i

Fiscal Year 2015 Budget

Summary and Background Information

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. SUMMARY OF THE 2015 BUDGET.......................................................................................1

II. THE 2015 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 – Equity and Opportunity........................................................................16

Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) ......................................................................................17

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

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

STEM Innovation .............................................................................................................20

STEM Innovation Networks ........................................................................................20

STEM Teacher Pathways ...........................................................................................20

STEM Master Teacher Corps .....................................................................................20

Effective Teaching and Learning: STEM.....................................................................21

High School Redesign......................................................................................................21

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

Excellent Instructional Teams ..........................................................................................22

Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants ............................................................22

ConnectEDucators .....................................................................................................23

Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund.........................................................................23

School Leadership......................................................................................................23

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy.......................................................................23

Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education......................................24

Expanding Educational Options .......................................................................................24

Supporting Effective Charter Schools .........................................................................24

Promoting Public School Choice.................................................................................24

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

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

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students...........................................................................25

Now Is the Time..........................................................................................................25

College Pathways and Accelerated Learning ...................................................................26

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

Fund for the Improvement of Education ...........................................................................27

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

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

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

Neglected and Delinquent Children and Youth Education...........................................28
ii

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, continued:

Page

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

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

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

Native Hawaiian Student Education .................................................................................29

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

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

Impact Aid........................................................................................................................30

Training and Advisory Services (Title IV of the Civil Rights Act) .......................................31

Supplemental Education Grants (Compact of Free Association Amendments Act) ..........31

C. SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES...........................................32

Overview ...............................................................................................................................32

Special Education..................................................................................................................33

Grants to States ...............................................................................................................33

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

Grants for Infants and Families ........................................................................................34

State Personnel Development..........................................................................................34

Technical Assistance and Dissemination .........................................................................34

Personnel Preparation .....................................................................................................35

Parent Information Centers ..............................................................................................35

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials ................................................................35

Special Olympics Education Programs.............................................................................36

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research....................................................................36

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants.....................................................................36

Client Assistance State Grants.........................................................................................37

Training............................................................................................................................37

Demonstration and Training .............................................................................................37

Independent Living...........................................................................................................38

Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) .......................................................38

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.............................................38

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults........................................39

Assistive Technology .......................................................................................................39

Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities ...............................................................39

American Printing House............................................................................................40

National Technical Institute for the Deaf .....................................................................40

Gallaudet University ...................................................................................................40

D. CAREER, TECHNICAL, AND ADULT EDUCATION........................................................41

Overview ...............................................................................................................................41

Career and Technical Education ......................................................................................41

Adult Education (Adult Basic and Literacy Education)......................................................42

Skills Challenge Grants ..............................................................................................42
iii

Page

E. STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.............................................................................43

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

Student Aid Summary Tables...........................................................................................46

Tax Benefits for Postsecondary Students.........................................................................48

Federal Pell Grant Program .............................................................................................48

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.................................................................49

Work-Study ......................................................................................................................49

Perkins Loans ..................................................................................................................50

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants................................................................................51

TEACH Grants .................................................................................................................51

Federal Family Education Loans and Direct Loans ..........................................................52

F. HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS................................................................................55

Overview ...............................................................................................................................55

Title III: Aid for Institutional Development .........................................................................56

Aid for Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs)......................................................................58

International Education and Foreign Language Studies (IEFLS) ......................................59

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)......................................59

First in the World..............................................................................................................59

College Success Grants for Minority-Serving Insitutions ..................................................59

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions ...............................60

Special Programs for Migrant Students............................................................................60

Federal TRIO Programs...................................................................................................60

Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) .......61

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN)...............................................61

Child Care Access Means Parents in School ...................................................................61

GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation..............................................................................62

State Higher Education Performance (SHEP) Fund .........................................................62

College Opportunity and Graduation Bonus .....................................................................63

Howard University............................................................................................................64

Academic Facilities ..........................................................................................................64

G. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES .......................................................................65

Overview ...............................................................................................................................65

Research, Development, and Dissemination....................................................................65

Statistics ..........................................................................................................................66

Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs).......................................................................66

Assessment .....................................................................................................................66

Research in Special Education ........................................................................................67

Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems ..............................................................................67

Special Education Studies and Evaluations .....................................................................67

III. PROGRAMS PROPOSED FOR CONSOLIDATION OR ELIMINATION ..............................68
iv

Page

IV. DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT .....................................................................................73

History and Background ........................................................................................................73

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

Department Employment.......................................................................................................76

Program Administration .........................................................................................................77

Student Aid Administration.....................................................................................................78

Office for Civil Rights.............................................................................................................78

Office of Inspector General....................................................................................................79

APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................80

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
The America we want for our kids – a rising America where honest work is plentiful and 

communities are strong; where prosperity is widely shared and opportunity for all lets us go as 

far as our dreams and toil will take us – none of it is easy. But if we work together, if we 

summon what is best in us, with our feet planted firmly in today, but our eyes cast towards 

tomorrow – I know it’s within our reach. 

President Barack Obama

January 28, 2014

I. SUMMARY OF THE 2015 BUDGET

In recent years, America’s schools have undertaken significant changes and America’s students 

are making positive gains in achievement and other educational outcomes. For example, the 

Nation’s high school graduation rate is at its highest point on record, in large part due to 

increases since 2007-2008 in the percentage of African-American students (up 5 points) and 

Hispanic students (up 8 points) receiving diplomas, and steep declines in dropout rates for 

African-American, Hispanic, and low-income youth. 

Last year, math and reading scores for fourth- and eighth-graders reached new highs on the 

National Assessment of Educational Progress. These positive changes show we are on the 

right path in improving the quality of our education system. They have been supported through 

commitments to education such as the $100 billion in education aid from the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009, continued support for critical formula grant programs 

for low-income and high-need students, and strategic investments to promote innovation and 

reform through programs such as the Race to the Top (RTT), Investing in Innovation (i3), 

School Improvement Grants (SIG), and Promise Neighborhoods. 

To help more students afford college and graduate with a degree, the Obama Administration 

has increased Federal investments in Pell Grants, college tax credits, and affordable loan 

repayment options. College attendance by minorities has jumped sharply, with 38 percent of 

African-American students now attending college compared to 30 percent in 2000, and 

32 percent of Hispanic students attending college compared to 22 percent in 2000. 

The Administration’s 2015 Budget builds on these efforts. 

The Administration is requesting $68.6 billion in discretionary appropriations for the 

Department of Education in 2015, an increase of $1.3 billion, or 1.9 percent, more than 

the 2014 level and almost $3 billion more than in 2013.

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

discretionary request for the Pell Grant program, and the total discretionary request. 
2

Department of Education Discretionary Appropriations

(in billions of dollars)

Breakdown of Department 

discretionary appropriations 2013 2014

2015

Request

Change

from 2014

Discretionary

(without Pell Grants)

$42.9 $44.5 $45.8 +$1.3

Pell Grants

(discretionary request)

$22.8 $22.8 $22.8 0.0

Total $65.7 $67.3 $68.6 +$1.3

The overall 2015 Budget also includes mandatory funds for both existing programs and new 

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

annually 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 the cost of Federal borrowing, origination fees, 

repayments, and defaults. Other education programs funded in whole or in part through 

mandatory appropriations include Pell Grants, Higher Education Aid for Strengthening 

Institutions, and Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants. New mandatory programs in the 

2015 Budget include RESPECT, the State Higher Education Performance Fund, and College 

Opportunity and Graduation Bonus grants.

From fiscal years 2010-2012, the Department 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 

even greater efficiencies and advance reforms that would improve student outcomes, Congress 

should enact the Administration’s proposal to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA). Legislation enacted in 2010 also ended the inefficient guaranteed 

student loan program. The resulting savings were invested in the Pell Grant program to support 

an increase in the maximum award, which has risen from $4,731 in award year 2008-2009 to 

$5,730 in award year 2014-2015; in expanding education and training at America’s community 

colleges; and in an expanded income-based repayment program to help borrowers better 

manage their student loan debt.

Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative

In late 2013, through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (BBA), Congress took an important first 

step toward replacing the damaging cuts caused by sequestration with longer-term reforms. 

Recognizing the importance of the 2-year budget agreement Congress reached in December, 

the President’s Budget adheres to the BBA’s discretionary funding levels for 2015, giving 

Congress a roadmap for how to create a budget at those levels that promotes growth and 

opportunity, enhances national security, and makes important reforms. 
3

However, the BBA levels are not sufficient to expand opportunity to all Americans or to drive the 

growth our economy needs. The BBA replaced half the sequestration cut for 2014 but just 

one-fifth of the scheduled cut in the discretionary funding level for 2015. As a result, taking into 

account unavoidable growth in programs such as veterans’ medical care and other factors, the 

BBA non-defense discretionary funding levels for 2015 are below the levels Congress provided 

in the bipartisan Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014. They are also below the 2007

funding levels, adjusted for inflation, even though the need for pro-growth investments in 

infrastructure, education, and innovation has only increased due to the Great Recession and its 

aftermath.

For that reason, the Administration’s Budget also includes a separate $56 billion Opportunity, 

Growth, and Security Initiative. The Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative, which is split 

evenly between defense and non-defense funding, recommends additional discretionary 

investments in 2015 that would spur economic progress, promote opportunity, and strengthen 

national security. 

Moreover, the Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative is fully paid for with a balanced 

package of spending cuts and closed tax loopholes, showing that additional pro-growth 

investments are easily affordable without increasing the deficit if Congress will enact commonsense spending and tax reforms. 

At the Department of Education, the Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative would support 

additional investments of $250 million for Preschool Development Grants, $300 million for the 

ConnectEDucators initiative, and $200 million for Promise Neighborhoods. All of these funds 

are in addition to the discretionary requests under the caps.

MAJOR INITIATIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

The 2015 Budget request for the Department focuses on six priorities: (1) increasing equity and 

opportunity for all students, (2) strengthening support for teachers and school leaders; 

(3) expanding high-quality preschool programs; (4) affordability and quality in postsecondary 

education; (5) promoting educational innovation and improvement; and (6) improving school 

safety and climate. 

Increasing Equity and Opportunity for All Students

Equity in education is vital because equality of opportunity is a core American value that helps 

form our national identity and gives us our economic strength. All young people in this country 

must have the chance to learn and achieve. Far too many students, especially in underserved 

groups and communities, lack access to a quality education, including strong teaching, rigorous 

coursework, high standards, engaging enrichment activities, safe environments, high-quality 

preschool, and affordable higher education. The 2015 request includes an emphasis on 

ensuring that all students—including poor and minority students, students with disabilities, and 

English Learners—graduate from high school prepared for college and careers. The 

Administration’s signature reform measures, including RTT and ESEA Flexibility, advance this 

goal through supporting State and local efforts in the implementation of college- and careerready (CCR) standards and aligned assessments, rigorous accountability systems intended to 

help close achievement gaps and turn around our lowest-performing schools, and new teacher 

and leader evaluation and support systems aimed at ensuring that every classroom has an 

effective teacher and every school an effective principal. However, the Administration 

recognizes that continuing inequities in the distribution of educational resources—funding, 
4

effective teachers and leaders, access to rigorous coursework, and safe schools—means that 

not all students are benefiting fully from these reforms. The 2015 request would address these 

inequities through a combination of new and existing programs.

• $300 million for a new Race to the Top – Equity and Opportunity (RTT-Opportunity) 

competition centered on improving the academic performance of students in the Nation’s 

highest poverty schools. This proposal would create incentives for States and school 

districts to make comprehensive changes in how they identify and close opportunity and 

achievement gaps. Building on previous reforms and existing Federal investments like 

Title I and Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems, grants would support: (1) developing and 

implementing systems that integrate data on school-level finances, human resources, and 

academic achievement; and (2) developing, attracting, and retaining effective teachers and 

leaders in high-poverty schools. Grants would also fund evidence-based practices, such as 

increasing access to rigorous coursework and activities that mitigate the effects of 

concentrated poverty, such as enhancing school climate and culture. Data would be used to 

identify the greatest disparities in opportunity and performance as well as effective 

strategies to address them so that all students are prepared for college and careers.

 

• $14.4 billion for Title I College- and Career-Ready Students and $11.6 billion for Special 

Education Grants to States to maintain support for students from low-income families 

attending high-poverty schools and students with disabilities. The 2015 request also 

continues to protect other key formula programs that target high-need populations, including 

$723 million for English Learner Education, $375 million for Migrant Students, $48 million for 

Neglected and Delinquent Children and Youth Education, $65 million for Homeless Children 

and Youth Education, $124 million for Indian Student Education, $32 million for Native 

Hawaiian Student Education, $31 million for Alaska Native Student Education, and 

$170 million for Rural Education programs. 

• $1.1 billion for a reauthorized 21st Century Community Learning Centers program to support 

competitive grants to States, local education agencies (LEAs), nonprofit 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.

• $505.8 million for School Turnaround Grants (STG) to maintain strong support for State and 

local efforts to implement rigorous, locally selected interventions in our lowest-performing 

schools, including Priority Schools identified through ESEA Flexibility. Interventions are 

designed to change school climate, culture, and outcomes through improved leadership, 

more effective teachers, better use of instructional time, more rigorous curricula, and datadriven reforms. Funds would support new grants serving an estimated 170 schools under 

the reauthorized program.

• $100 million for Promise Neighborhoods, an increase of $43 million, for awards to a new 

cohort of high-need communities that develop plans combining effective, cradle-to-career 

services for children and families with comprehensive reforms centered on high-quality 

schools.
5

• $70 million for Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems, an increase of $35 million, to support 

expansion and enhancement of systems that support the integration of data on school-level 

finances, teacher and leader effectiveness, and academic achievement that can be used to 

analyze links between the distribution of educational resources and student outcomes, with 

the overall goal of improving the effectiveness and productivity of our education system.

Strengthening Support for Teachers and School Leaders

The 2015 request provides significant support for teachers and leaders who are doing the hard, 

daily work of implementing new CCR standards and aligned assessments, turning around our 

lowest-performing schools, and using new evaluation and support systems to improve their 

practice. In particular, we are seeking new funding to build educators’ capacity to use 

technology to deliver instruction aligned to new CCR standards, while also continuing to support 

the Administration’s proposal for reauthorizing ESEA teacher and leader programs and 

renewing our mandatory proposal for the Recognizing Educational Success, Professional 

Excellence, and Collaborative Teaching (RESPECT) initiative. The 2015 request includes:

 

• $200 million for a new ConnectEDucators initiative that would help educators transition to 

using technology and data to personalize learning and improve CCR instruction and 

assessment. The goal of the ConnectEDucators program is to ensure that teachers and 

leaders with access to high-speed Internet and devices for students, including those in 

schools supported through the Administration’s ConnectED initiative, are well prepared to 

use these resources in a way that improves classroom instruction and student learning. 

Funds would provide support for educators in creating and using high-quality open digital 

learning resources and content aligned to CCR standards; using mobile devices and digital 

tools to personalize learning and implement new assessments; analyzing real-time data to 

understand and improve student outcomes; using technology to personalize student 

learning and to increase student engagement; and providing remote access to effective 

educators, such as master teachers, to assist with hard-to-staff schools and subjects.

• $2.3 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:

− $2.0 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 10 percent national activities set-aside 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. 

− $320 million for the Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund to help States and LEAs 

improve the effectiveness of teachers and leaders in high-need LEAs and schools by 

reforming teacher and school leader advancement and compensation systems and 

implementing other innovative personnel strategies to strengthen teacher and school 

leadership teams.
6

• $35 million for a transformed School Leadership Program to expand the Department’s 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, creating a positive 

school climate, and supporting instruction aligned to CCR standards.

• $5 billion in one-time 2015 mandatory funds for the RESPECT (Recognizing Educational 

Success, Professional Excellence, and Collaborative Teaching) grants, to provide targeted 

support for teachers and school leaders by improving preparation and early career 

assistance, giving teachers and leaders opportunities to develop and advance as they lead 

the transition to college- and career-ready standards, and ensuring that teachers have a 

supportive work environment built around shared collaboration. This request would support 

up to 1,000 grants to States and districts to invest in needed improvements to the education 

profession, reaching up to 1.6 million teachers.

Expanding High-Quality Preschool Programs

Last year President Obama committed to expanding educational opportunity for millions of 

children through a historic new investment that would support universal access to high-quality 

preschool for all 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income families, while also creating an 

incentive for States to serve additional middle-class families. The 2015 Budget renews the 

President’s request for the $75 billion mandatory Preschool for All (P4A) program as the 

centerpiece of his early learning agenda. 

In addition, we would build on the success of winning congressional support for the initial 

$250 million fiscal year 2014 investment in the Preschool Development Grant (PDG) program 

by doubling funding for PDG to $500 million in fiscal year 2015. The 2015 request for early 

learning includes: 

• $1.3 billion in 2015 and $75 billion over 10 years in mandatory funding for Preschool for All 

to 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 proposal is based on a cost-sharing model that would help 

States serve all children from low- and moderate-income families, create an incentive for 

States to expand access to high-quality preschool for additional middle-class families, and 

promote access to full-day kindergarten.

• $500 million for competitively awarded Preschool Development Grants to help build State 

and local capacity to implement high-quality preschool programs and to enhance or expand 

existing programs. An additional $250 million request is proposed as part of the President’s 

Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative, for a total discretionary investment of 

$750 million. 

• $441.8 million for the Grants for Infants and Families program under the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), an increase of $3.3 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.
7

• $353.2 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.

These investments would be complemented by funds provided through the Department of 

Health and Human Services to support voluntary home visiting programs and high-quality infant 

and toddler care.

Affordability and Quality in Postsecondary Education

In today’s economy, a college degree is the surest ticket to the middle class; however, fewer 

than 1 in 10 students from low-income families complete college. To keep America’s economy 

strong and strengthen the middle class, the 2015 request would help make college affordable 

and help more Americans obtain a college degree or certificate. The 2015 request also funds a 

signature initiative to help America’s families make informed college choices by working with the 

higher education community to develop a sensible and constructive college rating system. Each 

of the proposals below is intended to support the President’s goal that America will once again 

have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020: 

• Rewarding and improving Pell Grant outcomes. The 2015 request provides $7 billion in 

mandatory budget authority over 10 years for new College Opportunity and Graduation 

Bonus grants to reward colleges that successfully enroll and graduate a significant number

of low- and moderate-income students on time and encourage all institutions to improve 

their performance. This new initiative would support innovations, interventions, and reforms 

to further increase college access and success by providing funding to eligible institutions 

based upon the number of Pell students they graduate on time. In addition, the Budget 

would expand Pell Grant eligibility to students who are co-enrolled in adult and 

postsecondary education as part of a career pathway program to allow adults without a high 

school diploma to gain the knowledge and skills they need to secure a good job, and would 

promote, on a pilot basis, efforts to improve student persistence and academic success, and 

accelerate progress towards an affordable, high-quality degree or credential. The Budget 

also would strengthen academic progress requirements in the Pell Grant program to 

encourage students to complete their studies on time.

• $4 billion for the State Higher Education Performance Fund would provide mandatory 

funding through multi-year (4-year) competitive grants to States to support (1) the successful 

implementation of performance-based policy and funding reforms that encourage and 

reward college attainment and affordability, as well as institutional innovation and reforms; 

and (2) maintaining State expenditures on higher education in States with a strong record of 

investment, or increasing State support in low-investment States. States would be required 

to match these resources dollar-for-dollar, for a total investment of $8 billion over 4 years.

• $100 million for a First in the World fund, under the Fund for the Improvement of 

Postsecondary Education, that would make competitive awards to support innovative 

strategies and practices shown to be effective in improving educational outcomes, including 

on-time completion rates, and making college more affordable for students and families, 

particularly for low-income students. 
8

• $75 million for College Success Grants for Minority-Serving Institutions that would provide 

competitive awards to minority-serving institutions designated under Title III and Title V of 

the Higher Education Act. Grants would support implementation of sustainable strategies, 

processes and tools (including technology) to reduce costs and improve outcomes for 

students. Funding could be used to implement evidence-based approaches and systems, 

as well as for evaluation and continuous improvement.

• Ensuring that student debt remains affordable, by continuing longstanding Administration 

efforts to help student borrowers with existing debt to manage their obligations through 

income-driven repayment plans, including a Pay As You Earn (PAYE) option that caps 

student loan payments at 10 percent of discretionary income. The Department has 

contacted struggling borrowers to make sure they are aware of these new plans and ensure 

that they have the information they need to choose the best one for them. The 2015 request 

proposes to extend PAYE to all student borrowers and reform PAYE terms to ensure that

the program benefits are targeted to the neediest borrowers and safeguard the program for 

the future. 

• Reforming campus-based aid to serve low-income students better. While all Title IV-eligible 

schools are potentially eligible to participate in the campus-based aid programs—Federal 

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG), Federal Work-Study, and Federal 

Perkins Loans—current allocation practices tend to reward schools for high-tuition prices; 

ignore the population of Pell-eligible students attending the institutions; and fail to take into 

account whether institutions offer a good value to students. The 2015 request would reform 

allocations in the campus-based programs to target those institutions that enroll and 

graduate higher numbers of Pell-eligible students, provide an affordable education, and offer 

quality education and training such that graduates can repay their educational debt. The 

request also would expand annual Perkins lending from the current $1 billion to $8.5 billion 

while shifting loan administration to the Federal Government.

Promoting Educational Innovation and Improvement

The 2015 request would continue the President’s strong emphasis on innovation and 

partnership to advance reform and improve educational outcomes. The Administration’s 

flagship program in this area remains Investing in Innovation (i3), which continues to build the 

evidence base for effective educational practices that would help to close America’s 

achievement gap. The 2015 Budget also renews the President’s request for new investment in 

high school redesign and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, 

while also proposing new initiatives in adult education and career and technical education that 

would promote innovation and collaboration between secondary and postsecondary education, 

nonprofit and community partners, business and industry, and researchers and other private 

sector partners. These investments would be designed to support transformational change in 

the way our country prepares students and adult learners for college and career success:

• $165 million for Investing in Innovation (i3), an increase of $23.4 million, to maintain strong 

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 $49.5 million for the

Advanced Research Projects Agency for Education (ARPA-ED), an initiative modeled on 
9

similar entities at the Departments of Defense and Energy that would aggressively pursue 

technological breakthroughs with the potential to improve the effectiveness and productivity 

of teaching and learning.

• $150 million for a new High School Redesign program to support the transformation of the 

high school experience by funding competitive grants to school districts and their partners to 

redesign high schools in innovative ways that better prepare students for college and career 

success so that all students graduate from high school with college credit and career-related 

experiences or competencies, obtained through project or problem-based learning, realworld challenges, and organized internships and mentorships. Grantees would work to: 

(1) align academic content and instructional practices more closely with postsecondary 

education and careers; (2) personalize learning opportunities to support the educational 

needs and interests of individual students; (3) provide academic and wrap-around support 

services for those students who need them; (4) make available high-quality career and 

college exploration and counseling on options for students after high school graduation; 

(5) offer multiple opportunities to earn postsecondary credit while still in high school; and 

(6) strategically use learning time in more meaningful ways, such as through technology, a 

redesigned school day or calendar, or competency-based progressions.

• $170 million in new funding for a comprehensive STEM Innovation proposal to transform 

teaching and learning in STEM education in American schools. Scientists and engineers 

are innovators—developing new industries and opportunities that create jobs and spur 

economic growth—and we must ensure that our Nation’s capacity to innovate and compete 

is never limited by a shortage of talent in STEM fields. The 2015 Budget proposes a fresh 

Governmentwide reorganization to enable more strategic investment in STEM education 

and more effective evaluation of outcomes. The proposed STEM initiative at the 

Department is a central element of this strategy. Key activities include:

− $110 million for STEM Innovation Networks to 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 accelerating the 

adoption of practices in P-12 education that help increase the number of students who 

seek out and are effectively prepared for postsecondary education and careers in STEM 

fields.

− $40 million for STEM Teacher Pathways in support of the President’s goal of developing 

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

preparing, placing, and supporting talented recent college graduates and mid-career 

professionals in the STEM fields in high-need schools.

− $20 million to support the activities of a National STEM Master Teacher Corps, which 

would identify, refine, and share models to help America’s best and brightest math and 

science teachers make the transition from excellent teachers to school and community 

leaders and advocates for STEM education. This program would recognize, enlist, and 

reward a nationwide corps of outstanding STEM educators to help improve STEM 

teaching and learning in their schools and communities. 
10

• $10 million for a new Non-Cognitive Skills initiative, under the Fund for the Improvement of 

Education, that would provide competitive grants to district and researcher partnerships to 

develop and test interventions to improve students’ non-cognitive skills in the middle grades. 

Such skills are foundational to students’ academic achievement and life success, and 

research suggests that they can have as much, if not more, impact on students’ grades and 

perseverance as academic interventions.

• $20 million for a new Adult Skills Challenge program to support partnerships—among 

States, adult education providers, institutions of higher education, and private organizations, 

including industry representatives with identified regional or local workforce needs—that 

build evidence of effectiveness and demonstrate innovative models for transforming our 

adult education system. 

• $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 while also improving accountability for academic and 

employability outcomes and the acquisition of technical skills. The Administration’s blueprint 

for the Perkins Act reauthorization is centered on high-quality career and technical 

education programs that are aligned with CCR standards and with the needs of employers, 

industry, and labor. In addition, the reauthorization proposal would build on the experience 

of the i3 program by creating a discretionary fund aimed at promoting innovation and reform 

in CTE and replicating the success of proven models.

Improving School Safety and Climate

Congress provided significant support in fiscal year 2014 for key elements of President 

Obama’s Now is the Time plan to reduce gun violence, make schools safer, and increase 

access to mental health services. The Department of Education is working with the 

Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice to implement this plan effectively, 

including efforts to strengthen emergency operations plans, create positive school climates, and 

help break the cycle of violence in communities with pervasive violence. The 2015 request 

would continue this work:

• $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 

decisionmaking frameworks, which research shows can help reduce problem behaviors, 

decrease bullying and peer victimization, improve organizational health and perceptions of 

school as a safe setting, and increase academic performance in reading and math.

• $45 million for a proposed Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students State and Local Grants 

program that would award grants to increase the capacity of States, districts, and schools to 

create safe, healthy, and drug-free environments, particularly in high-poverty schools. 

States and LEAs would 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 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.
11

• $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 access to school-based counseling services, referral to community-based services 

for students suffering from trauma or anxiety (including posttraumatic stress disorder), 

conflict resolution programs, and other school-based strategies to prevent future violence.
12

II. THE 2015 EDUCATION BUDGET BY PROGRAM AREA

A. HIGH-QUALITY EARLY LEARNING

Overview

The Administration’s 2015 Budget request for education reflects President Obama’s continuing 

commitment to strengthening educational outcomes, particularly for children from low-income 

families, by increasing our Nation’s investment in early learning. Since the enactment of No 

Child Left Behind, Federal, State, and local efforts to improve the performance of our schools 

and students have produced mostly modest gains, at a time when we need to 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. For example, children from low-income families start kindergarten, on average, 12 to 

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

Other 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. 

In addition, we know that 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 reduced remedial 

education costs, increased labor productivity, and reduced crime. 

Many States have taken note of these facts and have launched their own efforts to expand the 

availability of preschool programs. As of 2013, 40 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 low-income families are not enrolled in any preschool program, and the high 

costs of private preschool and the 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.

This is why President Obama began his second term of office by calling on Congress to expand 

access to high-quality preschool to every child in America through a Federal-State cost-sharing 

partnership that would guarantee universal access to every 4-year-old from low- and moderate-
13

income families and create incentives for States to serve additional children from middle class 

families.

The President’s 2015 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 

$500 million discretionary investment in Preschool Development Grants.

Preschool for All

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

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

The 2015 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 proposal 

recognizes that high-quality preschool can provide the foundation for children’s success in 

school and help eliminate the school readiness gap between children from low- and higherincome 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) ongoing program evaluation to ensure 

continuous improvement; and (8) onsite 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 for States that 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 at or below 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 

high-quality 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... 0.0 $250.01 $500.0

The request includes $500 million in discretionary funding for Preschool Development Grants 

(PDG) to help additional States and communities pave the way for the successful 

 1 $250.0 million was provided for Preschool Development Grants through the Race to the Top authority in 2014.
14

implementation of Preschool for All by creating or expanding high-quality preschool programs 

that can serve 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income families. The grants would support 

States, local education agencies, or local government entities seeking to: (1) build or expand 

high-quality preschool systems, including investments in facilities, workforce development, and 

quality infrastructure components such as program standards, monitoring, and evaluation; and 

(2) scale up high-quality programs in targeted communities that could serve as models for the 

Preschool for All initiative. The President’s Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative includes 

an additional $250 million for the PDG program that, if enacted, would significantly increase 

Federal support for high-quality preschool programs in fiscal year 2015. The Department 

currently is designing the 2014 competition for PDG, in consultation with the early learning 

community and Congress, and will draw on lessons learned from the 2014 competition to guide 

the most effective use of 2015 PDG funds.
15

B. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

Overview

The 2015 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 Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf. 

The reauthorization plan recognizes that addressing persisting 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. 

Race to the Top (RTT) would continue to provide incentives for innovation and reform, with the 

$300 million 2015 request dedicated to a new Race to the Top – Equity and Opportunity 

(RTT-Opportunity) competition designed to help States and school districts address continuing 

inequities in achievement and the distribution of educational resources—funding, effective 

teachers and leaders, access to rigorous coursework, and safe schools. These differences in 

resources too often effectively deny equal educational opportunity to poor and minority students. 

A $165 million request for Investing in Innovation (i3) would maintain strong support for 

developing, validating, and scaling up 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.

The $14.4 billion request for the CCR students program, which would replace Title I Grants to 

Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), would remain the foundation of the 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 and graduate high 

school ready for college and careers. The reauthorized Title I program also would restructure 

State accountability systems to target rigorous interventions on a State’s lowest-performing 

schools, with support from the $506 million School Turnaround Grants (STG) program.

The 2015 request provides significant support to teachers and leaders who are doing the hard, 

daily work of implementing new CCR standards and aligned assessments, turning around our 

lowest-performing schools, and using new evaluation and support systems to improve their 

practice. The proposed $200 million ConnectEDucators competition would give new money to 

districts to improve their educators’ ability to take advantage of expanded technological capacity 

and new digital learning tools to personalize learning and improve CCR-aligned instruction. 

Formula funds to States and districts through a reauthorized Effective Teachers and Leaders 

State Grants program would support improving the effectiveness of all educators through better 

recruitment, preparation, development, and retention. A $320 million request for the competitive 

Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund would support a new competition spurring innovation in 

human capital management systems in high-need districts. Additionally, the $35 million request 

for School Leadership would provide new grants for evidence-based preparation for highly 

effective school leaders in high-need schools and districts.
16

Other key initiatives in the 2015 request for elementary and secondary education include 

$170 million in new funding for STEM Innovation, a comprehensive strategy for improving P-12 

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

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

$150 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; $100 million to expand the Promise 

Neighborhoods program as part of the Administration’s Ladders of Opportunity initiative; and 

$214 million for a Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students program that supports the President’s 

common-sense proposals to protect our children from gun violence and make our schools safer. 

In addition, the President’s Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative would accelerate the 

impact of key 2015 budget proposals, by providing an additional $300 million for the 

ConnectEDucators initiative (for a 2015 total of $500 million), and $200 million for Promise 

Neighborhoods (for a 2015 total of $300 million).

Race to the Top

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

 2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $520.2 0.01 $300.0

 1 $250.0 million was provided for Preschool Development Grants through the Race to the Top authority in 

2014.

In 2015, the Administration is requesting $300 million for a new Race to the Top – Equity and 

Opportunity (RTT-Opportunity) initiative centered on improving the academic performance of 

students in the Nation’s highest poverty schools. The initiative would drive comprehensive 

change in how States and school districts identify and close longstanding educational 

opportunity and achievement gaps. There would be two types of required activities. 

First, grantees would develop, implement, or enhance data systems for local or State use that 

integrate information on school-level finances, teacher and principal experience and 

effectiveness, student coursework, and academic achievement. Grantees would use these data 

to: (1) identify LEAs, schools, and student groups with the greatest disparities in opportunity 

and outcomes; (2) develop strategies for addressing these gaps to ensure all students are 

prepared for college and careers; and (3) measure the success of these strategies and use the 

results to support continuous program improvement. 

Second, grantees would use funds to develop, attract, and retain more effective teachers and 

leaders in high-need schools, through strategies such as targeted and individualized 

professional development, career ladder opportunities, financial incentives, strengthening 

school culture and climate, and educator training and preparation programs, including those 

focused on developing effective principals trained to foster success and support excellent 

teachers in high-need schools. 

In addition to the required activities, grantees would be expected to address other factors 

contributing to educational opportunity and achievement gaps. These include, for example, 

school safety; non-cognitive skills; expanded learning time; fair and appropriate school discipline 

policies; mental, physical, and social emotional supports; college and career counseling, and 
17

other strategies that mitigate the effects of concentrations of poverty. Grantees could promote 

evidence-based practices that expand access to rigorous coursework linked to college- and 

career-ready standards; AP and IB classes; and early college programs in high schools.

Grantees would examine the use and alignment of existing Federal education resources, 

including Title I, Title II, and Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems to ensure consistency with 

their RTT-Opportunity plans, and would ensure that State and local funds are distributed fairly 

by implementing a more meaningful comparability standard, based on actual school-level 

expenditures, in participating Title I LEAs. 

RTT-Opportunity would provide the incentives and resources to States and LEAs committed to 

taking on this challenge, closing achievement gaps, preparing the 21st century workforce 

needed to ensure our continued economic competitiveness and prosperity, and delivering on 

our Nation’s promise of equal opportunity for all Americans.

Investing in Innovation Fund (i3)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ......................................... $141.6 $141.6 $165.0

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 to improve student 

achievement and other outcomes. The funding requested for 2015 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.

 

Priorities under consideration for 2015 include targeting student attainment in science, 

technology, engineering, and science (STEM) subjects; supporting high quality education in 

rural locations; accelerating achievement of students with disabilities or English Learners; and 

fostering meaningful parent and family engagement. 

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. Under the request, up to 30 percent of i3 funds would be used for ARPA-ED.
18

College- and Career-Ready Students

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $13,760.2 $14,384.8 $14,384.8

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 to the ESEA in the 

areas of standards and assessments, accountability and support for schools and LEAs, and 

teacher and leader effectiveness. In general, these changes are consistent with many of the 

reforms currently being implemented by more than 40 States under RTT or ESEA flexibility. 

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 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.

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 to 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.
19

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. 

School Turnaround Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $505.8 $505.8 $505.8

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.

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

to implement fully and effectively the 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 the 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. 
20

STEM Innovation

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

STEM Innovation Networks

STEM: Innovation Networks.......................... — — $110.0

STEM: Teacher Pathways............................. — — 40.0

STEM: Master Teacher Corps....................... — — 20.0

Subtotal............................................ — — 170.0

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

Mathematics and Science Partnerships ....... $141.9 $149.7 — 

Total ................................................. 141.9 149.7 319.7

The STEM Innovation initiative is part of a Governmentwide STEM reorganization that would 

create a fresh framework for delivering STEM education to more students and more teachers 

more effectively while reducing fragmentation. Specifically, the Department of Education is 

leading the Administration’s efforts to improve P-12 STEM instruction, which includes meeting 

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 accelerating the 

adoption of practices in P-12 education that help increase the number of students who seek out 

and are effectively prepared for postsecondary education and careers in STEM fields. Projects 

would develop and validate evidence-based practices in a set of “platform schools” and 

implement 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 increasing student engagement 

and achievement in STEM subjects; supporting teachers to improve student interest and 

outcomes in STEM; increasing the opportunities for students to have authentic STEM 

experiences, both during the school day and in informal settings; creating a system of integrated 

and strategic support for STEM that is designed for sustainability, replication and scaling up; 

and increasing opportunities for students and teachers to interact with, learn from, and be 

inspired by STEM professionals and experts. 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 build on the strong momentum started in the 

private sector aimed at producing 100,000 new effective and highly effective STEM teachers 

over the next decade. The new program would provide competitive grants to create or expand 

high-quality pathways to teacher certification and other innovative approaches for recruiting, 

preparing, placing and supporting talented recent college graduates and mid-career 

professionals in the STEM fields in high-need schools.

The request also includes $20 million to support the National STEM Master Teacher Corps, 

which would identify, recognize, and reward some of the Nation’s most talented STEM teachers, 
21

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, by making formula grants to SEAs 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.

High School Redesign

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $150.0

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. Grantee activities would include (1) redesigning 

academic content and instructional practices to align with postsecondary education and careers; 

(2) providing personalized learning opportunities and academic and wrap-around support 

services; (3) providing high-quality career and college exploration and counseling services; 

(4) offering opportunities to earn postsecondary credit while still in high school; (5) offering 

career-related experiences; (6) offering project-based learning; (7) making more strategic use of 

learning time, which could include effective application of technology, redesigning school 

calendars, and competency-based progression; and (8) providing evidence-based professional 

development to educators. 

Funds would support competitive grants to LEAs in partnership with institutions of higher 

education and other entities, such as nonprofits, community-based organizations, businesses, 

and other industry-related organizations that can help high schools prepare students to apply 

academic concepts to real world challenges. 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.

Assessing Achievement

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

State Grants................................................. $360.2 $369.1 $369.1

Enhanced Assessment Instruments............. 8.7 8.9 8.9

Total ................................................. 368.9 378.0 378.0

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 
22

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. 

Funds also could be used to acquire, and to train teachers and other staff to use, the 

educational technology needed to implement new assessments. The Department would set 

aside $8.9 million of the fiscal year 2015 request to support a grant competition to enhance or 

improve State assessment systems, which could include improving the accessibility of 

assessments, developing computer-enhanced and/or other new assessments or assessment 

items, providing high-quality professional development for teachers using assessment data to 

improve instruction, obtaining technology to help administer or analyze assessments, and/or 

conducting research to contribute to assessment knowledge and quality.

Excellent Instructional Teams 

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Effective Teachers and Leaders 

State Grants........................................... — — $2,000.0

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ...... $2,337.8 $2,349.8 —

Transition to Teaching.................................. 24.7 13.8 —

Teacher Quality Partnership......................... 40.6 40.6 —

School Leadership ....................................... 27.6 25.8 35.0

ConnectEDucators....................................... — — 200.0

Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund .......... — — 320.0

Teacher Incentive Fund ............................... 283.8 288.8 — 

Total ................................................. 2,714.5 2,718.8 2,555.0

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

Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants program, ConnectEDucators, the Teacher and 

Leader Innovation Fund, and School Leadership.

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

districts to increase the effectiveness of teachers and leaders through a variety of activities, 

including those designed to support the creation of effective teacher career ladders, reform 

certification and licensure requirements, increase the effectiveness of professional 

development, and reform teacher and school leader compensation. States 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 

10 percent of the appropriation to recruit, prepare, 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 of educator preparation 

programs; and to invest in other efforts to enhance the teaching and leadership professions. 
23

ConnectEDucators is a new proposal that complements the President’s ConnectED initiative, 

which would help ensure that all of America’s classrooms, including those in high-poverty or 

rural areas, have access to high-speed broadband and wireless connectivity networks. 

ConnectEDucators would help provide educators with the skills they need to take full advantage 

of these high-speed networks and related devices to improve instruction for all students. The 

new program would provide competitive funds to LEAs and LEA consortia to support educators’ 

use of technology and data to personalize learning and to provide better CCR-aligned 

instruction. Grant activities would be informed by educator and student needs, based on a 

needs assessment, and could include coaching to help educators select and use high quality 

digital content or student data to improve instruction; expanding collaboration, engagement, and 

communication with parents, teachers, and professional networks; and providing access to 

experts and effective teachers through online/blending-learning environments in hard-to-staff 

schools and subjects.

The program would give priority to LEAs that have a minimum level of technological 

infrastructure, propose to work in LEA consortia, and partner with local and national 

organizations that would develop resources all LEAs can use. SEAs would also receive 

foundational formula funds to expand and increase technical capacity.

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

and LEAs to improve the effectiveness of teachers and leaders in high-need LEAs and schools 

by reforming teacher and school leader compensation and career advancement systems and 

implementing other innovative human capital management strategies.

The request also would provide a small increase for a transformed School Leadership program, 

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

and districts.

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy.... — — $183.7

Ready-To-Learn Television.......................... $25.8 $25.7 —

Striving Readers .......................................... 151.4 158.0 —

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 grade 12. 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. 
24

Effective Teaching and Learning for a Well-Rounded Education

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Effective Teaching and Learning for a

Well-Rounded Education........................ — — $25.0

Arts in Education.......................................... $23.6 $25.0 —

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. 

Expanding Educational Options

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)s 2013 2014

2015

Request

Expanding Educational Options ................... — — $248.2

Charter Schools Grants................................ $241.5 $248.2 —

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 make 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 support charter schools facilities programs. The Promoting Public School Choice 

grants program would provide 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 high-quality educational options 

available to students in high-need schools. In fiscal year 2015, the Department would fund only 

the Supporting Effective Charter Schools program.

Promise Neighborhoods

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $56.8 $56.8 $100.0

The request provides an increase to support new awards to local partnerships to develop and 

implement 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 would 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 

2015 funds for planning grants to communities that intend to apply for funding under both the 

Promise Neighborhoods and HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods programs. 
25

21st Century Community Learning Centers

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $1,091.6 $1,149.4 $1,149.4

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 

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.

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students....... — — $214.0

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities National Activities ............. $61.5 $90.0 —

Elementary and Secondary School

Counseling ............................................. 49.6 49.6 —

Physical Education Program ........................ 74.6 74.6 —

Total ................................................. 185.7 214.2 214.0

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 

fitness; and (3) improve students’ 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 to continue important 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 include $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 
26

to Violence), and for data collection, dissemination, outreach, and related forms of technical 

assistance for other activities that promote safe and healthy students.

College Pathways and Accelerated Learning

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

College Pathways and Accelerated

Learning................................................. — — $74.8

High School Graduation Initiative ................. $46.3 $46.3 —

Advanced Placement ................................... 28.9 28.5 —

Total ................................................. 75.2 74.8 74.8

This program would focus on increasing graduation rates and improving 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 diploma 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.

Magnet Schools Assistance Program

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $91.6 $91.6 $91.6

Under the Magnet Schools Assistance program, the Department makes competitive grants to 

support high-quality magnet schools in LEAs implementing a desegregation plan. 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.
27

Fund for the Improvement of Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $38.3 $42.4 $24.3

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 $8 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 for youth. 

The request also includes $10 million for a new Non-Cognitive Skills initiative that would provide 

competitive grants to district and researcher partnerships to develop and test interventions that 

improve students’ non-cognitive skills in the middles grades, a time when many students lose 

interest in, engagement with, and motivation for academic work, increasing the likelihood of

dropping out of high school.

English Learner Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $693.8 $723.4 $723.4

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 ESEA 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)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Migrant Student Education........................... $372.8 $374.8 $374.8

Neglected and Delinquent Children

and Youth Education.............................. 47.6 47.6 47.6

Total ................................................. 420.4 422.4 422.4

Migrant Student Education State Grants provide formula-based assistance in meeting the 

special educational needs of more than 257,000 children of migrant agricultural workers and 

fishers, including overcoming the educational disruption and other challenges that result from 
28

repeated moves so that these students meet the same academic standards as other 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 98,000 neglected and delinquent 

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $61.8 $65.0 $65.0

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $169.8 $169.8 $169.8

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 the 

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)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Grants to Local Educational Agencies.......... $100.4 $100.4 $100.4

Special Programs for Indian Children........... 18.0 18.0 18.0

National Activities......................................... 5.6 5.6 5.6

Total ................................................. 123.9 123.9 123.9

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 ESEA 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) $7.4 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) $10.4 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 $5.6 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. 

Native Hawaiian Student Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $32.4 $32.4 $32.4

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. 
30

Alaska Native Student Education

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $31.5 $31.5 $31.5

This program awards competitive grants to eligible applicants to support 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $48.4 $48.4 $48.4

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: 

(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 the regional centers and SEAs. 

Impact Aid

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Payment for Federally Connected Children:

Basic Support Payments ........................ $1,093.2 $1,151.2 $1,151.2

Payments for Children with Disabilities... 45.9 48.3 48.3

Facilities Maintenance.................................. 4.6 4.8 4.8

Construction................................................. 16.5 17.4 17.4

Payments for Federal Property .................... 63.4 66.8 0.0

Total ................................................. 1,223.6 1,288.6 1,221.8

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.
31

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 $48.3 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.

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

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $6.6 $6.6 $6.6

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $16.7 $16.7 $16.7

The request would maintain support for Supplemental Education Grants to the Federated States 

of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, 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 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.
32

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 2015 

Budget funds a wide range of programs that can improve educational, employment, and 

independent living outcomes for people with disabilities. 

The $12.6 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, an increase of $100 million from fiscal year 2014, to 

maintain the Federal contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special education at 

approximately 16 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) and provide an 

estimated average of $1,758 per student for about 6.6 million children ages 3 through 21. The 

$100 million increase would support new Results Driven Accountability Incentive grants, which 

would provide competitive grants to States to identify and implement promising, evidence-based 

reforms that would improve service delivery for children with disabilities while also building State 

and local capacity to continue to improve outcomes for those children in the long-term.

The request also includes a $3.3 million increase (for a total request of $441.8 million) for the 

Grants for Infants and Families program to assist States in providing high quality early 

intervention services to approximately 340,000 infants and toddlers with disabilities and their 

families. Funding for the Preschool Grants program would be maintained at its 2014 level of 

$353.2 million. 

The $225.1 million request for Special Education National Activities would maintain support for 

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 $33.0 million over the fiscal year 2014 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 offset the 

reduction in funds ($32.2 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 2015 request also includes appropriations 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. The requested language also would provide authority for these funds to 

remain available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2016. 
33

The Budget also provides $134.5 million for the three independent living programs, the same as 

the 2014 level. These programs provide independent living services through formula grants to 

designated State agencies and competitive grants to centers for independent living. The 

$108 million request for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research includes 

an increase of $4.0 million over the 2014 level for research activities in the employment domain. 

The Budget also includes $209.8 million for special institutions for persons with disabilities, 

including $24.5 million for the American Printing House for the Blind, $66.3 million for the 

National Technical Institute for the Deaf, and $119.0 million for Gallaudet University.

Special Education

Grants to States

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ....................................... $10,974.9 $11,472.8 $11,572.8

Estimated average Federal share

per child (in whole dollars).............. $1,674 $1,743 $1,758

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 $1,758 for an estimated 6.6 million 

children with disabilities, which represents a Federal contribution of about 16 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 $100 million for Results Driven Accountability Incentive grants, which 

would provide competitive grants to States to implement State Systemic Implementation Plans 

to improve results for children with disabilities ages birth through 21. These incentive grants 

would be used by States to identify and implement promising, evidence-based reforms that 

would improve service delivery for children with disabilities while building State and local 

capacity to improve long-term outcomes for those children.

The request for Grants to States also 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. 
34

Preschool Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .......................................... $353.2 $353.2 $353.2

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 

estimated $471 per child for approximately 750,000 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 budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .......................................... $419.7 $438.5 $441.8

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 request would enable States to provide 

high quality early intervention services to approximately 340,000 infants and toddlers with 

disabilities and their families. 

State Personnel Development

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $41.6 $41.6 $41.6

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 2015 request would help cover the cost of approximately 38 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $44.31 $44.31 $44.3

1 Excludes $7.58 million for the Special Olympics, which is requested as a separate line item in 2015.

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 
35

the separate $15 million set-aside under the Grants to States program to help States meet data 

collection requirements, would support continuation costs for projects initiated in previous years

Personnel Preparation

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ......................................... $83.7 $83.7 $83.7

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $27.4 $27.4 $27.4

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 106 centers as well as awards to provide technical assistance to the centers.

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $28.0 $28.0 $28.0

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 

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 

$24.49 million for continuation awards and $3.56 million for new awards.
36

Special Olympics Education Programs

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $7.581 $7.581 $7.58

1 Funding was provided under the Technical Assistance and Dissemination program.

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. 

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $3,066.2 $3,302.1 $3,335.1

Note: The amount shown for FY 2014 is the mandatory level for the VR State Grants program and does not 

include the 7.2 percent sequester reduction for mandatory programs that went in to effect October 1, 2013, pursuant 

to the Budget Control Act of 2011.

This program provides formula grants to State VR agencies to help individuals with disabilities 

become gainfully employed. These agencies provide a wide range of services to over 1 million 

individuals with disabilities annually, 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 2013, the VR program helped over 182,000 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 direct service programs under the 

Rehabilitation Act in order to reduce duplication of effort and administrative costs, streamline 

program administration at the Federal and State levels, and improve accountability. The 

$33 million increase over the fiscal year 2014 mandatory level would offset the reduction in 

funds resulting from the Administration’s proposal. The request also includes $40.5 million for 

grants to Indian tribes. 

Direct service programs proposed for elimination include Supported Employment State Grants 

and the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers program. The Administration is also proposing 

appropriations 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. To lessen the potential impact of this proposal, the Administration is also 

proposing language that would give the Department flexibility to allocate up to $33 million of the 
37

funds provided for the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program to States in accordance 

with a formula determined by the Secretary. 

Client Assistance State Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $11.6 $12.0 $12.0

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 54,100 individuals with disabilities.

Training

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................ $33.7 $33.7 $30.2

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 $3.5 million from the 2014 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 each 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $5.0 $5.8 $5.8

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 are used to support model demonstrations, technical 

assistance, and projects designed to improve program performance and the delivery of VR and 

independent living services. 

The majority of funds (about $4 million) would support new model demonstration grants to assist 

State VR agencies, in collaboration with their State and local partners, to improve employment 

outcomes for youths with significant disabilities transitioning from secondary school to 

postsecondary education and employment. Five-year grants would be awarded to develop and 

implement model VR strategies and services for youths with significant disabilities that would 

lead to increased college completion and preparation for employment. 
38

Independent Living

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

State Grants................................................. $22.1 $22.9 $22.9

Centers ........................................................ 75.8 78.3 78.3

Services for Older Blind Individuals.............. 32.2 33.3 33.3

Total ................................................. 130.1 134.5 134.5

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $17.1 $17.6 $17.6

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 63,100 individuals with disabilities.

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $103.1 $104.0 $108.0

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 $4.0 million more than the 
39

2014 level for research activities in the employment domain. At least $86 million of the request 

would support continuation costs for grants made in previous years.

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $8.7 $9.1 $9.1

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 

65 clients in its residential training and rehabilitation program, and serve an estimated 

1,500 consumers, 350 families, and 800 agencies and organizations through its regional offices. 

Assistive Technology

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $31.1 $33.0 $31.0

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 $25.7 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 

2014 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 2015 for this duplicative competitive grant program. 

Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

American Printing House for the Blind.......... $23.2 $24.5 $24.5

National Technical Institute for the Deaf....... 62.0 66.3 66.3

Gallaudet University..................................... 119.0 119.0 119.0

Total ................................................. 204.2 209.8 209.8
40

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 1,260 undergraduate and technical students, 

90 graduate students, and 150 interpreters for persons who are deaf. 

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 $119.0 million for operations, including funds that may be used for the 

Endowment Grant program. The request would help Gallaudet serve an estimated 1,852 

undergraduate and graduate students and 275 elementary and secondary education students in 

the 2014-15 school year.
41

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 2015, 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 programs with the 

demands of the 21st century economy and workforce while creating stronger linkages between 

secondary and postsecondary education. The 2015 request also includes $597.7 million for 

Adult Education programs, including a new $20 million Skills Challenge Grants proposal that 

would build evidence of effectiveness and demonstrate innovative models for transforming our 

adult education system.

Career and Technical Education

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Career and Technical Education

State Grants........................................... $1,064.5 $1,117.6 $1,117.6

National Programs ....................................... 7.4 7.4 7.4

Total ................................................. 1,071.9 1,125.0 1,125.0

Funds for the CTE program would support the first year of activity under a reauthorized Carl D. 

Perkins Career and Technical Education Act (Perkins Act). In April 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 to 

help 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; and

• 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.

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 set-
42

aside 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. 

Adult Education (Adult Basic and Literacy Education)

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Adult Basic and Literacy Education

State Grants........................................... $564.0 $564.0 $564.0

Skills Challenge Grants................................ — — 20.0

National Leadership Activities ...................... 10.7 13.7 13.7

Total ................................................. 574.7 577.7 597.7

Adult Basic and Literacy Education State Grants assist adults without a high school diploma or 

the equivalent to become literate and obtain the knowledge and skills necessary for 

postsecondary education, employment, and economic self-sufficiency. The reauthorization of 

the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, authorized by 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 $70.8 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 adults born in the U.S., as well as the ongoing need to 

address the English language acquisition, literacy, and workforce skills gaps of the immigrant 

population. The request would also make additional awards to support reentry education 

models, an activity launched in fiscal year 2013 through the Promoting Reentry Success 

through Continuity of Educational Opportunities competition.

The 2015 request also includes a new, $20 million Skills Challenge Grants proposal under 

National Leadership Activities. This new program would support partnerships—among States, 

adult education providers, institutions of higher education, and private organizations, including 

industry representatives with identified regional or local workforce needs—that build evidence of 

effectiveness and demonstrate innovative models for transforming our adult education system. 

These partnerships would develop and scale up evidence-based models that combine basic 

skills education with training so that participants have access to high-quality programs that 

equip them with the skills necessary to find jobs in high-demand fields or transition into creditbearing postsecondary education and training. Grantees would also build evidence of effective 

practices through rigorous evaluations. 
43

E. STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

Overview

The student financial assistance programs provide important resources to students and families 

to help them achieve their dreams of a postsecondary education. Over the course of his 

administration, President Obama has focused on targeted investments in and improvements to 

these programs, including increasing the maximum Pell Grant award by $1,000, creating and 

extending the American Opportunity Tax Credit, making loans more affordable, and helping 

borrowers manage debt repayment. Going forward, a new ratings system, currently in 

development, would improve college transparency and accountability by identifying colleges that 

provide the best value to students and encouraging all colleges to improve. The 2015 request 

continues this focus on making college more affordable, driving higher performance, and 

ensuring that students have the information, resources, and support they need to enroll in 

college, graduate, and, for those students with education-related loans, repay their student loan 

debt. 

Overall, the 2015 Budget includes both discretionary and mandatory funding that would make 

available $142.8 billion in new grants, loans, and work-study assistance—an increase of 

$45.1 billion, or 46 percent, over the amount available in 2008—to help an estimated 

12.8 million students and their families pay for college. Key proposals include:

Expanding and Improving the PAYE Repayment Plan

The 2015 Budget proposes to expand the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) plan to all qualified student 

borrowers beginning in 2015, regardless of when they borrowed. PAYE lowers monthly 

payments for borrowers who have high loan debt and modest incomes, helping to protect them 

from unmanageable student loan burdens. The request proposes reforms to PAYE terms to 

ensure that the program is well-targeted and provides a safeguard against rising tuition at highcost institutions. Additionally, it makes the PAYE repayment plan the only income-driven 

repayment plan option for new borrowers as of July 1, 2015.

Supporting and Improving the Pell Grant Program

The Pell Grant program—the cornerstone of Federal efforts to make a postsecondary education 

affordable for low-income students—is supported by a request of $22.8 billion in discretionary 

funds as well as $6.4 billion in mandatory funds. Total funding of $29.2 billion would provide 

Pell Grant awards to nearly 8.9 million students during the 2015-2016 award year, while 

increasing the maximum Pell Grant award to an expected $5,830. The Budget would make 

changes to Pell Grant eligibility provisions by strengthening academic progress requirements to 

encourage students to complete their studies on time. The Budget would also provide Pell 

Grant eligibility to students who are co-enrolled in adult and postsecondary education as part of 

a career pathway program to allow adults without a high school diploma to gain the knowledge 

and skills they need to secure a good job.
44

Campus-Based Aid

• 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. The request would revise current allocation formulas 

for Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants and Work-Study to reward institutions 

that enroll and graduate higher numbers of Pell-eligible students while offering an 

affordable and quality education such that graduates obtain employment and repay their 

educational debt.

• Reforming and expanding the Perkins Loan 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

approximately 2,700 additional postsecondary education institutions, providing more 

students with increased access to affordable loan funds that carry important protections 

and benefits. The new Perkins Loan program would address the scheduled expiration of 

the existing program. Savings from the new program would be reinvested in the Pell 

Grant program to help maintain the maximum Pell award. Lending authority would be 

allocated to institutions based on their students’ financial needs and their record in 

enrolling and graduating higher numbers of Pell-eligible students, and offering both an 

affordable and quality education enabling their graduates to repay their educational debt.

College Opportunity and Graduation Bonus

The Administration’s 2015 Budget includes a mandatory College Opportunity and Graduation 

Bonus proposal that would reward colleges that successfully enroll and graduate a significant 

number of low- and moderate-income students on time and encourage institutions to improve 

their performance. Eligible institutions would receive an annual “bonus” grant equal to their 

number of on-time Pell graduates multiplied by a tiered bonus amount per student, varying by 

institution type. In addition, this new program would encourage institutions to continue 

improving their performance by providing a larger bonus amount for additional Pell graduates. 

Eligibility would be based on Pell students comprising a significant share of an institution’s 

graduating class, graduation rates, and student loan default rates. The estimated total 10-year 

cost of the College Opportunity and Graduation Bonus proposal is $7 billion. Bonus grants 

would be used for making key investments and adopting best practices that would further 

increase college access and success for low-income students, such as by awarding additional 

need-based financial aid, enhancing academic and student support services, improving student 

learning and other outcomes while reducing costs, using technology to accelerate 

improvements, and establishing or expanding accelerated learning opportunities, as well as 

other innovations, interventions, and reforms.

College Success Grants for Minority-Serving Institutions

The request also would provide $75 million for competitive grants to support institutions that are 

designated under Title III or Title V of the Higher Education Act as a Historically Black College 

or University or Minority-Serving Institution, which includes Hispanic Serving Institutions, 

Predominately Black Institutions, Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities, Asian American 

and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions, Native American-Serving Nontribal 

Institutions, and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Institutions. 
45

Institutions would be able to apply individually or in consortia. Grants would be awarded based 

on the quality of proposals, including the likelihood that they would result in increased numbers 

of Pell Grant recipients completing postsecondary education. Grants would support 

implementation of sustainable strategies, processes and tools, including those based on 

technology upgrades, to reduce costs and improve outcomes for students, including one or 

more of the following: 

• Partnering with school districts and schools to provide college recruitment, awareness, 

and preparation activities to enable students to enter and complete postsecondary 

education.

• Establishing high-quality dual-enrollment programs.

• Implementing evidence-based course redesigns of high enrollment courses to improve 

student outcomes and reduce costs.

• Providing need-based aid with incentives for on-time completion.

• Providing comprehensive student support services, both academic and non-academic.

• Reducing the need for, and improving the success of, remedial education.

Institutions would be required to establish performance goals for the duration of the grant 

(4 years), and continued funding would be conditional upon successful progress toward the 

goals. Funding would be used to implement evidence-based approaches and systems, as well 

as for evaluation and continuous improvement.

Federal Student Aid and Tax Benefits for College Students

In addition to 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 Assistance to 

College Students

Fiscal Year

2008

Fiscal Year 

2015 

Request

Change in

Dollars

Percent 

Change

Student Aid Available $97.7 billion $142.8 billion $45.1 billion 46%

Selected Tax Benefits $7.5 billion $18.7 billion $11.2 billion 149%
46

Student Aid Summary Tables

Program budget authority (BA)

Budget Authority (dollars in millions) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Pell Grants

Discretionary funding .......................................... $22,778.4 $22,778.41 $22,778.41

Mandatory funding .............................................. 12,441.2 6,167.01 6,397.01

Subtotal, Pell Grants ........................................ 35,219.5 28,945.4 29,175.4

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants .......... 696.2 733.1 733.1

Work-Study ............................................................... 925.6 974.7 974.7

TEACH Grants 2 ........................................................ 14.8 18.4 17.9

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants ......................... 0.2 0.3 0.4

Federal Family Education Loans ............................... -6,843.63 -5,676.03 —

Federal Direct Loans ................................................. -38,184.54 -14,791.64 -7,156.34

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ..................................... — — -827.75

Total ............................................................. -8,171.8 10,204.3 22,917.5

1 Amounts appropriated for Pell Grants for 2013, 2014, and 2015 include mandatory funding provided by 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012; and the Budget Control Act of 2011. Mandatory funding was also 

provided in the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, as amended. 2 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 2013 and 2014 include new loan 

subsidy and upward reestimates and exclude downward reestimates. The downward reestimate for 2014 was 

$13.3 million. The amount for 2015 reflects new loan subsidy. 3 FFEL budget authority does not include the Liquidating account. The 2013 amount includes a net 

downward reestimate of -$6.8 billion primarily related to revised interest rates. The 2014 amount includes a net 

downward reestimate of -$1.7 billion primarily related to revised interest rate assumptions, and a net downward 

modification of -$4.0 billion as a result of the changes to guaranty agency loan retention and compensation passed in 

the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013. These reestimates and modifications reflect the impact of changes on an 

outstanding FFEL portfolio of over $296 billion. 4 The 2013 amount includes a net downward reestimate of -$8.2 billion primarily related to revised interest 

rates. The 2014 amount includes a net upward reestimate of $6.8 billion, primarily related to revised interest rates 

and increased participation in income-based repayment plans. The 2015 amount includes a net upward modification 

of $7.2 billion to reflect the budgetary impact of the proposed changes to PAYE. (Reestimates and modifications 

reflect the impact of changes on an outstanding Direct Loan portfolio of $585 billion.) 5 Amount in 2015 reflects proposal to create a new Perkins Loan program as a mandatory credit program.
47

Aid Available to Students (dollars in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

Pell Grants ....................................................... $32,351.7 $32,958.4 $33,876.7

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.. 926.1 975.3 975.3

Work-Study ...................................................... 1,100.3 1,158.7 1,158.7

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants ................ 0.3 0.3 0.4

New Student Loans:

Federal Direct Loans .................................. 101,255.9 99,647.2 101,554.6

Perkins Loans ............................................ 1,010.6 1,010.6 1,010.6

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ...................... — — 4,113.4

TEACH Grants ........................................... 93.0 96.3 98.5

Subtotal, Student Loans ....................... 102,359.51 100,754.21 106,777.21

Total ..................................................... 136,737.92 135,846.92 142,788.32

1 In addition, Consolidation Loans for existing borrowers will total $27.5 billion in 2013, $25.4 billion in 2014, 

and $27.0 billion in 2015. 2 Shows total aid generated by Department programs, including Perkins Loan capital from institutional 

revolving funds, and institutional matching funds.

Number of Student Aid Awards

(in thousands)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Pell Grants ................................................................ 8,861.0 8,711.0 8,854.0

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants .......... 1,545.0 1,627.0 1,627.0

Work-Study ............................................................... 655.6 690.4 690.4

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants 1 ....................... — — —

New Student Loans: 2

Federal Direct Loans ........................................... 20,240.9 19,240.4 19,085.8

Perkins Loans ..................................................... 499.8 499.8 499.8

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans ............................... — — 766.3

TEACH Grants .................................................... 32.4 33.7 34.1

Total awards ........................................................ 31,834.9 30,802.5 31,557.6

1 Less than 1,000 recipients in each year.

2 In addition, Consolidation Loans for existing borrowers will total 670,000 in 2013, 511,000 in 2014, and 

523,000 in 2015.

Number of Postsecondary Students Aided by Department Programs

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014 2015

Unduplicated Count (in thousands) ................ 13,395 12,852 12,838
48

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 2014, the Federal Government will spend an estimated $15.5 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; nearly 

$2 billion for the Lifetime Learning tax credit, a credit of up to $2,000 for undergraduate and 

graduate tuition and fees; and $1.45 billion for above-the-line deductions for interest paid on 

postsecondary student loans.

Federal Pell Grant Program

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions

Discretionary budget authority................ $22,778.4 $22,778.4 $22,778.4

Mandatory budget authority.................... 4,854.2 5,579.0 6,397.0

Definite mandatory funding..................... 7,587.0 588.0 —

Total ................................................. 35,219.5 28,945.4 29,175.4

Program costs (dollars in millions)................ 32,396.0 33,002.0 33,921.0

Aid available (dollars in millions) .................. 32,351.7 32,958.4 33,876.7

Recipients (in thousands)............................. 8,861 8,711 8,854

Maximum grant (in whole dollars)

Discretionary portion .............................. $4,860 $4,860 $4,860

Mandatory add-on .................................. 785 870 970

Total 5,645 5,730 5,830

Average grant (in whole dollars)................... 3,651 3,784 3,826

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 based on the financial 

circumstances of students and their families. The 2015 discretionary request of $22.8 billion for 

Pell Grants would continue to make college more affordable for 8.9 million students by 

supporting the scheduled increase in current law in the maximum Pell award by an estimated 

$100, from $5,730 in award year 2014-2015, to $5,830 in award year 2015-2016, while also fully 

funding the program through award year 2016-2017.

In addition to fully funding the Pell program in fiscal year 2015, the Budget proposes making a 

down payment toward addressing the long-term Pell funding gap by reforming and expanding 

the Perkins Loan program. The savings associated with this proposal 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.
49

Campus-Based Programs

The Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG), Work-Study, and Perkins Loan 

programs are called the “campus-based” programs because they make grants directly to 

participating institutions, which have considerable flexibility to package awards based on the 

needs of their students. The 2015 request would reform these programs to assist students 

attending those institutions that enroll and graduate higher numbers of Pell-eligible students and 

offer an affordable and quality education such that graduates can repay their educational debt.

In addition, the request would expand and reform the Perkins Loan program to significantly 

increase both lending authority and the number of participating institutions, in part by modifying 

the formula used to allocate funding to institutions, which currently is based primarily on 

institutions’ longevity in the program. 

These reforms, collectively, seek to provide increased access to college by making it more 

affordable for students with financial need and better targeting resources to institutions that 

demonstrate success in the areas of access, affordability, completion, and quality, to ensure 

that students are well-prepared for work and life after graduation. 

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $696.2 $733.1 $733.1

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. $926.1 $975.3 $975.3

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ 1,545 1,627 1,627

Average award (in whole dollars)................. $599 $599 $599

This program provides grant assistance of up to $4,000 per academic year to undergraduate 

students with demonstrated financial need. Program funds are allocated to institutions 

according to a statutory formula and require a 25 percent institutional match. The $733.1 million 

request would leverage $242 million in institutional matching funds to make available a total of 

more than $975 million in grants to an estimated 1.6 million recipients. Awards to students 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 enroll and graduate higher numbers of Pell-eligible students, and offer an 

affordable and quality education such that graduates can repay their educational debt.

Work-Study

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $925.6 $974.7 $974.7

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. $1,100.3 $1,158.7 $1,158.7

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ 656 690 690

Average award (in whole dollars)................. $1,678 $1,678 $1,678
50

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 to level-fund Work-Study at the 2014 amount – $974.7 million –

which, when combined with institutional matching funds, would make available nearly 

$1.16 billion to an estimated 690,000 recipients. 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 request would reform the institutional allocation 

formula to direct funding toward institutions that enroll and graduate higher numbers of Pelleligible students, and offer an affordable and quality education such that graduates can repay 

their educational debt.

Perkins Loans

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

Perkins Loans (current program):

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. $1,010.6 $1,010.6 $1,010.6

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ 500 500 500

Average loan (in whole dollars).................... $2,022 $2,022 $2,022

Unsubsidized Perkins Loans:

Loan subsidies (BA in millions) ................... — — -$827.7

Aid available (dollars in millions) ................. — — $4,113.4

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ — — 766

Average loan (in whole dollars).................... — — $5,368

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 

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 a reformed and expanded 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. Savings from this proposal, estimated at $6 billion in outlays over 10 years would 

be redirected to the Pell Grant program to help maintain the maximum Pell award. 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—the request would reform the institutional allocation formula to direct 
51

funding toward institutions that enroll and graduate higher numbers of Pell-eligible students, and 

offer an affordable and quality education such that graduates can repay their educational debt.

Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in thousands .......................................... $236 $285 $355

Aid available (dollars in thousands) ............. $273 $341 $418

Recipients (in thousands) ............................ * 1 * 1 * 1

Average award (in whole dollars)................. $1,678 $1,678 $1,678

1 Number of recipients estimated to be less than 1,000.

The Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grant program provides non-need-based grants to students 

whose parent or guardian was a member of the Armed Forces who died in Iraq or Afghanistan 

as a result of performing military service after September 11, 2001. Students are not required to 

be eligible for a Pell Grant in order to receive a Service Grant; however, the student must be 

24 years old or younger; or, if older than 24, must have been enrolled in an institution of higher 

education at the time of the parent or guardian’s death. Service Grants are equal to the 

maximum Pell Grant for a given award year, which is projected to be $5,830 for the 2015-2016 

award year. 

TEACH Grants

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions......................................................... $13.1 1 $14.6 1 $17.9 1

Aid available to students (in millions)..................... $93.0 $96.3 $98.5

Recipients (in thousands) ..................................... 32.4 33.7 34.1

Maximum grant (in whole dollars).......................... $4,000 $4,000 $4,000

Average grant (in whole dollars)............................ $2,873 $2,861 $2,886

1 Amounts for 2013 and 2014 include new loan subsidy and upward reestimates, and exclude downward 

reestimates. The downward reestimate for 2014 was -$13.3 million. The amount for 2015 reflects new loan subsidy. 

The 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 
52

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)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Federal Family Education Loans

Net modification of existing loans ........ — -$4,020.41 —

Net reestimate of existing loans........... -$6,843.6 2,3 -1,655.7 2,3 —

Total, FFEL program BA................ -6,843.6 -5,676.0 —

Federal Direct Loans

New loans subsidies (BA).................... -30,032.8 2 -21,585.2 2 -$14,399.5 2

Net modification of existing loans ........ — — 7,243.2 1

Net reestimate of existing loans........... -8,151.7 3 6,793.6 3 —

Total, new budget authority............ -38,184.5 -14,791.6 -7,156.3

Total, student loans (BA)................ -45,028.1 -20,467.6 -7,156.3

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 2014 FFEL modification reflects the impact of changes to guaranty 

agency loan retention and compensation in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013. The 2015 Direct Loan modification 

reflects the impact of the proposed changes to the Pay As You Earn repayment plan.

2 Total includes amount for Consolidation Loans.

3 Under Credit Reform, the subsidy amounts are reestimated annually in both Direct Loans and FFEL to 

account for changes in long-term projections. Reestimates and modifications reflect the impact of changes on 

outstanding portfolios of $296 billion for FFEL, $90 billion for ECASLA, and $585 billion for Direct Loans.
53

New loan volume (in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Direct Loans

Stafford loans ................................ $27,398.0 $26,225.8 $25,984.4

Unsubsidized Stafford loans .......... 55,873.5 54,662.8 55,775.7

PLUS loans ................................... 17,984.4 18,758.6 19,794.6

Total ........................................ 101,255.9 1 99,647.2 1 101,554.7 1

Number of new loans (in thousands)

Direct Loans

Stafford loans ................................ 8,525 8,069 7,944

Unsubsidized Stafford loans .......... 10,408 9,861 9,824

PLUS loans ................................... 1,307 1,310 1,318

Total ........................................ 20,240 1 19,240 1 19,086 1

1 In addition, Consolidation Loans for existing borrowers will total $26.7 billion and 670,000 loans in 2013, 

$25.4 billion and 511,000 loans in 2014, and $27.0 billion and 523,000 loans in 2015.

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 loans to students and their families through 

private lenders. State and private nonprofit guaranty agencies administered the Federal 

guarantee which protected FFEL lenders against losses related to borrower default, collected on 

defaulted loans, and provided 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 contractors. The Direct Loan program features four types of loans:

• 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 in academic 

year 2013-2014 is 3.86 percent. 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 3.86 percent for undergraduate 

borrowers and 5.41 percent for graduate and professional borrowers in academic year 

2013-2014, but the Federal Government does not pay interest for the student during 

in-school, grace, and deferment periods.

• PLUS Loans are available to parents of dependent undergraduate students, and to graduate 

and professional students. The interest rate is 6.41 percent in academic year 2013-2014 

and the Federal Government does not pay interest during in-school, grace, and deferment 

periods.
54

• 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 2015 Budget proposes to extend Pay As You Earn (PAYE) to all student borrowers and 

reform the PAYE terms to ensure that program benefits are targeted to the neediest borrowers. 

The reforms also aim to safeguard the program for the future, including by protecting against 

institutional practices that may further increase student indebtedness. In addition, to simplify 

borrowers' experience while reducing program complexity, PAYE would become the only 

income-driven repayment plan for borrowers who originate their first loan on or after July 1, 

2015, which would allow for easier selection of a repayment plan. Students who borrowed their 

first loans prior to July 1, 2015, would continue to be able to select among the existing 

repayment plans (for plans for which they now qualify and for loans originated through their 

current course of study), in addition to the modified PAYE. 

The Budget proposes additional changes to PAYE that include:

• Eliminating the standard payment cap under PAYE so that high-income, high-balance 

borrowers pay an equitable share of their earnings as their income rises;

• Calculating payments for married borrowers filing separately on the combined household 

Adjusted Gross Income;

• Capping Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) at the aggregate loan limit for 

independent undergraduate students to protect against institutional practices that may 

further increase student indebtedness, while ensuring the program provides sufficient 

relief for students committed to public service;

• Establishing a 25-year forgiveness period for borrowers with balances above the 

aggregate loan limit for independent undergraduate students;

• Preventing payments made under non-income driven repayment plans from being 

applied toward PSLF to ensure that loan forgiveness is targeted to students with the 

greatest need; and

• Capping the amount of interest that can accrue when a borrower’s monthly payment is 

insufficient to cover interest costs, to avoid ballooning loan balances.
55

F. HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Overview

The Administration’s 2015 request includes $2.3 billion in discretionary funds 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 and 

return our Nation to First in the World in college attainment so that by 2020 American would 

once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.

The Administration’s Budget invests in innovation at the institutional level through a $175 million 

request for the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE). This proposal 

includes approximately $100 million for First in the World, which would build on the 2014 

competition, and continue to support innovative strategies and practices shown to be effective in 

improving educational outcomes and making college more affordable for students and families. 

The request also includes $75 million to support a new College Success Grants for 

Minority-Serving Institutions initiative. These grants would assist Minority-Serving Institutions 

(MSIs) in developing sustainable strategies, processes and tools—including those based on 

technology—to reduce costs and improve student outcomes. 

The request includes $52.0 million, an increase of $51.4 million, for GPRA data/HEA program 

evaluation to support pilot and demonstration program studies, postsecondary evaluations, the 

development and refinement of a college ratings system, and activities to improve program 

performance measurement.

To help close gaps between racial and socioeconomic groups in college enrollment and degree 

attainment, the request provides $422.8 million in discretionary funding for the Aid for 

Institutional Development programs, the same as the 2014 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 $107.4 million in discretionary funding for 

the Aid for Hispanic-Serving Institutions programs.

The request would provide $838.3 million to maintain college preparation and completion 

activities for participants in the Federal TRIO Programs, as well as $301.6 million to assist 

middle and high school students in preparing for college through Gaining Early Awareness and 

Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). These programs are crucial for helping to 

meet the President’s college attainment goal by getting more students into and through 

postsecondary education.

In addition, the Higher Education request includes $76.2 million, an increase of $4 million over 

the 2014 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 $29.3 million 

for merit- and need-based scholarships and fellowships to postsecondary students under 

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) programs.
56

Title III: Aid for Institutional Development

(BA in millions)

 

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Strengthening Institutions (SIP) ......................... $76.4 $79.1 $79.1

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges 

and Universities (TCCUs) ............................ 24.4 25.2 25.2

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges

and Universities (mandatory TCCUs)........... 28.5 1 27.8 1 30.0 1

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native

Hawaiian-serving Institutions (ANNHs) ........ 12.2 12.6 12.6

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native

Hawaiian-serving Institutions (mandatory 

ANNHs) ....................................................... 14.2 1 13.9 1 15.0 1

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges

and Universities (HBCUs) ............................ 216.1 223.8 223.8

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges

and Universities (mandatory HBCUs)........... 80.7 1 78.9 1 85.0 1

Strengthening Historically Black Graduate

Institutions (HBGIs)...................................... 55.9 57.9 57.9

Master’s Degree Programs at HBCUs

and PBIs (mandatory HBCUs/PBIs)............. 10.9 2 10.7 2 —

Strengthening Predominantly Black

Institutions (PBIs)......................................... 8.8 9.1 9.1

Strengthening Predominantly Black

Institutions (mandatory PBIs)....................... 14.2 1 13.9 1 15.0 1

Strengthening Asian American and Native

American Pacific Islander-serving

Institutions (AANAPISIs) .............................. 3.0 3.1 3.1

Strengthening Asian American and Native

American Pacific Islander-serving

Institutions (mandatory AANAPISIs) ............ 4.7 1 4.6 1 5.0 1

Strengthening Native American-serving

nontribal institutions (NASNTIs) ................... 3.0 3.1 3.1

Strengthening Native American-serving

nontribal institutions (mandatory NASNTIs) . 4.7 1 4.6 1 5.0 1

Minority Science and Engineering

Improvement (MSEIP) ................................. 9.0 9.0 9.0

Total....................................................... 566.6 577.4 577.8

Discretionary .................................... 408.6 422.8 422.8

Mandatory ........................................ 158.0 154.5 155.0

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). These 

figures include sequester reductions of 5.1 percent in 2013 and 7.2 percent in 2014 that went into effect October 1, 

2013, pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25). 2 These funds are mandatory appropriations provided under Section 897 of the HEA. These figures include 

sequester reductions of 5.1 percent in 2013 and 7.2 percent in 2014 that went into effect October 1, 2013, pursuant to 

the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25).
57

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; 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 132 continuation grants 

and would enable the Department to award new development grants.

Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) supports 34 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. In addition, $30 million in mandatory funds is 

available under section 371 of the HEA for TCCUs.

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 approximately 15 new and 

3 continuation awards 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 2015 

mandatory funds to award 12 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 2015 funding would support 96 HBCUs. In 2015, 

$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. 

Strengthening 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 AfricanAmerican and that serve at least 50 percent low-income or first-generation college 

students. The request would support the fifth year of funding for 35 PBI grantees. In addition, 

$15 million in mandatory funding is available in 2015 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 a competition 

for new awards for institutions serving this diverse population. In addition, mandatory funding of 

$5 million is available in 2015 to support 11 continuation awards for these institutions.
58

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 a competition 

for new awards and an additional $5 million in mandatory funds would support 13 continuation 

grants.

The Minority Science and Engineering Improvement program would fund approximately 14 new 

grants and 24 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)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

Developing HSIs ................................................ $95.2 $98.6 $98.6

Mandatory Developing HSI STEM 

and Articulation Programs ............................ 94.9

1

92.8

1

 100.0

1

Promoting Postbaccalaureate

Opportunities for Hispanic Americans

(Discretionary)........................................ 8.5 8.8 8.8

(Mandatory)............................................ 10.9 2 10.7 2 —

Total ....................................................... 209.5 210.9 207.4

Discretionary..................................... 103.7 107.4 107.4

Mandatory ........................................ 105.8 103.5 100.0

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). These figures include 

sequester reductions of 5.1 percent in 2013 and 7.2 percent in 2014 that went into effect October 1, 2013, pursuant to 

the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25). 2 These funds are mandatory appropriations provided under Title VIII, Part AA, Section 898 of the HEA. These 

figures include sequester reductions of 5.1 percent in 2013 and 7.2 percent in 2014 that went into effect October 1, 

2013, pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25).

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 

2015, $98.6 million in discretionary funding would support approximately 156 new and 

continuation awards. In addition, mandatory funds provided under section 371 of the HEA 

would support 109 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 postbaccalaureate certificate or postbaccalaureate 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 2015, 

$8.8 million in discretionary funding would support 18 new awards.
59

International Education and Foreign Language Studies (IEFLS)

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Domestic Programs ..................................... $63.1 $65.1 $69.1

Overseas Programs ..................................... 7.1 7.1 7.1

Total ................................................. 70.2 72.2 76.2

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 $4 million increase, or 6 percent, for Domestic Programs in 2015 would support 

new awards to help American students develop proficiency in critical foreign languages, 

specifically those spoken in the Asia-Pacific and Sub-Saharan Africa regions, and new 

institutional mobility grants in Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

First in the World Awards ............................. — $75.0 $100.0

College Success Grants............................... — — 75.0

International Consortia................................. $1.9 — —

Training for Realtime Writers........................ 1.1 1.1 —

Centers for the Study of Distance Education 

and Technological Advancements.......... — 1.5 —

Center for Best Practices to Support Single 

Parent Students ..................................... — .5 —

Analysis of Federal Regulations and 

Reporting Requirements on IHEs........... — 1.0 —

Other............................................................ 0.3 0.3 —

Total ................................................. 3.3 79.4 175.0

FIPSE awards competitive grants to support exemplary, locally developed projects that are 

models for innovative reform and improvement in postsecondary education. The 2015 request 

would provide approximately $100 million for the second year of the First in the World (FITW) 

fund. First in the World provides funding for institutions of higher education to develop and test 

innovative strategies and practices that improve college completion rates and make college 

more affordable, particularly for low-income students. In addition, $75 million of the amount 

requested for FIPSE would be used to support College Success Grants for Minority-Serving 

Institutions to assist MSIs in developing sustainable strategies to reduce costs and improve 

student outcomes. 
60

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $7.7 $7.7 $7.7

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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $34.6 $34.6 $34.6

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. HEP and CAMP programs focus on finding and assisting migrant youth who have 

educational potential but who have not been able—due to limited or inconsistent educational 

opportunity—to complete high school or go on to postsecondary education. The 2015 request 

would support approximately 46 HEP projects and 42 CAMP projects, as well as outreach, 

technical assistance and professional development activities.

Federal TRIO Programs

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA) 2013 2014

2015

Request

Talent Search .............................................. $128.1 $135.3 $136.4

Upward Bound ............................................. 249.5 266.7 265.6

Veterans Upward Bound .............................. 13.0 13.8 14.1

Upward Bound Math-Science....................... 40.5 43.1 43.1

Educational Opportunity Centers ................. 44.1 46.9 46.9

Student Support Services ............................ 281.7 289.6 289.6

McNair Post Baccalaureate Achievement .... 34.1 35.7 35.7

Staff Training ............................................... 1.3 1.4 1.4

Evaluation ................................................... 2.0 2.0 1.7

Administration/Peer Review ......................... 1.6 3.7 3.7 

Total ................................................. 796.0 838.3 838.3
61

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 2014 level for these college preparation and student support programs, 

including approximately 2,790 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $286.4 $301.6 $301.6

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 2014 level and would support continuation awards for approximately 

37 States and 83 Partnerships in fiscal year 2015.

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN)

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $29.3 $29.3 $29.3

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 would seek talented 

students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds. The 2015 request would support 

approximately 579 fellowships.

Child Care Access Means Parents in School

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $15.1 $15.1 $15.1

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 

2015 request would support approximately 148 continuation awards.
62

GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... $0.6 $0.6 $52.0

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 increase 

would support pilot and demonstration program studies, the development and refinement of a 

new college ratings system, and activities to improve program performance measurement. 

State Higher Education Performance (SHEP) Fund

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $4,000.0

The State Higher Education Performance Fund (SHEP) is a proposed competitive grant 

program for States to support, reform, and improve the performance of their public higher 

education systems. Building on the President’s College Value and Affordability agenda and 

previous budget proposals, this initiative calls on States to make college more affordable and 

increase college access and success, especially for low-income students. The SHEP Fund 

would provide 4-year grants to support (1) the successful implementation of policy and funding 

reforms that encourage and reward improved college performance, as well as institutional 

innovation and reforms; and (2) to maintain State expenditures in higher education in States 

with a strong record of investment or to increase State support in low-investment States.

To be eligible for funding, States would need to adopt critical higher education reform policies 

and allocate the Federal and State resources under this program to institutions through a 

performance-based funding program for higher education. Specifically, States would need to:

• Adopt policies to ensure seamless transitions into higher education for all students 

(including older adults) and among 2-year and 4-year public institutions of higher 

education through greater alignment with the K-12 system, including guaranteed credit 

transfers;

• Establish clear postsecondary pathways from the workforce system;

• Allocate State financial aid primarily on the basis of need; and

• Improve transparency to empower students and families with clear and relevant 

consumer information about the return on investment at colleges and universities and to 

encourage colleges to improve.

In awarding grants, priority would be given to States with a strong record of investment in higher 

education, and States that commit to increasing significantly their support for higher education.

For fiscal year 2015, the Administration requests $4 billion in mandatory funding to support the 

State Higher Education Performance Fund. States would be required to match these resources 

dollar-for-dollar, for a total of $8 billion over 4 years. Federal and State matching resources 

would be allocated among institutions based upon a performance formula developed by each 
63

State that meets minimum criteria set by the Secretary of Education, including that funding gaps 

for under-resourced institutions are not exacerbated in order to ensure all students have a 

chance to succeed, and would also support the successful implementation of State policy and 

funding reforms. States would have to set performance goals tied to a timeline, with specific 

goals for graduating low-income students and making college more affordable. Funds provided 

through this program could be used to support and scale up effective and innovative practices 

that improve access and success at public colleges and universities while reducing cost per 

degree, including:

• Providing comprehensive academic and student support services;

• Allocating need-based aid tied to progress toward completion;

• Providing accelerated learning opportunities and degree pathways, such as dual 

enrollment;

• Advancing competency-based education; and

• Reforming remedial education, especially for low-income, adult, and other 

underrepresented students.

Funding to institutions would be conditional upon making satisfactory progress to meet the goals 

that States establish in their applications. As part of their applications, States would have to 

submit an implementation plan that identifies which reforms require legislative action, 

demonstrate participation from all public institutions, and describe a long-term plan for 

sustainable performance-based funding beyond the grant period. During the grant period, 

funding levels could also be adjusted (through a higher level of Federal match) to explicitly 

reward States that commit to larger funding increases to public higher education, including 

need-based financial aid and reduced net price.

College Opportunity and Graduation Bonus

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................... — — $647.0

This mandatory proposal would reward colleges that successfully enroll and graduate a 

significant number of low- and moderate-income students on time and encourage all institutions 

to improve their performance. Eligible institutions would receive an annual “bonus” grant equal 

to their number of on-time Pell graduates multiplied by a tiered bonus amount per student, 

varying by institution type. In addition, this new program would encourage institutions to 

continue improving their performance by providing a larger bonus amount for additional Pell 

graduates. Eligibility would be based on Pell students comprising a significant share of an 

institution’s graduating class, graduation rates, and student loan default rates. The estimated 

total 10-year cost of the College Opportunity and Graduation Bonus proposal is $7 billion.

States would use their grants to make key investments and adopt best practices that would 

further increase college access and success for low-income students, such as by awarding 

additional need-based financial aid, enhancing academic and student support services, 

improving student learning and other outcomes while reducing costs, using technology to 

accelerate improvements, and establishing or expanding accelerated learning opportunities, as 

well as other innovations, interventions, and reforms.
64

Howard University

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

General Support.......................................... $194.5 $194.5 $194.5

Howard University Hospital ......................... 27.3 27.3 27.3

Total ................................................ 221.8 221.8 221.8

The 2015 request would maintain support for Howard University’s academic programs, research 

programs, construction activities, and the Howard University Hospital at the 2014 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 $3.4 million for Howard University’s endowment. The direct 

Federal appropriation accounts for approximately 38 percent of Howard University’s operating 

costs. 

Academic Facilities

(BA in millions)

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

HBCU Capital Financing Program............ $20.2 $55.2 $19.4

CHAFL Federal Administration................. 0.4 0.4 0.4

These programs support the construction, reconstruction, and renovation of academic facilities 

at institutions of higher education. The 2015 request for the HBCU Capital Financing Program 

would support the management and servicing of loan guarantees on previously issued loans, 

and includes $19.1 million in loan subsidy that would allow the program to guarantee 

$303.6 million in new loans in 2015. 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.
65

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 2015, the Administration is seeking $637.2 million for IES activities, an increase of 

$60.2 million over the 2014 appropriation. This request would enable IES to award 

approximately $60 - $75 million in new research and development grants in early learning and 

elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education. NCES would receive an additional 

$14 million to support State participation in the Program for International Student Assessment 

(PISA) and to collect administrative National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) data 

every 2 years. In addition, the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems program would receive an 

additional $35.5 million to make new grants and support the expansion and enhancement of 

systems that improve the productivity of our education system.

The request would also 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)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $179.9 $179.9 $190.3

The request includes an increase of $10.4 million over the 2014 level to support critical 

investments in education research, development, dissemination, and evaluation that provide 

parents, teachers, schools, and policy-makers with evidence-based information on effective 

educational practices. 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. Funding would also support the 

work of the Virtual Learning Laboratory, including a new Research and Development Center on 

online and blended learning strategies and the development of training programs on the use of 

“big data” for educational research. 
66

Statistics

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................ $103.1 $103.1 $122.7

The Department’s statistics program—operated primarily through competitively awarded 

contracts administered by the NCES—provides general statistics about trends in education, 

collects data to monitor reform and measure educational progress, and informs the IES 

research agenda. The 2015 request, an increase of $19.7 million from 2014, 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 study that would allow States to 

benchmark the performance of their 15-year-old students against international standards and 

$8 million to collect administrative National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey data every 

2 years, providing more timely information on educational costs, financial aid, enrollment, and 

student progress. 

Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $54.4 $54.4 $54.4

The requested funds would be used to support the fourth 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 high quality research and proven practices to the school level. Key priorities 

include providing technical assistance on data analysis, evaluating programs and strategies, 

and using data from Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems for research and evaluation to 

address important issues of policy and practice.

Assessment

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $131.1 $140.2 $132.3

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 

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. The assessments currently scheduled for 2015 are reading, mathematics, and 

science. 
67

Research in Special Education

program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions .............................................. $47.3 $54.0 $54.0

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 provides 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 Longitudinal Data Systems

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $36.1 $34.5 $70.0

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 $10 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 

$35.5 million increase would allow the Department to support $57 million in new grants 

emphasizing early childhood data linkages, promoting better use of data in analysis and 

policymaking, and integrating data on school-level finances, teacher and leader effectiveness, 

and academic achievement. 

Special Education Studies and Evaluations

Program budget authority (BA)

2013 2014

2015

Request

BA in millions ............................................. $10.8 $10.8 $13.4

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 oversample of special education students in the Middle Grades 

Longitudinal Study, an evaluation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (a schoolwide approach to address problem behaviors), and a study of post high school outcomes for 

youth with disabilities. 
68

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 more than three dozen 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. 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. Similarly, the Administration’s request 

would eliminate separate funding authorities for the smaller vocational rehabilitation-related 

programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act whose activities can be conducted under the 

larger Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program.

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 2015 request.

2015 Proposed Discretionary Program Consolidations or Eliminations

Program (2014 BA in millions)

Advanced Placement ................................................................................. $28.5

Arts in Education........................................................................................ 25.0

Charter School Grants ............................................................................... 248.2

Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities ...................................... —

Elementary and Secondary School Counseling.......................................... 49.6

High School Graduation Initiative ............................................................... 46.3

Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property................................................. 66.8

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants .................................................... 2,349.8

Mathematics and Science Partnerships ..................................................... 149.7

Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (Vocational Rehabilitation) ................ 1.2

Model Transition Programs for Students with Intellectual

Disabilities into Higher Education ......................................................... 10.4

Physical Education Program ...................................................................... 74.6

Ready-to-Learn Television ......................................................................... 25.7

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Activities............. 90.0

Striving Readers ........................................................................................ 158.0

Supported Employment State Grants......................................................... 27.5

Teacher Incentive Fund ............................................................................. 288.8

Teacher Quality Partnership....................................................................... 40.6

Training for Realtime Writers...................................................................... 1.1

Transition to Teaching................................................................................ 13.8

Total ............................................................................................... 3,695.6
69

Programs Proposed for Consolidation or Elimination in FY 2015

(2014 BA in millions)

Advanced Placement ............................................................................................... $28.5

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.......................................................................................... $248.2

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 provide such assistance.

Elementary and Secondary School Counseling........................................................ $49.6

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 ............................................................................. $46.3

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............................................................... $66.8

This authority provides payments to local educational agencies without regard to the presence 

of federally connected children and thus does not necessarily support the provision of 

educational services for federally connected children. 
70

Programs Proposed for Consolidation or Eliminations in FY 2015, continued

(2014 BA in millions)

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ............................................................. $2,349.8

This program, which provides funds to States and local educational agencies 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 support a wide range of activities to improve the effectiveness of 

teachers and school leaders while also helping to ensure that effective teachers and leaders are 

equitably distributed across high- and low-poverty schools.

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, as part of the 

STEM Innovation proposal. The new program would provide formula grants to support 

comprehensive, evidence-based strategies and professional development that aligns Federal, 

State, and local resources to provide high-quality STEM instruction.

Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (Vocational Rehabilitation) ................................ $1.2

This program makes comprehensive vocational rehabilitation (VR) services available to migrant 

and seasonal farmworkers with disabilities, with the goal of increasing their employment 

opportunities. The Department believes that continuing to provide separate funding for this 

small, narrowly targeted program is not an efficient way to ensure appropriate and high-quality 

services for special populations who may be underserved under the VR State grants program. 

Model Transition Programs for Students with Intellectual Disabilities

Into Higher Education......................................................................................... $10.4

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 First in the World fund under 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 .................................................................................... $74.6

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. 
71

Programs Proposed for Consolidation or Eliminations in FY 2015, continued

(2014 BA in millions)

Ready-to-Learn Television ....................................................................................... $25.7

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 would be available under two 

new broader programs: Effective Teaching and Learning: Literacy; and Effective Teaching and 

Learning: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), as part of the STEM 

Innovation proposal.

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Activities........................... $90.0

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 funding 

available for such activities.

Striving Readers .................................................................................................... $158.0

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.

Supported Employment State Grants....................................................................... $27.5

This formula grant program 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. 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 and a separate funding stream is no longer needed. This proposal would 

reduce duplication of effort and administrative costs, streamline program administration at the

Federal and State level, and improve efficiency and accountability.

Teacher Incentive Fund ......................................................................................... $288.8

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.
72

Programs Proposed for Consolidation or Eliminations in FY 2015, continued 

(2014 BA in millions)

Teacher Quality Partnership..................................................................................... $40.6

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. Similar activities would be supported under the Excellent 

Instructional Teams initiative.

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.............................................................................................. $13.8

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 set-aside in Effective Teachers and Leaders 

State Grants would support similar activities.
73

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 16,900 school districts and 50 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 13 million postsecondary students.

The Department is responsible for administering education programs authorized by Congress 

and signed into law by the President. This responsibility involves developing regulations and 

policy guidance regarding program operations, determining how program funds are awarded to 

recipients consistent with statutory requirements, and ensuring programs are operated fairly and 

conform to statutes and laws prohibiting discrimination in federally funded activities. The 

Department also collects data and conducts research on education to help 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 2015 request would provide $14.4 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 education needs of 

6.6 million students with disabilities; Federal Pell Grants, which would make available nearly 

$33.9 billion in need-based grants to 8.9 million students enrolled in postsecondary institutions; 

and the postsecondary student loan programs, which would help provide roughly $129 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, 

reflecting, in part, the implementation of complex new competitive grant programs like RTT and 

Investing in Innovation (i3). In the postsecondary area, the Ensuring Continued Access to 

Student Loans Act of 2008 (ECASLA) supported uninterrupted access by students to federally 

guaranteed student loans throughout the financial crisis, while the SAFRA legislation of 2010 

ended Federal subsidies to private lenders. At the same time, the Administration has 

succeeded in eliminating or consolidating 49 programs that had served their purpose, been 

proven ineffective, or were more effectively supported through 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. The Department is now the sole lender 

for Federal postsecondary student loans and has a portfolio of approximately $1 trillion, 
74

including Federal Family Education Loans (FFEL), ECLASA, and Direct Loans. 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 (OMB) on prudent financial management 

through instruments such as OMB Circular A-123 on internal controls. Out of necessity, the 

Department has devoted more resources to information technology management, given 

directives such as OMB Exhibits A-53 on IT investment portfolio and A-300 on the management 

of capital assets. 

Despite the dramatic increase in its workload, the Department has controlled its administrative 

costs by reducing the number of personnel and improving its acquisition and financial 

management. The following chart compares the cumulative percentage increases, from 2003 to 

2013, in the Department’s discretionary budget, total loan originations, and FAFSA applications, 

with the Department’s total decrease in full-time equivalent (FTE) usage.

24%

78%

67%

-9%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Department of

Education Discretionary

Budget (Includes Pell

Grants)

Total Loan Originations FAFSA Applications Department FTE

Percent Change

The Department's workload grew from 2003 to 2013 while FTE 

levels decreased.

Key workload indicators FTE
75

Salaries and Expenses Overview

2013

Fo

otnot

e 2014

Fo

otnot

e

2015 

Request

Fo

otnot

Departmental Management

(BA in millions)

Program Administration $430.6 $422.9 $442.01

Office of Civil Rights 98.4 98.4 102.0

Office of Inspector General 57.8 57.8 59.2

Student Aid Administration 978.92 1,166.02 1,446.9

Other 9.83 9.23 8.73

Total 1,575.5 1,754.3 2,058.8

Full-time equivalent employment (FTE)

Program Administration 1,942 1,934 1,945

Office of Civil Rights 565 558 558

Office of Inspector General 270 253 251

Student Aid Administration 1,296 1,320 1,320

Other 17 19 19

Total 4,0904 4,0844 4,0934

 

1 Includes $1.5 million in 2015 for Building Modernization. 2 Excludes $367.6 million in 2013 and $226.9 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 2013; target for 2014 and 2015.

The 2015 Budget request for Salaries and Expenses (S&E) would 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. As a result, our 
76

administrative funds are approximately 1 percent of the total annual program appropriations and 

new loan volume administered by the Department. 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 9 percent.

The Department is requesting $2.05 billion for its S&E budget accounts in 2015, an increase of 

$305 million, or 17.5 percent, over the 2014 level. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 eliminated 

mandatory funding for servicing costs paid to Not-For-Profit loan servicers. Over 88 percent of 

the above requested increase is for servicing costs formerly funded by mandatory budget 

authority. The rest of the requested increase is focused on key priority areas and built-in 

increases: student aid systems and operational costs necessary to originate, disburse, and 

manage Pell Grants and Student Loans; necessary upgrades to the Education’s Central 

Automated Processing System (EDCAPS), the Department’s core financial system; built-in 

increases for a proposed 1 percent pay raise in January 2015 and the increased retirement 

contribution rates starting October 2014; IT security; IT system enhancements; and building 

modernization costs to reduce the Department’s space needs and rental costs. 

The chart below provides detail on the total Salaries and Expenses request of $2.05 billion by 

category. 

Department Employment

The 2015 request includes funding for 4,093 FTE, a net increase of 9 FTE from the 2014 level 

of 4,084 FTE. We are seeking increases of 2 FTE for the Institute of Education Sciences and 

1 FTE for Policy and Program Studies Services in the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy 

Development in order to enhance the Department’s evaluation, research, and data analytic 

capabilities. Other increases include 4 FTE for the Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education (OESE) to address workload needs, especially as OESE transitions to a case 

management approach for grant administration; 1 FTE for the Office of Safe and Healthy 

Students in OESE; and 3 FTE for the Office of Innovation and Improvement for a new Office of 

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education. The request also 

includes a reduction of 2 FTE in the Office of Inspector General. 

Personnel

29%

Other Non-Personnel

3%

Overhead (Rent & 

Mail) 4%

Other Department 

Contracts

5%

Student Aid 

Administration 

Contracts

59%

FY 2015 Salaries & Expenses Costs by Category

Contract costs account for most of the Salaries and Expenses budget.
77

 

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 is located in Federal 

Student Aid (FSA), the Office of 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 aid programs. OIG staff conducts audits and investigations of 

Department programs and operations. OCR investigates civil rights complaints and conducts 

civil rights compliance reviews.

Program Administration

The Program Administration account provides administrative support for most programs and 

offices in the Department. The 2015 request totals $442.0 million, an increase of $19.1 million, 

or 4.5 percent, above the 2014 level. The request includes $292.0 million for personnel 

compensation and benefits to support 1,945 FTE, which reflects an increase of 11 FTE from the 

2014 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 2015 is $156.4 million, an increase of $13.0 million from 

the 2014 level of $143.4 million. This increase is needed for: (1) the new Office of STEM 

Education, which would engage in outreach and technical assistance activities to States and 

districts in support of the STEM Innovation initiative; (2) built-in increases for a proposed 

1 percent pay raise in January 2015 as well as increased FERS contribution rates starting 

October 2014; (3) continued operations of EDCAPS, the Department’s core financial system; 

and (4) IT spending largely for necessary upgrades to the Department’s financial management 

system software, the redesign and modernization of EDFacts to simplify and improve the quality 

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
78

of K-12 program participation and performance data submitted by States, and enhancements to 

risk management tools designed to reduce the probability of improper payments.

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, are the Nation’s largest source of financial aid 

for postsecondary students. This account funds 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, servicing loans, and 

collecting on defaulted loans.

Ensuring the smooth operation of the complex financial transactions and many 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 

highest administrative priorities. Primary responsibility for administering the Federal student 

financial assistance programs rests with Federal Student Aid, the Office of the Under Secretary, 

and the Office of Postsecondary Education.

During the 2013-2014 award year, FSA provided approximately $164.2 billion in grant, workstudy, and loan assistance, including loan consolidations, to almost 13.4 million postsecondary 

students and their families. These students attended approximately 6,200 institutions of 

postsecondary education accredited by dozens of agencies.

SAFRA ended the origination of new loans under the 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 2013, the Bipartisan Budget Act removed SAFRA language that authorized 

mandatory budget authority to fund loan servicing performed by Not-For-Profit servicers. The 

Department currently has 11 loan servicers to service the Department’s portfolio of over 

31 million borrowers and those contracts are funded with discretionary dollars.

The Student Aid Administration account represents 70 percent of the Department’s total 

discretionary administrative budget. The 2015 request would provide $1.4 billion to administer 

student aid programs, an increase of $281 million over the 2014 level. Ninety-six percent of the 

increase results from FSA now funding all loan servicing with discretionary dollars and the 

anticipated growth in loan volume. In addition to the servicing request, funds are necessary to 

maintain operations for student aid application processing, origination, disbursement functions, 

and student aid IT system hosting; and manage the acquisition strategy for FSA’s core contracts 

for origination and disbursement, application processing, 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 7,841 in 2011 to an estimated 

9,950 in 2015. The 2015 request for OCR is $102.0 million, an increase of $3.6 million over the 
79

2014 level. Most of the requested increase is for the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and 

would be used to complete survey activities relating to the data for the 2013-2014 school year, 

support enhanced data quality activities, publish data through the CRDC Web site, and begin 

preparations for the 2015-2016 Survey. About $78.0 million of the OCR budget is for staff pay 

and benefits for its 558 FTE including a proposed 1 percent pay raise in January 2015, as well 

as increased FERS contribution rates starting October 2014; the remaining $24.0 million covers 

overhead costs as well as computer equipment, data analysis and reporting activities, travel, 

and other contractual services.

The requested funds would 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 

would 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 2015 request for the OIG is $59.2 million, an increase of 

$1.4 million over the 2014 level. Approximately 68 percent of this amount, or $40.6 million, is 

for personnel compensation and benefits to support a staffing level of 251 FTE, including built-in 

increases for a proposed 1 percent pay raise in January 2015 and increased FERS contribution 

rates starting October 2014.

The non-personnel request of $18.6 million includes $1 million to contract for the mandated 

annual audit of the Department’s financial statements. The scope of the audit would 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.
80

APPENDICES

 Summary of Discretionary Funds

 Mandatory Funding in the Department of Education

 Summary of Mandatory Funds

 Advance Appropriations for the Department of Education

 Total Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary Education in the United States

 Detailed Budget Table by Program