-board discretionary decrease required by 

P.L. 113-6, and sequester reductions of 5 percent for discretionary funding and 5.1 percent for mandatory 

funding required by the Budget Control Act of 2011. 1 Includes $2.0 million in 2014 for Building Modernization.

2 Excludes $276.7 million in 2012, $385.9 million in 2013, and $434.4 million in 2014 in Mandatory funds. 3

Includes small Federal Credit Administration accounts and S&E activities in program accounts.

4 Actual FTE usage in 2012; target for 2013 and 2014.
77

The 2014 budget request for Salaries and Expenses (S&E) will pay the costs of staff, overhead, 

contracts, and other activities needed to administer and monitor the Department’s educational 

assistance programs. The Department of Education has the smallest staff of the 15 Cabinet 

agencies, but its discretionary budget alone is the third largest, behind only the Department of 

Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services. In addition, its efficient and 

contractor-assisted administration of student financial assistance helps limit administrative costs

for student aid to less than 1 percent of the nearly $155 billion of new aid available annually, not 

including consolidations, through Department programs. When adjusted for inflation, the 

Department of Education’s overall administrative budget is about the same as it was 10 years 

ago, and FTE has declined by 6 percent.

The Department is requesting $1.692 billion for its S&E budget in 2014, an increase of 

$30 million, or 2 percent, over the 2013 level. The Department’s Salaries and Expenses budget 

in 2014 also includes $434.4 million in mandatory funding for Not-For-Profit (NFP) loan 

servicers in the Student Aid Administration account. In addition, the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS) has requested and will transfer $3 million in additional funds to the 

Student Aid Administration account to manage and service the Health Education Assistance 

Loan (HEAL) Program.

The requested increase is focused mainly on key overhead areas: Education’s Central 

Automated Processing System (EDCAPS), rent, IT security, IT system enhancements, and 

building modernization costs associated with Department-occupied buildings. 

The chart below provides detail on the total Salaries and Expenses request of $1.692 billion by 

category. 

Department Employment

The 2014 request includes funding for 4,266 FTE, a net increase of 19 FTE from the 2013 level 

of 4,247 FTE. Three FTE are requested in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education 

to handle increased workload related to monitoring and providing technical assistance to 

support effective State implementation of ESEA flexibility plans designed to improve educational 

outcomes for all students. As there will be significant variation in the State accountability and 

support systems created under ESEA flexibility, these FTE would also support the effort to build 

Personnel

35%

Other Non-Personnel

4%

Overhead (Rent & 

Mail) 5%

Contracts

56%

FY 2014 Salaries & Expenses Costs by Category

Contract costs account for most of the Salaries and Expenses budget.
78

a body of evidence through the development and analysis of program performance measures 

and program evaluations. An additional 5 FTE are requested in the Office of Innovation and 

Improvement to establish an Office of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

(STEM) Education that would play a critical role in improving K-12 STEM instruction as part of 

the consolidation and realignment of Federal STEM programs. An additional 8 FTE will be used 

in the Office of Inspector General to support audit, investigation, and inspection activities, as 

well as information technology (IT) audits and computer crime investigations (cyber security) for 

all Department programs. Eight additional FTE are requested to strengthen the Department’s

evaluation capacities in response to the OMB Memorandum M-12-14. The request includes a 

5 FTE reduction in Federal Student Aid. 

 

As shown in the following chart, staff is divided among the Washington, D.C. headquarters, 

11 regional offices, and 13 field offices. Most regional and field office staff are in Federal 

Student Aid (FSA), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), and the Office for Civil Rights 

(OCR). FSA regional office personnel conduct reviews of lenders, institutions, and guaranty 

agencies participating in the student financial aid programs and perform debt collection activities 

on defaulted student loans. OIG staff conducts audits and investigations of Department 

programs and operations. OCR investigates civil rights complaints and conducts civil rights 

compliance reviews.

Boston

New York City

Philadelphia

Washington, D.C.

Regional Offices

Field Offices

Location of the Department of Education 

Regional and Field Offices

Seattle

San

Francisco Denver

Kansas

City

Chicago

Atlanta

Dallas

Cleveland Sacramento

Long Beach

Puerto Rico Pembroke 

Pines

Pittsburgh

St. Paul

Austin

Phoenix

Nashville

Ann Arbor
79

Program Administration

The Program Administration account provides administrative support for most programs and 

offices in the Department. The 2014 request totals $463.5 million, an increase of $17.0 million, 

or 3.8 percent, above the 2013 level. The request includes $292.0 million for personnel 

compensation and benefits to support 2,051 FTE, which reflects an increase of 16 FTE from the 

2013 level.

 

Non-personnel costs cover such items as travel, rent, mail, telephones, utilities, printing, 

information technology, contractual services, equipment, supplies, and other services. The total 

request for non-personnel activities in 2014 is $171.4 million, an increase of $12.2 million from 

the 2013 level of $159.2 million. This increase is needed to: (1) support the new Office of STEM 

Education, which will engage in outreach and technical assistance activities to States and 

districts in support of the STEM Innovation initiative; (2) provide continued operations of

EDCAPS, the Department’s core financial system; and (3) complete the implementation of a 

new Contracts and Purchasing Support System to replace the current system, which is at the 

end of its lifecycle and is not meeting key functionality needs required to manage the contract 

acquisition and purchasing process.

Student Aid Administration

The Student Aid Administration account provides funds to administer the Federal student 

financial assistance programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 

1965, as amended. The Title IV programs, which provide funds to help students and families 

pay for the cost of education beyond high school, collectively represent the Nation’s largest 

source of financial aid for postsecondary students. The Student Aid Administration account 

supports a range of functions across the student aid lifecycle, including education for students 

and families about the process for obtaining aid, processing student financial aid applications,

disbursing aid, insuring existing loans, and servicing loans.

Ensuring the smooth operation of the complex array of financial transactions and participants 

involved in the student financial aid programs—and safeguarding the interests of both students 

and Federal taxpayers—is one of the Department's greatest management challenges and one 

of its highest administrative priorities. Primary responsibility for administering the Federal 

student financial assistance programs rests with Federal Student Aid (FSA) and the Office of 

Postsecondary Education (OPE).

During the 2012-2013 award year, FSA delivered or supported the delivery of approximately 

$177.3 billion in grant, work-study, and loan assistance, including loan consolidations, to almost 

14 million postsecondary students and their families. These students attended approximately 

6,200 active institutions of postsecondary education accredited by dozens of agencies.

The enactment of SAFRA ended the origination of new loans under the Federal Family 

Education Loan (FFEL) program and required all new loans to be originated through the Direct 

Loan (DL) program and serviced by the Department of Education effective July 1, 2010. 

Although all new lending is made through the DL program, lenders and guaranty agencies 

continue to service and collect outstanding loans from the FFEL portfolio. In addition, SAFRA 

authorized mandatory budget authority to support loan servicing performed by Not-For-Profit 

servicers. The Department is currently contracted with 16 loan servicers, both For-Profit and 

Not-For-Profit, in order to meet the growing demands of servicing Direct Loans and servicing 

loans purchased under ECASLA.
80

The Student Aid Administration account represents 62 percent of the Department’s total 

discretionary administrative budget. The 2014 request would provide $1.1 billion to administer 

student aid programs, an increase of $6.7 million over the 2013 level. The requested funds are 

necessary to manage and service the student loan portfolio, including anticipated increases in 

loan volume; maintain operations for student aid application processing, origination and 

disbursement functions, as well as student aid IT system hosting; and manage the acquisition 

strategy for Federal Student Aid’s (FSA) core contracts for origination and disbursement and 

system hosting.

Office for Civil Rights

The Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) investigates discrimination complaints, conducts 

compliance reviews, monitors corrective action plans, and provides technical assistance on civil 

rights issues. Over the past 5 years, OCR’s workload has dramatically increased as civil rights 

complaints received by the Department have increased from 6,364 in 2009 to an estimated 

8,200 in 2014. The 2014 request for OCR is $107.5 million, an increase of $4.9 million over the 

2013 level. Most of the requested increase is for the Civil Rights Data collection (CRDC), which 

will be used to complete survey activities relating to the data for the 2011-2012 school year, 

support enhanced data quality activities, publish data through the CRDC website, and support 

planning activities for the next universal data collection, scheduled for the 2013-2014 school 

year. About $80.6 million of the OCR budget is for staff pay and benefits for its 598 FTE; the 

remaining $20.5 million covers overhead costs as well as computer equipment, data analysis 

and reporting activities, travel, and other contractual services.

The requested funds will ensure essential program support to resolve complaints of 

discrimination filed by the public and to ensure that institutions receiving Federal financial 

assistance are in compliance with the civil rights laws enforced by OCR. The request also will 

provide resources for technical assistance to recipients, parents, and students to address civil 

rights concerns and to prevent problems from arising in the future. OCR provides extensive 

information on its Internet site, including self-assessment materials for recipients, data on school 

characteristics, brochures, and other information for the public.

Office of Inspector General

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts audits and investigations of the Department’s 

programs and activities to help ensure accountability for taxpayer-provided funds and to identify 

management improvements. The 2014 request for the OIG is $62.3 million, an increase of $2.5 

million over the 2013 level. Approximately 65 percent of this amount, or $40.7 million, is for 

personnel compensation and benefits to support a staffing level of 277 FTE.

The non-personnel request of $21.6 million includes $2.2 million to contract for the mandated 

annual audit of the Department’s financial statements. The scope of the audit will include the 

examination and analysis of account balances, review of applicable financial systems, and 

evaluation of internal controls and compliance with significant laws and regulations. 

Additionally, the non-personnel request includes funds to support the Council of Inspectors 

General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE); and to continue to develop the ability to perform 

predictive analytics, a new tool to help determine whether accounting anomalies are indicative 

of fraudulent activity.
81

APPENDICES

• Sequestration and Continuing Resolution at the Department of Education

• Summary of Discretionary Funds

• Mandatory Funding in the Department of Education

• Summary of Mandatory Funds

• Advance Appropriations for Department of Education

• Total Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary Education in the 

United States

• Detailed Budget Table by Program