Department of Education

INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Request

CONTENTS

Page

Appropriations Language ........................................................................................................V-1

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes.......................................................................V-2

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers .............................................................................V-3

Summary of Changes .............................................................................................................V-4

Authorizing Legislation............................................................................................................V-5

Appropriations History.............................................................................................................V-6

Significant Items in FY 2018 Appropriations Reports...............................................................V-7

Summary of Request ..............................................................................................................V-8

Activities:

Research, development, and dissemination .....................................................................V-11

Statistics...........................................................................................................................V-24

Regional educational laboratories.....................................................................................V-38

Assessment......................................................................................................................V-43

Research in special education ..........................................................................................V-54

Statewide longitudinal data systems .................................................................................V-65

Special education studies and evaluations .......................................................................V-70
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-1

V-1

Appropriations Language

For carrying out activities authorized by the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, the 

National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act, and section 664 of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, $521,563,000, which shall remain available through 

September 30, 2020.

1

NOTES

A full-year 2018 appropriation was not enacted at the time the 2019 budget was prepared; therefore, the budget 

assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018 (Division D of P.L. 115-56, as 

amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.

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

Provisions and Changes document that follows the appropriations language.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-2

V-2

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1 ...$521,563,000, which shall remain 

available through September 30, 2020.

This language provides 2-year availability of 

funds for the account. This language is 

needed to facilitate the planning of long-term 

programs of research and to accommodate 

cyclical surveys and assessments. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-3

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2017

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Discretionary appropriation:

Discretionar y budget authority: Appropriation .................................................... $605,267 0 $521,563

Discretionar y budget authority: Annualized CR (P.L. 115-56, as amended)....... 0 $601,156 0

Discretionar y budget authority: Total, discretionary appropriation.................. 605,267 601,156 521,563
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-4

V-4

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2018 Annualized CR...................................................................................... $601,156

2019 .............................................................................................................. 521,563

Net change............................................................................ -79,593

Increases:

2018

Annualized

CR base

Change 

from base

Program:

Increase funding to reflect the President’s Budget request to 

fund Research, development, and dissemination; Assessment, 

including National assessment and National Assessment 

Governing Board; Research in special education; and Special 

education studies and evaluations at FY 2017 enacted 

levels. This amount would restore cuts resulting from the 

0.6791 percent across-the-board reduction included in the FY 

2018 Annualized CR Level. $406,285 +$2,778

Increase funding for Statistics to support the Privacy Technical 

Assistance Center, which was previously funded under 

Statewide longitudinal data. This amount would also restore 

cuts resulting from the 0.6791 percent across-the-board 

reduction included in the FY 2018 Annualized CR Level. 108,756 +3,744

Subtotal, increases +6,522

Decreases:

2018

Annualized

CR base

Change 

from base

Program:

Eliminate funding for the Regional educational laboratories. 54,053 -54,053

Eliminate funding for the Statewide longitudinal data systems. 32,062 -32,062

Subtotal, decreases -86,115

Net change -79,593
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-5

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2018

Authorized

2018

Annualized CR

2019

Authorized

2019

Request

Research and Statistics

Research, development, and dissemination (ESRA, parts A, B, and D, 

except section 174)

0

1, 2

$186,227 0

2

$187,500

Statistics (ESRA, part C) 0

1, 2

108,756 0

2

112,500

Regional educational laboratories (ESRA, section 174) 0 54,053 0 0

Assessment

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEPAA, section 303) 0

2

147,988 0

2

149,000

National Assessment Governing Board (NAEPAA, section 302) 0

2

7,692 0

2

7,745

Research in special education (ESRA, part E) 0

3

53,633 0

3

54,000

Statewide longitudinal data systems (ETAA, section 208) 0 32,062 0 0

Special education studies and evaluations (IDEA, section 664) 0

3

 10,745 0

3

 10,818

Total appropriation 601,156 521,563

Portion of request not authorized 601,156 521,563

1 Section 194(a) of the Education Sciences Reform Act provides that not more than the lesser of 2 percent of the amount appropriated to carry out the Act 

(excluding amount appropriated for the Regional Educational Laboratories) or $1,000 thousand shall be made available for the National Board of Education 

Sciences and that the National Center for Education Statistics shall be provided not less than its fiscal year 2002 amount ($85,000 thousand). 2 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in FY 2019 under appropriations 

language. 3 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in FY 2019 under appropriations 

language.

V-5
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-6

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Footnote

Senate 

Allowance Footnote AppropriationFootnote

2010 $689,256 $664,256 $679,2561 $659,006

2011 738,756 659,0062 722,7561 608,7863

2012 760,473 620,9034 609,7881 593,664

2013 621,150 593,6645 618,6615 562,612

2014 671,073 N/A6 652,9371 576,935

2015 637,180 N/A6 579,0217 573,935

2016 675,883 409,9568 562,9788 618,015

2017 693,818 536,0499 612,5259 605,2679

2018 616,839 605,26710 600,26710 601,15610

2019 521,563

1 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Committee action only. 

2 The level for the House allowance reflects the House-passed full-year continuing resolution. 3 The level for appropriation reflects the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 

2011 (P.L. 112-10). 4 The level for the House allowance reflects an introduced bill. 5 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2013 appropriations bill, 

which proceeded in the 112th Congress only through the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee. 6 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. 7 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only. 8 The levels for House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2016 appropriations bill, which 

proceeded in the 114th Congress only through the House Committee and Senate Committee. 9 The levels for House and Senate allowances reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2017 

appropriations bill; the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017. 10 The levels for the House reflect floor action on an Omnibus appropriation bill; Senate allowances reflect 

Committee action on the regular annual 2018 appropriations bill; the Appropriation reflects the annualized Continuing 

Resolution level.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-7

Significant Items in FY 2018 Appropriations Reports

IES Operating Plan

Senate: The Committee directs that the Director of IES submit an operating plan to the 

Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate detailing how IES 

plans to allocate funding available to research, evaluation, and other activities 

authorized under law. 

Response: IES will comply with this directive and take the necessary steps to provide this 

information. 

Protecting Personally Identifiable Information (PII)

Senate: The Committee directs the Department to ensure that its employees, contractors, 

and grantees, including States that receive funds from Statewide longitudinal 

data system grants, adhere to the strictest and highest standards for protecting 

PII. The Committee further directs the Department to report to the Committee, as 

well as to the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and the 

House Education and the Workforce Committee, on the actions it has taken to 

comply with this directive. 

Response: IES will comply with this directive and take the necessary steps to provide this 

information; however, we note that the request includes no funding for the 

Statewide longitudinal data systems program. 
V-8

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FISCAL YEAR 2019 REQUEST 

(in thousands of dollars)

Summary of R equ est

Click here for accessible version 

V-8
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-9

Summary of Request

A full-year 2018 appropriation was not enacted at the time the fiscal year 2019 budget was 

prepared; therefore, the budget assumes the Department is operating under the Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L 115–56, as amended). The amounts included for fiscal year 2018

reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) supports research, data collection and analysis 

activities, and the assessment of student progress. IES serves as a leader in the Department of 

Education and works with other Federal agencies to develop standards for research, improve 

the use of evidence in grant competitions, and reduce burden and improve quality through the 

use of administrative data in evaluations and research. The Administration requests 

$521.6 million for this account for fiscal year 2019, a decrease of $80 million over the fiscal year 

2018 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. 

The Administration requests $187.5 million for research, development, and dissemination, an 

increase of $1.3 million over the fiscal year 2018 annualized CR amount. This investment in 

research is critical because high-quality information about effective practices is essential for 

improving education, providing valuable insight into how public dollars could be better used to 

improve student outcomes. The funding will provide support for building a high-quality evidence 

base for what works in education, as well as provide support for IES dissemination efforts to 

ensure that the evidence base informs practice both in the field and also in the Department. 

For Statistics, which provides funds to support the collection, analysis, and reporting of data 

related to education at all levels, the Administration requests $112.5 million, an increase of 

$3.7 million over the fiscal year 2018 annualized CR amount. The request would allow the 

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to support the collection, analysis, and 

dissemination of education-related statistics in response to both legislative requirements and to 

the particular needs of data providers, data users, and education researchers. The request also 

includes $3 million to support the Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC), which serves as 

a valuable resource center to State and local educational agencies, the postsecondary 

community, and other parties engaged in building and using education data systems on issues 

related to privacy, security, and confidentiality of student records. 

A total of $156.7 million is requested for Assessment in 2019. Of this amount, $149.0 million 

would provide support for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and 

$7.7 million would support the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). The requested 

funding for Assessment would support NAGB in formulating policy guidelines for NAEP, as well 

as the costs associated with the sampling and data collection; pilot testing; item development; 

and scoring, analysis, and reporting of NAEP assessments.

The Administration requests $54.0 million for Research in Special Education, an increase of 

$367 thousand over the fiscal year 2018 annualized CR amount. The requested funds would 

support programs of research, including research intended to improve the developmental 

outcomes and school readiness of infants, toddlers, and young children with disabilities; 

improve education outcomes in core subject areas for children with disabilities; improve social 

and behavioral outcomes; and assist adolescents with disabilities to be college- and careerready.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-10

Summary of Request (continued)

The request includes $10.8 million for Special Education Studies and Evaluations, an increase 

of $73 thousand over the fiscal year 2018 annualized CR amount. IES supports a range of 

evaluations that are designed to provide information about which programs and practices are 

effective and ineffective and thereby provide concrete guidance for educators and parents. At 

the request level, five of these studies would receive funding from the 2019 appropriation: an 

evaluation of preschool special education practices; Phase 2 of the National Longitudinal 

Transition Study 2012; the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study; the Early Childhood Longitudinal 

Study; and reports on special education interventions. 

No funds are requested for the Regional Educational Laboratories (REL) and the Statewide 

Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) programs. The RELs support dissemination and technical 

assistance activities that are duplicative of existing investments in the areas of training, 

technical assistance, and professional development to build State capacity to provide highquality education. Likewise, the SLDS has arguably fulfilled its original purpose of enabling 

States to design, develop, and implement longitudinal data systems to efficiently and accurately 

collect, manage, and analyze individual student data. To date, 47 States, the District of 

Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa have each received awards to 

develop and implement longitudinal data systems. The only three States that have not received 

an SLDS award over five competition cycles are Alabama, New Mexico, and Wyoming. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-11

Research, development, and dissemination

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Parts A, B, and D)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01 2 3

Budget Authority:

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

Annualized CR

$186,227 $187,500 +$1,273

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009; the Administration proposes to continue funding this program in 

FY 2019 through appropriations language. 2 The authorizing law provides that not more than the lesser of 2 percent of the amount appropriated to carry out the 

Education Sciences Reform Act (excluding appropriations for the Regional Educational Laboratories) or $1.0 million 

shall be made available for the National Board for Education Sciences (NBES).

3 The authorizing law requires that of the amount appropriated for the Education Sciences Reform Act (excluding 

appropriations for the Regional Educational Laboratories), the National Center for Education Statistics shall be 

provided not less than its FY 2002 amount ($85 thousand).

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Authorized by the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA), the Institute of Education Sciences 

(IES) supports research and development that is both rigorous and relevant to the needs of 

educators and policymakers. As these investments have begun to yield promising and 

significant information, IES has also transformed the way the Department disseminates

education research findings. IES is doing this through a number of strategies, including through 

the redesign of its website (https://ies.ed.gov/) to facilitate online navigation and access to tools 

and resources relevant to classroom instruction and policy decisions. IES also continues to work 

with the field to help States, districts, schools, and institutions of higher education access 

available evidence to make more informed decisions based on high-quality evaluations.

IES includes four national centers: the National Center for Education Research (NCER), the 

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National Center for Education Evaluation 

and Regional Assistance (NCEE), and the National Center for Special Education Research 

(NCSER). The Director of IES is responsible for coordinating the activities of the centers, 

establishing and maintaining peer review standards, and ensuring that all publications are 

based on sound research. The National Board for Education Sciences (NBES), which is funded 

from the Research, Development, and Dissemination (RDD) program, is composed of private 

sector leaders as well as researchers and educators. Its responsibilities include approving 

priorities and peer review procedures, as well as providing guidance to IES. 

IES receives funding through seven programs in the IES account; one of those programs, RDD, 

provides funding for NCER and NCEE. NCEE also receives funding from the Regional 

Educational Laboratories (RELs) and Special Education Studies and Evaluation programs within 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-12

the IES account, as well as funding for evaluations and evidence reviews from other programs 

within the Department. NCER conducts sustained programs of scientifically rigorous research 

that build an evidence base in education to drive better decisions and lead to more effective 

practice. Activities within NCER are organized around research topic areas, such as reading 

and writing, early learning, mathematics and science education, teacher effectiveness and 

pedagogy, and education systems and policies. Since its authorization in 2002, IES has built a 

diverse NCER research portfolio that includes national research and development centers, fieldinitiated research projects, education research training projects, field-initiated evaluations of 

State and local programs and policies, and advancements in statistical and research 

methodology. 

NCER’s research activities help to improve education quality and improve student achievement, 

particularly for students at risk of academic failure. Many NCER projects also help inform critical 

education decisions at the State and local levels, and lead to better education practices across 

the country. For example:

• In 2016, NCER launched the Supporting Early Learning from Preschool through Early 

Elementary School Grades Network to examine factors that are associated with children’s 

early learning and achievement, and to develop and validate an observation tool that 

practitioners can use to assess and improve classroom instruction. The network involves 

leading experts in early childhood education and is conducting work in Boston,

Massachusetts; Fairfax County in Virginia; four rural school districts in North Carolina;

twelve urban and rural school districts in Nebraska; and the State of Ohio.

• NCER’s Education Research Grant and Small Business Innovation Research programs 

supported the development and pilot-testing of Assessment-to-Instruction (A2i), a set of 

tools designed to help elementary school teachers deliver individualized literacy instruction 

to students in kindergarten through 3rd grade. Researchers found that students who received 

A2i across multiple years were reading at 5th grade level by the end of 3rd grade. In 2017, 

the Department awarded a five-year Education Innovation and Research (EIR) grant to 

expand A2i to at least 300 schools and 100,000 students, and to evaluate its impact on 

reading achievement when implemented on a large scale.

• From 2014 to 2017, NCER supported a researcher-practitioner partnership involving Oregon 

State University and the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) to develop better 

identification and tracking procedures for the State’s 60,000 students who are identified as 

English Learners (roughly 10% of the State’s total K-12 population). The findings helped 

ODE design its implementation plan for the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and to 

address a State law requiring that resources be directed to districts with the highest needs 

and lowest student outcomes. 

• Since 2002, NCER has supported research on “growth mindset” – the idea that students 

who believe intelligence is acquired rather than fixed will exert greater effort and achieve 

better academic outcomes. A 2015 grant is testing the efficacy of online modules to teach 

growth mindset to middle school students in California and New York, and another grant is 

testing a similar online program adapted for community college students in California and 

Indiana. The college version has been implemented at 100 institutions and is being used by 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-13

more than 50,000 students. It includes features that allow researchers to monitor fidelity of 

implementation and assist colleges to measure impact on student achievement.

NCER also funds research training programs to help develop a steady supply of researchers 

dedicated to finding solutions to problems in education. NCER’s pre- and post-doctoral training 

programs in the education sciences have trained 945 and 189 fellows, respectively, since their 

creation in 2004-2005. Fellows who have completed their training are leading or contributing to 

education research projects as employees of universities, research firms, or government 

agencies. In 2016, NCER launched the Pathways to the Education Sciences program to 

diversify the pool of students entering the education profession. The Pathways program targets 

students who are attending or recently graduated from Minority Serving Institutions, and has 

enrolled nearly 50 participants to date. Finally, NCER funds programs to help early- and midcareer education researchers develop their skills and learn new methods. Recent training areas 

include topics such as using and understanding information from randomized control trials, 

evaluations using quasi-experimental designs, and applying cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness 

analyses.

NCEE supports a wide range of activities in the areas of evaluation, technical assistance, and 

dissemination. The Center conducts evaluations of the implementation and impact of key 

Federal education programs, through both traditional and quick-turnaround studies, and serves 

as a standards and validation body for education evaluations. A portion of funding used to 

support NCEE program evaluations comes from other programs and is not part of this request 

for RDD. NCEE is also responsible for translating research findings into information that is 

accessible to education practitioners and for enhancing the use of evidence by policymakers 

and practitioners through the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), the Education Resources 

Information Center (ERIC), and the National Library of Education (NLE). These programs work 

with NCES, NCER, and NCSER to promote and make accessible the results of their work. 

Funding for the WWC, ERIC, and NLE is part of the RDD request.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014.........................................................................................$179,860

2015...........................................................................................179,860

2016...........................................................................................195,000

2017...........................................................................................187,500

2018...........................................................................................186,227

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2019, the Administration requests $187.5 million for the Research, Development, 

and Dissemination (RDD) program, to restore funding to the fiscal year 2017 level. The RDD 

program identifies effective strategies for improving student learning in early childhood, K−12, 

postsecondary, and adult education and works to disseminate this information to policymakers 

and practitioners in ways that maximize its utility. RDD funds support several key activities in the 

Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Centers, including activities administered by the National 

Center for Education Research (NCER), the National Center for Education Evaluation and 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-14

Regional Assistance (NCEE), and the National Board of Education Sciences (NBES), which 

advises and consults with IES on the policies of the Institute. RDD funded activities include:

• NCER Education Research Grants;

• NCER National Research and Development (R&D) Centers;

• NCER Research Training;

• NCER Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR);

• NCEE What Works Clearinghouse (WWC);

• NCEE Education Resources Information Center (ERIC);

• NCEE National Library of Education (NLE); and the

• National Board for Education Sciences (NBES).

The requested funds would enable IES to sustain efforts to produce and support the use of

evidence-based practices in the field and in the Department by allowing IES to make

approximately $54.7 million in new research awards and enhance dissemination activities.

National Center for Education Research (NCER) Programs of Research

NCER research grants, which include a set of grant programs designed to support research that 

will help improve the quality of education for all students, from early childhood through 

postsecondary and adult education, would receive approximately $54.7 million in fiscal year

2019. To determine funding priorities for NCER research competitions, IES staff hold Technical 

Working Group meetings with education researchers and practitioners from around the country 

and solicit public comments through the IES website. Staff also discuss priorities with the NBES 

and with officials within the Department. Competitions for new 2018 grants were announced in 

May 2017; awards will be made by July 1, 2018. 

New education research investments in fiscal year 2019 will build the capacity of States and 

school districts to evaluate policies and programs designed to improve student outcomes and 

school performance. For fiscal year 2019 awards, IES anticipates publishing the Requests for 

Applications (RFA) on its website in March 2018. 

NCER research activities include the following programs:

• Education Research Grants: This program supports field-initiated research projects and 

accounts for the largest share of NCER grants. For fiscal year 2017 awards, NCER invited

proposals on the following 12 topics:

o Cognition and student learning;

o Early learning programs and policies;

o Education leadership;

o Education technology;

o Effective teachers and effective teaching;

o English learners;

o Improving education systems;

o Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education;

o Postsecondary and adult education;
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-15

o Reading and writing;

o Social and behavioral context for academic learning; and

o Three special topics for which evidence of promise or effectiveness is generally lacking: 

Arts in Education; Career and Technical Education; and Highly Mobile Students (such as 

children in military families).

Applicants may propose to conduct the following kinds of research projects, depending on 

their goals for the research:

o Exploratory research projects identify factors and conditions that are associated with 

academic achievement in order to build knowledge of how education programs operate, 

generate hypotheses for future testing, and contribute to development of interventions 

that can improve student outcomes.

o Development and innovation projects create interventions to address continuing 

problems that the nation has not yet solved (e.g., achievement gaps between lower- and 

higher-income students) and emerging problems and challenges (e.g., integrating new 

technologies into classrooms in ways that support student learning and achievement).

o Efficacy and replication projects examine whether fully developed interventions produce 

a beneficial impact on student outcomes when implemented in authentic education 

delivery systems like schools or classrooms. These projects often involve technical 

assistance and close monitoring by the research team to make sure the interventions 

are implemented with fidelity.

o Effectiveness studies determine whether fully developed interventions with prior 

evidence of efficacy produce beneficial education outcomes when implemented under 

routine conditions (e.g., if a district implemented an intervention on its own without 

special support from the developer or research team).

o Measurement projects support research to develop and validate surveys, tests, and 

other instruments used for screening, progress monitoring, and outcome assessments.

• National Research and Development (R&D) Centers: The R&D Centers program 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncer/RandD/) is intended to help solve education problems in the U.S. by 

engaging in research, development, evaluation, and national leadership activities aimed at 

improving the education system and, ultimately, student achievement. Each R&D Center 

conducts a focused program of research in under-investigated topics that are of interest to 

education policymakers and practitioners. For example, recent grants have supported new 

research on the implementation and effectiveness of gifted and talented programs for 

children and youth and on virtual learning. The virtual learning center is designed to study 

instructional practices, content, and learning tools provided to students in widely-used online 

instructional delivery platforms and how the large amounts of data generated within such 

platforms can be used to address practical needs and questions. The maximum funding is

$2 million per year for up to 5 years. The fiscal year 2019 request will support four R&D 

Centers on school choice, rural education, writing instruction for adolescents, and science 

instruction for students in early elementary school grades. 

• Research Training: Through its pre- and post-doctoral training programs, NCER supports 

grants to institutions of higher education to develop training programs for graduate students 

and researchers. These programs prepare students and professionals to conduct research 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-16

that is needed to help State and local school districts improve and that will contribute to the 

advancement of theory and practice. For fiscal year 2017, NCER invited new proposals for 

post-doctoral training, methods training for education researchers, and the Pathways to the 

Educational Sciences Research Training program (Pathways), which provides funding for 

training programs at minority-serving institutions (MSIs) and institutions of higher education 

that partner with MSIs. Pathways is designed for upper-level undergraduates, recent college 

graduates, and master’s students and is intended to help them prepare for doctoral study or 

careers in education research. The maximum allowable award for Pathways is $1,200,000 

over 5 years.

• Statistical and Research Methodology in Education: A critical aspect of IES’s mission is to 

provide education scientists with the tools they need to conduct rigorous applied research. 

The Statistical and Research Methodology in Education program supports the development 

of products that will help education researchers at all levels improve their study designs, 

data analyses, and interpretations of findings. Recent grants have supported software 

programs to help school district officials evaluate teacher performance and protect individual 

student privacy when using State longitudinal data systems. Areas of funding in the 

2017 competition include developing statistical tools to support important policy decisions by 

State and local education officials, increasing generalizability of research findings, and 

mining data to answer policy-relevant questions. The maximum funding for the 

2017 competition is $900,000 over 3 years. Early career researchers (i.e., those who

recently completed their doctoral study) could apply for up to $200,000 over 2 years.

• Research Collaborations Grants: This program supports research conducted in close 

collaboration with practitioners and policymakers, including State education agencies 

(SEAs) and local education agencies (LEAs). Three funding topics are available under this 

grant program: Research-Practitioner Partnerships (RPP) in Education, Continuous 

Improvement Research in Education, and the Evaluation of State and Local Education 

Programs and Policies. In 2018, IES will accept applications under the RPP and Evaluation 

of State and Local Education Programs topics. The RPP topic is intended to support initial 

research on a field-identified education issue of high priority for the partner education 

agency that has important implications for improving student education outcomes. The 

maximum funding for the 2018 competition is $400,000 for up to 2 years. The Evaluation of 

State and Local Programs and Policies topic is designed to support rigorous evaluations of 

fully-developed interventions that States and school districts have already implemented. The 

maximum funding for the 2018 competition under this topic is $5,000,000 for up to 5 years. 

• Research Networks Focused on Critical Problems of Education Practice: The purpose of 

these grants is to focus resources and attention on education problems or issues that are 

high priority for the Nation and to create a structure for researchers who are working on 

these issues to share ideas, build new knowledge, and strengthen their research and 

dissemination capacity. In 2016, IES invited proposals for two networks: (1) supporting early 

learning from preschool through early elementary grades and (2) scalable strategies to 

support college completion. The early learning network generated a large number of 

applications and resulted in seven awards; the college completion network resulted in two 

awards. In 2017, IES held a second competition to add up to three more projects to the 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-17

college completion network. The maximum funding amount is $1.1 million per year for up to 

5 years.

• Low-Cost, Short-Duration Evaluations of Education Interventions: This program supports

rigorous evaluations of education interventions that SEAs or LEAs believe will produce 

meaningful improvements in student outcomes within a short period of time; for example, 

within a single semester or academic year. The evaluations are low cost—up to $250,000 

over 2 years—because they focus on outcomes that can be easily measured using 

administrative records. The grants are carried out by partnerships of research institutions 

and SEAs or LEAs. IES did not make any awards during the first round of the fiscal year 

2018 competition because none of the applications scored high enough to be funded. 

• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR): This program (https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/) awards 

contracts to qualified small businesses to conduct innovative research and development 

projects focused on education technology. Small businesses can receive Federal funding for 

two phases of research and development. Phase I awards are designed to determine the 

scientific or technical merit of ideas by testing the feasibility of a technological approach; 

Phase II awards are designed to expand on the results of Phase I projects and to further 

pursue their development. Phase II awards require a more comprehensive plan for research 

and development and must include a description of the commercial potential of the 

education technology. Small businesses may also submit applications for “Fast Track” 

awards that combine Phase I and Phase II activities.

IES also makes a small number of unsolicited awards for projects that are not eligible for 

funding under current grant competitions or that address time-sensitive questions. Additional 

information is available at http://ies.ed.gov/funding/unsolicited.asp.

NCEE Dissemination Activities

NCEE dissemination activities are designed to ensure that practitioners and policymakers have 

access to high-quality research information in usable forms and would receive approximately 

$17.6 million in 2019. These activities provide tools to help practitioners and policymakers easily 

locate current information on the effectiveness of various strategies and interventions, thereby 

amplifying the impact of the Department’s investments in rigorous research and evaluation. 

Examples of such tools include the WWC thematic information campaigns publicized through 

email blasts and on Twitter, Facebook, and the WWC website.

• Education Resources Information Center (ERIC): The mission of the ERIC online system 

(https://www.eric.ed.gov) is to provide a comprehensive, easy-to-use, searchable 

bibliographic and full-text database of education research. ERIC has made several 

enhancements to address Federal public access requirements for grantees and contractors. 

These policies require that grantees and contractors deposit their final, peer-reviewed 

manuscript to ERIC and that ERIC make it available to the public 12 months after 

publication. Since 2013, IES and ERIC staff have negotiated agreements with over 

1,500 ERIC publishers to reflect this new requirement and have revised its selection policy 

to clarify that both journal articles and non-journal articles can be peer-reviewed. ERIC 

added cross-linking to information on the IES website to direct users to the NCER and 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-18

NCSER grant abstracts and to the WWC study review pages. With more than 

300,000 visitors daily, ERIC is the most visited website operated by the Department. 

Through these and other enhancements, IES is continuing to improve the ERIC user 

experience through improved search functionality and easier linkages to more full-text peer 

reviewed education research publications.

• National Library of Education (NLE): The NLE serves as the Federal Government's primary 

education information resource to the public, education community, and other government 

agencies. Information services are critical to enable the Department to use data and 

research to make decisions and build evidence of program effectiveness. Examples of NLE 

services include the recently launched internal websites on topics such as early learning, 

charter schools, and rural education, developed in collaboration with Department offices. 

The sites are internal resources that provide Department staff with relevant research and 

data on State programs and policies. In 2018, the NLE plans to continue to provide research 

services, to make the library’s historical collection fully available to the education scholar 

community, and to work with Department data stewards to improve the public’s access to 

Federal education data.

• What Works Clearinghouse (WWC): The WWC (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/) is a central 

and trusted source for scientific evidence on what works in education. To date, the WWC 

has reviewed more than 9,300 studies and published more than 560 intervention reports 

that assess the rigor of research evidence on the effectiveness of interventions in topics 

such as reading, mathematics, dropout prevention, early childhood education, English 

language learners, postsecondary access and success, and students with learning 

disabilities. The WWC also develops user-friendly guides that provide practical, researchbased recommendations for addressing common instructional challenges, such as teaching 

foundational skills to support reading for understanding for students in early grades, 

teaching effective writing strategies for students in secondary school, and strategies to 

support and improve the success of students academically underprepared for college. The 

Find What Works tool (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/FWW) allows users to easily search for 

studies by topic area, such as math or science, to find studies where there is evidence of 

positive effects. The “Students Like Yours” feature of Find What Works allows users to 

specify characteristics of their students in order to better identify what research has been 

conducted on similar populations. The WWC’s database of Reviews of Individual Studies 

(https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ReviewedStudies) has been enhanced to help users more 

easily identify studies that meet WWC standards and to identify those studies that have at 

least one statistically significant finding. Funds in 2019 will be used to enhance the WWC in 

order to expand dissemination efforts to better meet the needs of practitioners and 

policymakers as well as to accelerate study reviews to help ensure that SEAs, LEAs, 

schools, and practitioners have access to the most up-to-date evidence. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-19

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures

2017

Funds

2018

Funds

2019

Funds

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

2019

Awards

Research activities:

Education research grants

ducation r esearch: New grant awards $41,060 TBD TBD 86 TBD TBD

ducation r esearch: Grant award continuations 81,479 $97,473 $55,945 154 190 TBD

Education r esearch: Total 122,539 TBD TBD 240 TBD TBD

National research and development 

centers

 nd development centers: New grant awards 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

 nd development centers: Grant award continuations 8,010 8,586 4,059 5 5 TBD

 nd development centers: Total 8,010 TBD TBD 5 TBD TBD

Research training

esearch tr aini ng: New grant awards 1,102 TBD TBD 8 TBD TBD

esearch tr aini ng: Grant award continuations 11,634 12,448 6,155 18 23 TBD

esearch tr aini ng: Total 12,736 TBD TBD 26 TBD TBD

Statistical and research methodology 

in education

 odol og y in education: New grant awards 645 TBD TBD 4 TBD TBD

 odol og y in education: Grant award continuations 2,978 1,516 722 13 7 TBD

 h methodol og y in education: Total 3,623 TBD TBD 17 TBD TBD

Evaluation of State and local 

education programs

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: New grant awards 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Grant award continuations 0 0 2,982 0 TBD TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Total 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Research collaborations grants

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: New grant awards 3,741 TBD TBD 15 TBD TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Grant award continuations 7,155 9,748 2,567 15 21 TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Total 10,896 TBD TBD 30 TBD TBD

Research networks focused on critical 

problems of education practice: wor ks focused on critical pr obl ems of education practice: cal pr obl ems of education practice: New grant awards 1,184 TBD TBD 2 TBD TBD

 cal pr obl ems of education practice: Grant award continuations1 7,465 8,441 TBD 9 11 TBD

 or ks focused on critical pr obl ems of education practice: Total 8,649 TBD TBD 11 TBD TBD
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-20

Output Measures

2017

Funds

2018

Funds

2019

Funds

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

2019

Awards

Low-Cost Evaluation of Education 

Interventions

 ati on of Education Inter ventions: New grant awards $471 TBD TBD 4 TBD TBD

 ati on of Education Inter ventions: Grant award continuations 389 $487 0 3 4 TBD

Low-C ost Evaluati on of Education Inter ventions: Total 860 TBD TBD 7 TBD TBD

Unsolicited awards

Unsolicited awar ds: New grant awards 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Unsolicited awar ds: Grant award continuations 823 61 TBD 3 1 TBD

Unsolicited awar ds: Total 823 TBD TBD 3 TBD TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 48,203 34,847 $54,700 119 TBD TBD

Subtotal, grant award continuations 119,932 138,759 103,075 220 262 TBD

Subtotal, grants 168,135 173,606 157,775 339 TBD TBD

Small Business Innovation 

Research Contracts 7,945 7,950 7,950

Dissemination Activities

Educational Resources Information 

Center 3,593 4,000 4,500

What Works Clearinghouse 7,619 7,618 8,540

National Library of Education 2,315 2,279 2,452

Dissemination/Logistical/Technical 

Support 3,179 3,070 3,300

Disseminati on Acti vities: Total 16,706 16,967 18,792

Peer review 2,626 2,651 2,683

National Board for Education 

Sciences $11 $300 $300

Carryover from Previous Fiscal Year (14,767) (6,845) 0

Carryover to Next Fiscal Year 6,845 0 0

Total 187,500 194,629 187,500

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2018 and 2019 are 

estimates. The number and size of new research awards will depend on the quality of applications received. 

Continuation costs for 2019 reflect estimates of new awards in 2018.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-21

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

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

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

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 

2018 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by the 

program. The Department established new measures for NCER in 2014.

Goal: Transform education into an evidence-based field.

Objective: Raise the quality of research funded or conducted by the Department. 

Measure: The minimum percentage of projects that result in peer-reviewed publications.

Year Target Actual

2014 72% 73%

2015 75 75

2016 78 82

2017 85 83

2018 87

2019 87

Additional information: Peer-reviewed publications are an expected product of all research 

projects (i.e., grants). NCER has been funding research projects since 2002. Given the lag from 

time of award to completion of the study and publication, the denominator for each reporting 

year will be the cumulative number of research grants that had been funded through the end of 

the fiscal year 3 years prior to the reporting year. (Grants that would not be expected to result in 

peer-reviewed publication, such as research training grants, summer training grants, and nonresearch study projects are not included.) Thus, for 2017, the total number of projects (the 

denominator) is 763, which is the total number of research projects funded across all NCER 

programs from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2014. The number of these projects with peerreviewed publications was 631. The percentage of projects with published findings only 

increased by 1 percent, as opposed to the target of 3 percentage points, because a substantial 

proportion of the studies funded in 2014 are still ongoing. NCER gathers information about peerreviewed publications through the annual grantee reports and records the publications in the 

IES Catalog of Education Research (ICER) database. Reporting on this measure is cumulative.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-22

Measure: The minimum number of IES-supported interventions with evidence of efficacy in 

improving student outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2014 75 73%

2015 82 84

2016 94 105

2017 104 110

2018 114

2019 130

Additional information: IES-supported interventions include those developed or evaluated by 

IES. Student education outcomes include both student academic outcomes and social and 

behavioral competencies. Student academic outcomes include learning and achievement in 

core academic content areas (reading, writing, mathematics, and science) and outcomes that 

reflect students’ successful progression through the education system (e.g., course and grade 

completion). Social and behavioral competencies include social skills, attitudes, and behaviors 

that may be important to students’ academic and post-academic success. This measure 

replaces two prior measures that looked at reading and writing and at mathematics and science. 

Those two measures mapped directly onto research programs competed from 2002 through 

2004. Over the past decade, NCER has expanded the number of topic areas in which research 

is supported, so the new measure more accurately captures information on the breadth of topics 

supported.

Results of intervention evaluations typically are not available until the end of a grant award 

period. NCER submits the results (peer-reviewed publications and reports) to the What Works 

Clearinghouse (WWC) for review. WWC-certified reviewers determine whether the evaluation 

meets the WWC standards with or without reservations, and whether the evaluation found the 

intervention to produce a statistically significant or substantively important positive effect for 

students on at least one relevant education outcome. Thus, the reported data are the numbers

of interventions since 2002 with evidence of meeting WWC standards and having positive 

effects on student outcomes as determined by the WWC reviewers.

Efficiency Measures

Measure: The average number of research grants administered per each program officer 

employed in the National Center for Education Research.

Year Target Actual

2014 41 31

2015 40 35

2016 40 38

2017 40 42

2018 40

2019 40
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-23

Additional information: The principal efficiency measure for IES is the ratio of research staff to 

research grants. In 2001, the Department’s predecessor research organization employed 

69 staff in its 5 national research institutes. Those staff administered 89 active research grants, 

or 1.3 per staff member. By 2007, 13 staff in the IES National Center for Education Research 

administered 417 active research grants with support from 4 staff in the IES Standards and 

Review and Grants Administration Staff offices. By 2011, staff monitored an average of 

35 grants per staff membera considerable increase from 2001.

In 2012 and 2013, NCER saw a slight decrease in the number of grants administered by 

program officers. In 2013, NCER had filled all open research staff positions for the first time, but 

was unable to fund as many new awards as it would have historically funded, due to budget 

cuts put in place by the sequester. At the same time, many of the awards made in fiscal year 

2009 were closing out, leading to additional reductions in the number of grants being monitored 

by staff. IES believes that the current number of research grants per program officer represents 

an appropriate level of oversight and capacity and that future targets should maintain this level.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-24

Statistics

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01 2

Budget Authority:

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program 

in FY 2019 through appropriations language. 2 The statute authorizes such sums as may be necessary for all of Title I, of which not less than the amount provided 

to the National Center for Education Statistics for FY 2002 shall be available for Part C, which is $85 thousand.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is 1 of 13 Federal statistical agencies and 

is the chief Federal entity engaged in collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to 

education in the U.S. As such, NCES makes a unique contribution to our understanding of the 

American educational system. NCES is one of four Centers in the Institute of Education 

Sciences (IES), which was established by the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) of 2002.

NCES is authorized to:

• collect, acquire, compile, and disseminate full and complete statistics on the condition and 

progress of education in the U.S.; 

• conduct and publish reports on the meaning and significance of such statistics; 

• collect, analyze, cross-tabulate, and report data, where feasible, by demographic 

characteristics, including gender, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, limited English 

proficiency, mobility, disability, and urbanicity; 

• help public and private educational agencies and organizations improve their statistical 

systems;

• acquire and disseminate data on U.S. education activities and student achievement 

compared with foreign nations; 

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

Annualized CR

$108,756 $112,500 $3,744
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-25

• conduct longitudinal and special data collections necessary to report on the condition and 

progress of education; and

• help the IES Director prepare a biennial report describing the activities of IES. 

NCES is also authorized to establish a program to train employees of public and private 

educational agencies, organizations, and institutions in the use of statistical procedures and 

concepts and may establish a fellowship program to allow such employees to work as 

temporary fellows at NCES.

Statistical information collected by NCES contributes to the identification of needs in education, 

the development of policy priorities, and the formulation, evaluation, and refinement of 

programs. The authorizing statute requires the Commissioner of NCES to issue regular reports 

on education topics, particularly in the core academic areas of reading, mathematics, and 

science, and to produce an annual statistical report on the condition and progress of education 

in the U.S. Over the last few years, NCES studies have provided information on a wide range of 

issues that are critical to education, including such topics as preparation for higher education, 

college costs, student financial aid, school choice, homeschooling, high school dropouts, school 

crime, teacher shortages, teacher mobility and attrition, and the achievement of students in the 

U.S. compared with that of other countries. NCES coordinates with other Federal agencies 

when carrying out surveys to ensure that the information collected is valuable across the 

Government. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services contributes to 

the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey, Kindergarten Class of 2010−11 (ECLS-K:2011), the 

National Science Foundation participated in the High School Longitudinal Study (HSLS:2009), 

and NCES collaborates with the Bureau of Justice Statistics to field the School Crime 

Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. Most work is conducted through 

competitively awarded contracts.

The Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) authorizes the National Board for Education 

Sciences (NBES) to advise the NCES Commissioner, and the Board may establish a standing 

committee to advise the Center.

Five areas, each with a set of specific activities, make up the Statistics budget:

• Cross-sectional Studies provide extensive staffing, school safety, adult education, and other 

issue-specific data from public and private schools, staff, and households. 

• Longitudinal Studies collect information on the same students over time. This information is 

a tool for understanding the processes through which individuals influence their education 

and education influences individuals, and can ultimately provide parents, educators, and 

policymakers with information to improve the quality of education.

• International Studies provide insights into the educational practices and outcomes in the 

U.S. by enabling comparisons with other countries. Interest in these studies has grown with 

the increasing concern about the Nation’s global competitiveness and the role education 

plays in ensuring economic growth.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-26

• Administrative Data Collections and Support include basic descriptive data collections from 

public schools at the elementary and secondary levels and from public and private 

postsecondary institutions, as well as activities that improve data standards and provide 

technical assistance.

• Cross-cutting Activities include initiatives to train the public on accessing and using NCES 

data; activities designed to enhance the usefulness of statistical data collections and 

publications; and programs to review and improve the quality of NCES studies and to 

safeguard privacy and confidentiality.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014.................................................................................$103,060

2015...................................................................................103,060

2016...................................................................................112,000

2017...................................................................................109,500

2018...................................................................................108,756

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2019, the Administration requests $112.5 million for the Statistics program, a 

$3 million increase from the fiscal year 2017 appropriation and $3.7 million above the 2018 

annualized continuing resolution (CR) level. The Administration requests that funding be 

available for 2 years, as it was in prior years. The additional $3 million would support the Privacy 

Technical Assistance Center (PTAC), previously funded under Statewide Longitudinal Data 

Systems (SLDS), which serves as a valuable resource center to State and local educational 

agencies, the postsecondary community, and other parties engaged in building and using 

education data systems on issues related to privacy, security, and confidentiality of student 

records. The request includes funds for a broad range of surveys and activities that provide 

information on education at all levels, including:

Cross Sectional Studies

Cross Sectional Studies, which include a set of sample surveys that provide extensive data 

about public and private schools, staff, and households throughout the U.S., would receive 

approximately $18.3 million of the 2019 request for the following surveys and activities:

• The National Household Education Surveys (NHES) (http://nces.ed.gov/nhes/), a suite of 

data collections that includes the Adult Training and Education Study (ATES), the Early 

Childhood Program Participation Survey (ECPP), and the Parent and Family Involvement in 

Education Survey (PFI), is designed to provide descriptive data on a wide range of 

education-related issues, including early childhood care and education, children’s readiness 

for school, before- and after-school activities of school-age children, adult participation in 

education and training for work, parent involvement in education, school choice, and 

homeschooling. The most recent data collection occurred in 2016. The next national data 

collection is scheduled for 2019.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-27

• The National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ntps/) is the 

Department’s primary source of information on teacher and principal preparation, classes 

taught in public schools, and demographics of the teacher and principal labor force. In

addition, each administration of NTPS contains rotating modules on important education 

topics such as: professional development, working conditions, and teacher and principal 

evaluation. This approach allows policy makers and researchers to assess trends on both 

stable and dynamic topics, including the average salary of a beginning principal, average 

student-teacher ratio in the U.S., and teachers’ views of their autonomy in the classroom.

The survey was redesigned from the Schools and Staffing Survey, which NCES conducted 

from 1987 to 2011, with a renewed focus on flexibility, timeliness, and integration with other 

Department data collections. Data collections for NTPS are scheduled every 2 years with 

the next to be completed during the 2017-2018 school year.

• The Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/frss/) collects issuespecific data quickly and with minimal response burden from elementary and secondary 

staff, schools, and districts. Data collected through FRSS surveys are representative at the 

national level, drawing from a universe that is appropriate for each study. The FRSS collects 

data from State educational agencies and national samples of other educational 

organizations and participants, including local educational agencies, public and private 

elementary and secondary schools, elementary and secondary school teachers and 

principals, and public libraries and school libraries. To ensure minimal burden on 

respondents, the surveys are generally limited to three pages of questions and sample sizes 

are relatively small. The next FRSS will collect data about how teachers develop lesson 

plans and assignments around student access to information technology outside of the 

classroom.

• The Private School Survey (PSS) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss/), conducted every 

2 years, provides information on the number of private schools, teachers, and students in 

the U.S. while providing a sampling frame for other NCES surveys. The survey, which 

includes all private schools, was last conducted in 2015-2016. The 2017-2018 data 

collection will be completed in 2018. 

• The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crime/) and 

the School Crime Supplement (SCS) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ssocs/) provide the 

Administration with many of the statistics used to provide context when crises and tragedies 

strike our Nation’s schools. SSOCS provides estimates of school crime, discipline, and 

school safety programs and policies from a nationally representative sample of 

approximately 3,500 public elementary and secondary schools, while the SCS collects 

information about school-related victimization, crime, and safety in public and private 

schools as part of a national survey of students ages 12 through 18 conducted by the 

Bureau of Justice Statistics. The two studies follow each other on a 2-year cycle. The most 

recent SCS was conducted in 2017, and the next SSOCS will occur in 2018. 

• The Survey of Earned Doctorates in the United States

(http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctorates/) annually collects basic statistics from the 

universe of doctoral recipients in the U.S. It is conducted by the National Center for Science 

and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), while 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-28

being supported by NCES, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration.

Longitudinal Studies

Longitudinal Studies are designed to collect information on the same students over time. NCES 

supports a set of surveys that follow students over various age spans. The data from these 

surveys provide a tool for understanding how education leads individuals to develop their 

abilities, and can ultimately provide parents, educators, and policymakers with information to 

improve the quality of education. Under the 2019 request, $36.7 million would support the

following longitudinal studies:

• The Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) (http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/) are a series of 

longitudinal studies that examine child development, school readiness, and early school 

experiences. The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010-11

(ECLS-K:11) is the third study in this series. Children in the ECLS-K:11 comprise a 

nationally representative sample selected from both public and private schools attending 

both full-day and part-day kindergarten in 2010-2011. The ECLS-K:11 provides data 

relevant to emerging policy-related domains not fully measured in previous studies, which 

has enabled researchers to study how a wide range of family, school, community, and 

individual factors are associated with school performance over time. The next data collection 

is currently being designed and is planned to begin in 2021.

• The High School Longitudinal Studies (HSLS) collect data on a cohort of students from 

9th grade through their postsecondary years. The HSLS:09

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/hsls09/) collected data in the fall of 2009 from a sample of 

students in the 9th grade, a crucial transition year for most students and a critical grade in 

determining high school success. The second round of data collection was in the spring of 

2012, when most of the student cohort was completing 11th grade. A short data collection 

occurred in the summer of 2013, when most cohort members would have finished high 

school, to learn about postsecondary plans and financing. The most recent round of data 

collection was conducted in 2016. Subsequent waves of data collection will follow the 

sample members through college and beyond, providing information on transitions from high 

school to postsecondary education or work. This data collection schedule will allow 

researchers and policymakers to learn if and how 9th graders’ plans are linked to their 

subsequent behaviors and outcomes, from course-taking to postsecondary choices, and 

how these plans evolve over time. The study will also examine factors that are associated 

with students succeeding in or dropping out of high school, with a special focus on science, 

technology, engineering, and math (STEM), curricular coverage, and at-risk students. NCES

has used data from the HSLS:09 to analyze the characteristics of early high school 

dropouts, finding that students in the lowest socioeconomic status were almost eight times 

more likely to drop out of high school than students in the highest socioeconomic status

(http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015066.pdf). Planning for the next high school cohort study is 

currently underway, with national data collection planned to begin in 2020. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-29

• The Middle Grades Longitudinal Study (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/mgls/) is the first 

longitudinal study to provide information on children’s development in grades 6 through 8 on 

factors associated with successful transition from elementary to secondary school. The 

study will include a nationally representative sample of 6th graders in the 2017-2018 school 

year, including oversamples of students with disabilities, and will focus on topics associated 

with students’ high school readiness, inclusion, and math and literacy learning in the middle 

grades. The field tests for the study were conducted in 2016 and early 2017, while baseline 

data will be collected in the beginning of 2018 with annual follow-ups in spring 2019 and 

spring 2020, when most of the students in the sample will be in grades 7 and 8, respectively.

• The National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/npsas/) is a comprehensive study of undergraduate, graduate, 

and first-professional degree students that examines how students and their families pay for 

postsecondary education. While NPSAS provides data on student financial aid programs 

necessary to make policy decisions and inform research, the data are collected once every 

4 years, and as a result, the data do not always reflect the current student aid policy 

environment. To address this infrequency, NCES initiated a NPSAS collection for 2017-2018 

that will be based solely on administrative data and that will follow the traditional NPSAS 

collections by 2 years. Combined with the original NPSAS collections, the administrative 

data collections will result in more frequent data collection and analysis, ultimately allowing 

the data to better reflect periods of rapid economic or social change. 

• The Baccalaureate and Beyond Survey (B&B) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/b&b/) follows 

students who complete their baccalaureate degrees. Initially, students in the NPSAS 

surveys who are identified as being in their last year of undergraduate studies are asked 

questions about their future employment and education expectations, as well as about their

undergraduate education. In later follow-ups, students are asked questions about their job 

search activities, education, and employment experiences after graduation. The most recent 

B&B was conducted in 2009 with a sample of 2008 bachelor's degree recipients from public 

and private postsecondary institutions; recipients were surveyed again in 2012, and a 

second follow-up is scheduled for 2018.

• The Beginning Postsecondary Student Longitudinal Survey (BPS) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/bps/) provides information on the progress of postsecondary 

students, following first-time postsecondary students through their postsecondary education 

and into the labor force. To date, BPS data have been collected for five cohorts of students, 

for which the 1990, 1996, 2004, 2008, and 2012 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS) served as the base data collections. Transcripts and student records have been 

collected from postsecondary institutions for more recent BPS cohorts. In 2015, NCES 

matched the samples of the 1996 and 2004 BPS cohorts to the National Student Loan Data 

System (NSLDS) and released up to 20 years of loan data for the participants in these 

studies in October 2017. The next BPS collection, which will also include a transcript and 

students records collection, will begin with the 2020 NPSAS. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-30

International Studies

International Studies (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/international/) provide insights into U.S. 

educational practices and outcomes by allowing comparisons with other countries. Interest in 

these studies has grown with increasing concern about the Nation’s global competitiveness and 

the role education plays in ensuring economic growth. International activities are a vital 

component of the Department's strategy for providing information to support education reform. 

Funding for the International Studies program is estimated at $19.2 million in 2019 and supports 

the following activities: 

• The International Analysis funding supports a number of activities, including the Indicators of 

National Education Systems Project (INES), a cooperative project among member countries 

of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to develop an 

education indicator reporting system. The goal of INES is to improve the comparability of 

education data across the 34-member OECD countries and to develop, collect, and report 

on a key set of indicators measuring the condition of education in these countries. The set of 

indicators includes measures of student enrollment and achievement, labor force 

participation, school and school system features, and costs and resources. The primary 

vehicle for reporting on these indicators is an annual OECD report entitled Education at a 

Glance (http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/). The U.S. plays an active role through participation in 

OECD working groups in formulating and reviewing indicators for the report.

• The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS), organized by the 

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, is an international 

comparative study to evaluate students’ computer and information literacy (i.e., their ability 

to use computers to investigate, create, and communicate in order to participate effectively 

at home, at school, in the workplace, and in the community). ICILS reports on students’ 

abilities to collect, manage, evaluate, and share digital information, as well as their 

understanding of issues related to the safe and responsible use of electronic information. 

The study also collects a rich array of data to investigate the factors that influence this suite 

of complex abilities in students. First established as a baseline study in 2013 with 

21 participating education systems around the world, ICILS will next be implemented in 

2018 to monitor changes over time in computer and information literacy achievement and its 

teaching and learning contexts. Funding supports the U.S. investment in the next cycle of 

ICILS. 

• The International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study (IELS) 

(http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/international-early-learning-and-child-well-being-study.htm), 

organized by the OECD, will collect international comparative data that will allow 

policymakers to better understand what outcomes are possible for children in early 

childhood education. The assessment and integrated surveys will enable insights on the 

relative effectiveness, equity, and efficiency of early childhood education systems across the 

world. The assessment and surveys for IELS were designed in 2016 and field tested in 

2017. The study will be conducted in 2018 and 2019 across the world, with data analysis 

and reporting occurring in 2020.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-31

• The Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/), which is sponsored by the OECD, is a household study 

assessing the basic skills and the broad range of competencies of adults around the world. 

In the U.S., the study was conducted in 2011-2012 and focused on cognitive and workplace 

skills needed for successful participation in 21st century society and the global economy. 

Specifically, PIAAC measures relationships between individuals’ educational backgrounds, 

uses of information and communications technology, and cognitive skills in the areas of 

literacy, numeracy, and problem solving. The PIAAC assessment was conducted again in 

the U.S. in 2013-2014 to collect supplemental data from households, as well as from a

separate sample of adults in State, Federal, and private prisons. In 2017, an additional 

sample was assessed in the U.S. to support adult literacy estimates at the county level; the 

next full cycle of PIAAC will be conducted in 2021.

• The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/), also sponsored by OECD, is designed to monitor, on a 

regular 3-year cycle, the achievement of 15-year-old students in three subject areas: 

reading literacy, mathematical literacy, and scientific literacy. The U.S. National PISA results 

are representative of the country as a whole but not of individual States. A State or territory 

may elect to participate in PISA—as Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Puerto Rico did in 

2015—and in that case a sample is drawn that is representative of that State or territory. 

While some elements covered by PISA are likely to be part of the school curriculum, PISA 

goes beyond mastery of school-based learning to include the knowledge and skills acquired 

outside of school. The survey had a special focus on reading literacy in 2000, on 

mathematics literacy in 2003, and on scientific literacy in 2006 and 2015. In 2015, PISA also 

assessed collaborative problem solving and financial literacy abilities in more than 70 

education systems across the world. The 2015 results found that 12 foreign education 

systems (Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong-China, Ireland, Japan, MacaoChina, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Slovenia) and Massachusetts had 

higher average scores than the U.S. in all 3 subject areas assessed. An online International 

Data Explorer (IDE) is available that allows users to create their own tables and charts from 

available data (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/international/ide/).

• The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/), which is sponsored by the International Association for 

the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), assesses the reading literacy of 

4th graders and the experiences they had at home and school in learning to read. PIRLS 

was first conducted in 2001, next in the spring of 2006 and 2011, and is scheduled to be 

conducted every 5 years thereafter. PIRLS was most recently conducted in spring 2016. An 

IDE is also available for this survey (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/international/ide/).

• The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/TIMSS/), also sponsored by the IEA, is a study of 4th and 8th graders’ 

mathematics and science achievement in the U.S. and other participating nations. The study 

is conducted every 4 years. The 2015 TIMSS included an assessment of secondary 

students’ achievement in advanced mathematics and physics. The study has gained the 

attention of educators, policymakers, and the public, spurring interest in improving middle 

school mathematics and science learning and achievement. The TIMSS IDE allows users to 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-32

create their own tables and charts using TIMSS data 

(http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/international/ide/).

Administrative Data Collections and Support

The Administrative Data Collections and Support category includes basic descriptive data 

collections from public schools at the elementary and secondary levels and from public and 

private postsecondary institutions, as well as activities that support improvement of data 

standards and technical assistance. The universe data also serve as the sample frames for 

sample surveys. Under the 2019 request, funding for administrative data collections would be 

an estimated $24.3 million. Key activities include:

• The Common Core of Data (CCD) (http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/), the Department’s primary 

database on public elementary and secondary education in the U.S., provides 

comprehensive, annual information on all school districts and public elementary and 

secondary schools (including public charter schools). The CCD contains basic descriptive 

information, including student enrollment, demographic, dropout, and high school 

completion data; numbers of teachers and other staff; and fiscal data, including revenues 

and expenditures. CCD data are available at the NCES website where users can construct 

custom tables using the Elementary/Secondary Information System 

(http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/). The CCD data collection is coordinated with the EDFacts

Submission System, which States use to report non-fiscal CCD data.

• The Common Education Data Standards (CEDS) (https://ceds.ed.gov/) project is a national 

collaborative effort to develop voluntary, common data standards for a key set of education 

data elements to streamline the exchange, comparison, and understanding of data within 

and across P-20W (Preschool, Grade 20 or Higher Education, Workforce) institutions and 

sectors.

• The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) (http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/) is 

a comprehensive collection system for postsecondary institutions, including all Title IV 

institutions. Components of the survey include: institutional characteristics, fall enrollment, 

completions, salaries, finance (including current fund revenues by source; current fund 

expenditures by function, assets, and indebtedness; and endowment investments), student 

financial aid, staff, graduation rates, outcome measures and academic libraries. Students 

and families make extensive use of IPEDS data to assist them in college choice through the 

NCES College Navigator (https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator) and the College Scorecard 

(https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/). Policymakers and researchers at the Federal, State, and 

local levels, as well as the media, use information from IPEDS to follow institutional trends 

related to postsecondary costs, enrollment and graduation rates, and financial aid. IPEDS 

retention and graduation rate data are also used for performance measurement in a number 

of the Department’s postsecondary education programs, and its data on tuition trends and 

net price provide important information to inform discussions and policymaking on student 

aid and access to higher education. IPEDS is conducted annually, although not all data are 

collected every year.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-33

• The Surveys and Cooperative Systems program provides support for a number of efforts to 

improve the quality, timeliness, and comparability of statistics used for education 

policymaking at all levels of government. This program includes the National Forum on 

Education Statistics (http://nces.ed.gov/forum/about.asp), which is composed of 

representatives from NCES, other Department offices, States, the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Department of Defense Dependents 

Schools. The program also includes two National Postsecondary Education Cooperatives 

(NPECs) (http://nces.ed.gov/npec/): one focused on IPEDS and one on the postsecondary 

longitudinal and sample surveys. The NPECs bring together a wide range of representatives 

from the postsecondary community who work with NCES to improve the quality and utility of 

postsecondary data.

• The Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) program 

(http://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/) uses data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau to 

create custom school district indicators of social and economic conditions for school-age 

children. Data generated by EDGE and many other NCES programs can be analyzed and 

viewed spatially using the MapEd tool (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/). The EDGE 

program uses spatial data collected by NCES and other federal sources to create locale 

indicators, school point locations, and other types of geographic data to support research 

and program administration.

Cross-cutting Activities

The Cross-Cutting Activities would receive approximately $13.9 million in 2019. Activities 

receiving funding include:

• The Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC) provides technical assistance to State and 

local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education related to the privacy, 

security, and confidentiality of student records. The PTAC was previously funded under 

SLDS.

• Annual Reports and Indicators include three major annual statistical compilations of critical 

education indicators: The “Condition of Education” (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/), the 

“Digest of Education Statistics” (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/), and “Projections of 

Education Statistics” (https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2016013). NCES 

also produces short-format statistical briefs on emerging issues in education.

• The Current Population Survey (CPS) (http://www.census.gov/cps/) is a monthly household 

survey conducted by the Bureau of the Census. Since the late 1960s, NCES has provided 

funding for a supplement that gathers data on enrollment in elementary, secondary, and 

postsecondary education and on educational attainment. NCES funds additional items on 

education-related topics such as language proficiency, disabilities, computer use and 

access, student mobility, and private school tuition.

• Funding for Data Development and Statistical Standards provides methodological and 

statistical support to NCES, as well as to Federal and non-Federal organizations that 

engage in statistical work in support of NCES’s mission. Activities include developing 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-34

standards that ensure the quality of statistical surveys, analyses, and products; coordinating 

the review of NCES products; coordinating revisions to the NCES Statistical Standards; 

funding the National Forum on Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/forum/); and 

improving the ED Data Inventory (http://datainventory.ed.gov/).

• Information technology funding includes support for NCES web servers and related 

activities, such as NCES Logistics Support, NCES web Support, and EDUCATE.

• Other activities include special studies to improve the quality and utility of assessments, 

including enhancements of survey methodology, assessment development, data analysis, 

and dissemination, as well as quality control procedures for NCES products. In addition, 

funding supports protection of confidential data; online technical training for researchers who 

use NCES data along with non-technical information sessions for other users; obtaining 

expert assistance; interagency activities to improve statistical quality and data use, including 

the Joint Program in Survey Methodology and FedStats; and printing and publications.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2017 2018 2019

Cross-Sectional Studies $29,225 $11,788 $18,343

Longitudinal Studies 23,277 43,946 36,702

International Studies 22,760 18,723 19,228

Administrative Data Collections and Support 23,386 23,631 24,316

Cross-Cutting Activities 10,852 10,668 13,911

Total 109,500 108,756 112,500

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

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

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

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in 

2019 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by the 

program.

Goal: To collect, analyze, and disseminate information on the condition of education in 

the United States and to provide comparative international statistics.

Objective: Provide timely and useful data that are relevant to policy and educational 

improvement.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-35

Measure: The extent to which customers would recommend NCES to others and would rely on 

NCES in the future as measured by the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI).

Year Target Actual

2010 74% 76%

2014 74 74

2016 74 72

2018 74 72

2020 74

Additional information: NCES collects customer satisfaction information through the ACSI 

(http://www.theacsi.org/), which provides satisfaction scores based on samples of customers. 

The baseline for this measure, 74 percent, was established using 2008 data. NCES did not

meet the performance target in 2018.

Measure: The number of data collections in which the response rate was below 85 percent.

Year

Number of 

Reports

Number of 

Survey 

Components

Number of Survey 

Components with 

Response Rates 

Below 85%

Percent of Survey 

Components with 

Response Rates 

Below 85%

2014 13 45 12 27%

2015 10 37 6 16

2016 10 22 3 14

2017 20 49 16 33

2018 10 24 6 25

2019 20 49 16 33

Additional information: One way in which NCES attempts to ensure the quality of its work is 

by maintaining high survey response rates. High response rates help ensure that survey data 

are representative of the target populations, and NCES has set specific benchmarks for different 

types of studies (e.g., universe surveys, cross-sectional surveys, and longitudinal studies). 

When a survey response rate is lower than 85 percent, the NCES statistical standards require 

that NCES conduct bias analyses to help determine the effect of the low rate on the survey 

results. All NCES surveys in 2009 through 2017 either had an 85 percent response rate or 

higher or had nonresponse bias analyses conducted and weight adjustments made, as needed.

In 2017, NCES released 20 reports that included 49 survey components. The response rates for 

77 percent of survey components were 86 percent or above and the remaining components had 

nonresponse bias analyses conducted because their response rates were below 85 percent. 

Actual data may fluctuate depending on the surveys being collected, but the percentage of 

surveys with response rates below 85 percent declined in 2014, 2015, and 2016 and increased 

in 2017. The nonresponse bias analyses, which were conducted for all surveys with a response 

rate of less than 85 percent, informed the nonresponse weight adjustments to help ensure 

published results accurately reflected the target population. The data for 2018 and 2019 are 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-36

projections based on data collections for which reports are scheduled to be released in 2018 

and 2019.

Efficiency Measures

NCES adopted two new efficiency measures in 2016. One of the measures looks at timeliness; 

the other examines the association between extending the length of data collections and 

response rates. The first NCES efficiency measure tracks survey data release timeliness by 

measuring if the reports for certain periodic data collections are released by a predetermined 

date set during a given reporting year. The efficiency measure addresses customers’ concerns 

about the data timeliness and helps assess whether NCES completes work in a timely manner.

Measure: The percentage of reports for certain periodic data collections meeting their annual or 

biennial release dates.

IPEDS Data Collection

Year Number of Reports Target Actual

2016 3 100% 33%

2017 3 100 100

2018 3 100

2019 3 100

CCD Data Collection

Year Number of Reports Target Actual

2016 3 100% 0

2017 3 100 100%

2018 3 100

2019 3 100

PSS Data Collection

Year Number of Reports Target Actual

2017 1 100% 0

2019 1 100

Condition of Education Data Collection

Year Number of Reports Target Actual

2016 1 100% 100%

2017 1 100 100

2018 1 100

2019 1 100
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-37

Additional information: NCES’ goal is to release reports for certain periodic data collections to 

the public by a predetermined release date, ensuring that the public can expect NCES reports 

for annual, biennial, or quadrennial data collections at an anticipated date during a reporting 

year. Specifically, the data collections that are tracked for this measure are IPEDS (annual), 

CCD (annual), PSS (biennial), and the Condition of Education (annual). In 2017, all IPEDS, 

CCD, and Condition of Education reports met the annual release date; no PSS reports met the 

annual release date. 

The second efficiency measure indicates the association between extending the length of data 

collections and response rates. Due to an increased reluctance to participate in government 

surveys, an increased level of effort and resources is needed to sustain acceptable response 

rates. One way to address declining response rates is to extend the planned length of data 

collection to allow for more follow-up with nonrespondents, with the goal of boosting the 

response rate to an acceptable level.

NCES had eleven sample surveys or survey components (outside of NAEP) that were 

completed during fiscal year 2017. The surveys collected data from a diverse set of different 

types of respondents using different data collection approaches. Six of these collections had 

extended data collection periods. Five extended operations by one month or less and one 

extended operations by three months. All surveys that extended data collection had higher 

response rates after the extension than at the planned close-out date with increases ranging 

from 0.3 percent to 6.3 percent. Four of the six collections that extended operations had at least 

a 1 percent increase in response rates per month of extended field operation. In 2018, NCES 

will continue to monitor various elements of its data collections to develop this measure.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-38

Regional educational laboratories

(Education Sciences Reform Act, section 174)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2018 

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

Annualized CR

$54,053 0 -$54,053

1

 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Administered by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance within 

the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

program (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/) supports a network of 10 laboratories that work in 

partnership with State education agencies (SEAs), school districts, and other entities to use 

data and research to improve academic outcomes for students. Each of the RELs serves a 

specific region of the country, with the fundamental mission of providing support for a more 

evidence-based education system. A map displaying the regions served by each REL is 

displayed on the following page and on the REL website identified previously in this paragraph.

RELs are intended to support activities to enhance State and local use of research and 

evidence, including: conducting applied research and evaluations; developing and 

disseminating products and processes based on the best available research findings; and 

providing training, coaching, and technical support to SEAs, local educational agencies (LEAs), 

school boards, and State boards of education. Through these activities, the RELs build local 

and State capacity to use data and evidence; access high-quality research to inform decisions;

identify opportunities to conduct original research; and track progress over time using highquality data and methods.

The RELs are part of the Department’s technical assistance and dissemination network that 

includes the Comprehensive Centers, What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), Equity Assistance 

Centers, and Technical Assistance Centers supported under Part D of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act. This network is organized by the Department to provide accessible, 

comprehensive, and relevant support to SEAs, LEAs, and schools as these entities rise to the 

challenge of ensuring a high-quality education for all students.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-39

Allocation of resources among the RELs is based on several variables, including the number of 

LEAs, the number of school-age children, and the cost of providing services within the 

geographic area encompassed by the region. RELs are funded through 5-year contracts with 

research organizations and institutions of higher education.

The current REL contracts were awarded in fiscal year 2017 and include an explicit focus on 

supporting sustained, ongoing partnerships with stakeholders at the State and district levels. 

Under the direction of their regional governing boards, RELs identify priority topic areas on which 

to focus their activities. There are currently 76 research partnerships operating across the RELs. 

Of these partnerships, 47 include State and district representatives from a single State and 

29 include members from multiple States.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-40

Although the research partners in the regions are the primary stakeholders of each REL, the 

Department also requires that RELs develop materials for national distribution through the IES

website. In addition to reports and studies, these materials include tools (e.g., rubrics or data

organizers) and technical assistance documents (e.g., PowerPoint presentations, workshop 

activities, and facilitators’ guides) that can be used by others who are not directly involved in the 

RELs’ work. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year ear (dollars in thousands)

2014....................................................................................$54,423

2015......................................................................................54,423

2016......................................................................................54,423

2017......................................................................................54,423

2018......................................................................................54,053

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration is not requesting funds for the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

program in fiscal year 2019. The RELs support dissemination and technical assistance activities 

that are duplicative of existing investments in areas of training, technical assistance, and 

professional development to build State capacity to provide high-quality education. Such 

assistance can be paid for directly by States and school districts, through programs such as 

Title I Grants to LEAs and Title I funds reserved for school improvement. Title I funds make 

available $15.5 billion annually to more than 14,000 school districts and 55,000 public 

elementary and secondary schools. These funds allow the recipients of services to directly 

select the service providers, rather than be assigned a service provider by the Department, 

which enhances choice and accountability and better serve the needs of the recipients of 

services. The request also is consistent with the principles of the ESSA, which reauthorized the 

ESEA in 2015 and emphasizes State and local responsibility for determining educational goals 

in response to State and local needs and developing and implementing strategies for meeting 

those goals.

Past surveys and evaluations suggest that the technical assistance currently provided through 

the RELs may be underutilized or not relevant to State and district needs. In the most recent 

REL independent evaluation (released April 2015), only 29 percent of State administrators and 

26 percent of district administrators reported that their research and technical assistance needs 

were met “very well” (as opposed to “moderately well” or “not well”), regardless of the source of 

assistance. The evaluation also indicated that less than half of State administrators and only 

18 percent of district administrators relied on the REL program “to a great extent” or “to a 

moderate extent” for education research and/or technical assistance, as opposed to a “small 

extent” or not at all. In contrast, 87 percent of State administrators relied on professional 

associations, and 82 percent of district administrators relied on their counterparts in other 

districts “to a great extent” or “to a moderate extent.” 

These data are also supported by an April 2016 report from the IES-funded National Center for 

Research in Policy and Practice (NCRPP). In a nationally representative survey of principals 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-41

and district leaders in the Nation’s mid-sized and large school districts, NCRPP found that 

leaders were more likely to access research through their professional associations, staff in 

other school districts, SEAs, and social media than through the RELs. Specifically, 60 percent of 

leaders reported that they “never” or “rarely” accessed research through the RELs (compared to 

12 percent who reported that they “often” or “all the time” accessed research through the RELs). 

Findings from the report suggest that State and local leaders prefer to choose their own 

technical assistance providers.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2017 2018 2019

Annual support for each REL:1

Northeastern Region $5,212 $5,292 0

Mid-Atlantic Region 4,942 4,992 0

Southeastern Region 5,420 0 0

Appalachian Region 3,751 4,784 0

Midwestern Region 5,876 5,876 0

Central Region 4,836 4,836 0

Southwestern Region 0 11,128 0

Western Region 5,718 5,713 0

Northwestern Region 4,625 4,680 0

Pacific Region 4,619 4,845 0

Subtotal, Regional educational 

laboratories

44,999 52,146 0

Program activities:2

Regional educational laboratory contracts 54,423 49,320 0

Independent review of REL plans and 

products

 0 5,000 0

Total 54,423 54,320 0

1

 Funding reflects estimated amounts obligated in the fiscal year, not the annual appropriation, and includes prior 

year carryover.

2

 The amounts show the estimated funding for each activity by year of the appropriation. Funds may be carried over 

into the next year.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-42

The 2012-2017 RELs were also contractually required to survey participants in each 

dissemination activity and report the data to IES. This measure averages participant responses 

to five survey items to create a single score for quality and relevance of dissemination activities; 

these items are:

• The workshop/training was relevant to an issue currently facing my organization.

• The workshop/training provided opportunities to consider how to use research or effectively 

incorporate data into decision making within my agency or organization.

• I expect to apply information from the workshop/training in my work.

• I am satisfied with the overall quality of this workshop/training.

• The benefits of attending this workshop/training were worth the time I invested.

The baseline for this measure was set in 2014 using data collected during calendar year 2013 

and was a rating of 3.4 on a scale where 1 equates to “Strongly Disagree” and 4 equates to 

“Strongly Agree.” The 2015 rating also was 3.4, which missed the target by 0.1. In 2016, the 

rating was 3.5, meeting the target. 

Other Performance Information

The Department began an independent evaluation of the REL program in 2009. The evaluation 

included each REL funded between fiscal years 2006 and 2011 and the REL program as a 

whole. Due to changes in the REL contracts, findings are not necessarily applicable to the 

current contractors.

The final report was issued in April 2015 and addressed the relevance and usefulness of impact 

study reports and technical assistance products. At the time of the study, seven RELs had 

completed eight impact studies. In order to include all RELs in the study, reviewers also 

collected one initial proposal for each of the three RELs that did not have a completed study but 

that did have one close to completion. All of the studies reviewed used randomized controlled 

trials. The expert panel members rated the reports for the eight completed impact studies as, on 

average, between “strong” and “very strong” in quality (4.1 on a 5 point scale). They rated the 

11 impact study proposals as, on average, between “adequate” in relevance and “relevant”

(3.61 on a 5 point scale).

State educational agency administrators identified teacher and staff evaluation as the area in 

which they had the most need for education research or technical assistance (53 percent); for 

district administrators, the area of greatest need was content standards, curriculum, or 

instruction in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (37 percent). Only 29 percent 

of the State administrators and 26 percent of district administrators thought their needs were 

met “very well” and both groups were more likely to look to other sources than the RELs for 

assistance. State administrators tended to obtain information from professional associations 

(87 percent, compared to 49 percent for the RELs); district administrators tended to look to 

colleagues in other districts or the State agency (82 percent versus 18 percent for the RELs).
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-43

Assessment

(National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 0

Budget Authority:

Program area

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

Annualized CR

National Assessment of Educational Progress $147,988 $149,000 +$1,012

National Assessment Governing Board 7,692 7,745 +53

Total 155,680 156,745 +1,065

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in 

FY 2019 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as “The Nation’s Report 

Card,” is the largest continuing and nationally representative assessment of what our nation’s 

students know and can do in various subject areas. NAEP has often been cited as the “gold 

standard” of assessments because it is developed using the best thinking from assessment and 

content specialists, education experts, and teachers from around the nation. NAEP is designed 

to measure and provide objective information on the status of and trends in student learning 

over time in a wide range of subject areas. By making this information on student performance 

available to policymakers, educators, parents, and others, NAEP has become an integral part of 

the Nation’s measurement of educational progress.

Assessment frequency is specified in the authorizing statute. The Commissioner for Education 

Statistics must conduct:

• National reading and mathematics assessments in public and private schools at 

grades 4 and 8 at least once every 2 years;

• National grade 12 reading and mathematics assessments in public and private schools on a 

regular schedule; and

• Biennial State assessments of student achievement in reading and mathematics in 

grades 4 and 8.

If time and resources allow, the Commissioner may conduct: additional national and State 

assessments in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades in public and private schools at regularly scheduled 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-44

intervals in additional subjects, including writing, science, U.S. history, geography, civics, 

economics, foreign languages, and arts; 12th grade State reading and mathematics 

assessments; and long-term trend assessments of academic achievement at ages 9, 13, and 17 

in reading and mathematics. Whenever feasible, information must be collected and reported by 

race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, disability, and limited-English proficiency. The 

NAEP schedule is publicly available at https://www.nagb.org/about-naep/assessmentschedule.html.

The National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) is responsible for formulating policy for 

NAEP. NAGB is composed of 25 voting members including Governors, State legislators, chief 

State school officers, a superintendent, State and local board of education members, testing 

and measurement experts, a representative of business or industry, curriculum specialists, 

principals, classroom teachers, and parents. The Director of the Institute of Education Sciences

(IES) serves as an ex officio, nonvoting member of the Board. Using a national consensus 

approach, NAGB develops appropriate assessment objectives and achievement levels for each 

grade in each subject area to be assessed.

The Assessment budget supports the following major program components:

• National NAEP: The main NAEP assessments report results for the Nation and are 

designed to follow the curriculum frameworks developed by NAGB. They periodically 

measure student achievement in reading, mathematics, science, writing, U.S. history, civics, 

geography, and other subjects.

• State NAEP: State assessments address the needs of State-level policymakers for reliable 

data concerning student achievement in their States in reading, mathematics, science, and 

writing.

• The Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA): Begun in 2002, the TUDA provides information 

on 4th and 8th grade student achievement in reading and mathematics in a small number of 

urban school districts. Although participation is voluntary, demand from districts to be 

included in TUDA has significantly increased in recent years, with 27 districts participating in 

2017. 

• Long-term trend NAEP: In its long-term trend program, NAEP administers identical 

instruments from one assessment year to the next, measuring student achievement in 

reading and mathematics. These assessments do not evolve based on changes in curricular 

or educational practices.

• Evaluation and validation studies: Congress mandates that the Secretary provide for 

continuing review of the national and State assessments and student performance levels by 

one or more nationally recognized evaluation organization. NAEP funds also support studies 

to examine critical validity issues involving NAEP design, interpretation, and operations.

In order to inform the American public about the performance of the Nation's students, NAEP 

produces a series of public audience and technical reports. All NAEP reports are available 

online (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/). In addition, a data tool 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-45

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/) allows users to create their own data tables 

with national and State data.

The NAEP legislation requires biennial State assessments in reading and mathematics in 

grades 4 and 8, and reporting of NAEP results, where feasible, by disability status and limitedEnglish proficiency as well as by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender. The Federal 

Government is specifically prohibited from using NAEP to influence standards, assessments, 

curriculum, or instructional practices at the State and local levels, or from using NAEP to 

evaluate individual students or teachers or provide rewards or sanctions for individual students, 

teachers, schools, or school districts. In addition, the use of NAEP data for student promotion or 

graduation purposes is prohibited, and NAEP should not affect home schools. Maintenance of a 

system of records containing personally identifiable information on students is also barred, and 

assessments must not evaluate or assess personal or family beliefs and attitudes.

Test integrity is further ensured by the Commissioner for Education Statistics’ ability to decline 

to release cognitive test items that will be used in future assessments for 10 years (and longer if 

important to protect long-term trend data) while continuing to provide for public access to 

assessment materials in secure settings. The NAEP statute requires that the public be notified 

about such access; requires that access be provided within 45 days in a mutually convenient 

setting; establishes procedures for receiving, reviewing, and reporting complaints; and provides 

criminal penalties for unauthorized release of assessment instruments.

Finally, the NAEP law mandates that participation be voluntary for students and schools, as well 

as for local educational agencies. Each participating State must give permission for the release 

of the results of its State assessment. However, under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA), each State participating in the Title I program had to develop a State 

plan (ESEA, Title I, Part A, Section 1111) in which it agreed to participate in the biennial 

grades 4 and 8 reading and mathematics NAEP assessments beginning in the 2002-2003 

school year, provided that the Secretary of Education pays for the costs of participation. Any 

State with an approved plan under section 1111 is deemed to have authorized the release of its 

grades 4 and 8 reading and mathematics NAEP data.

Funding levels for both NAEP and NAGB for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014..................................................................................$140,235

2015....................................................................................137,235

2016....................................................................................157,235

2017....................................................................................156,745

2018....................................................................................155,680

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $156.7 million for fiscal year 2019 for the Assessment program, an 

increase of $1.1 million, to restore funding to the fiscal year 2017 level. Of the request amount, 

$149.0 million would provide support for the National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) and $7.7 million would support the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). As 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-46

the largest continuing and nationally representative source of data on what the Nation’s 

students know and can do in various subject areas, NAEP plays a critical role in helping to 

benchmark national education progress. Since most States and districts use their own unique 

assessments, such a benchmark is essential and will likely be even more important as States 

work to improve their accountability systems with the increased flexibility granted in the Every 

Student Succeeds Act.

NAEP State-level assessments are held every other year, meaning that costs are considerably 

higher in some years and lower in others. Due to this cycle, the Administration requests that 

these funds remain available for 2 years, as they have been in recent years, in order to provide 

flexibility to administer these assessments and spread out costs over time.

National Assessment Governing Board

NAGB is an independent, bipartisan organization that formulates policy guidelines for NAEP. 

While the NAEP reading and mathematics assessments are mandated in frequency and in 

grade levels assessed by the National Assessment of Education Progress Authorization Act, 

NAGB has discretion in selecting which non-mandatory subject areas will be assessed and how 

often. In addition, NAGB is responsible for:

• Developing the student achievement levels for each grade and subject area assessed;

• Taking appropriate actions to improve the form, content, use, and reporting of NAEP;

• Developing assessment objectives and specifications for each subject area;

• Developing standards and procedures for regional and national comparisons;

• Planning and executing the initial public release of NAEP reports;

• Developing a process for review of the assessments;

• Designing the NAEP methodology, content, frameworks; and

• Developing guidelines for reporting and dissemination.

Since NAGB began setting standards for NAEP in 1990, the achievement levels (Basic, 

Proficient, and Advanced) are a signature feature of the reporting of NAEP results. Given the 

importance of reporting NAEP results in ways that lead to valid, reliable, and clear 

interpretations, the statute requires independent evaluations of the NAEP achievement levels.

An evaluation of the mathematics and reading achievement levels was conducted by the 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in 2016. The evaluation focused 

on the extent to which NAEP’s achievement levels for mathematics and reading are valid, 

reliable, and informative to the public. The evaluation report concluded that the achievement 

levels are a meaningful and important part of NAEP reporting and recommended seven areas 

for improvement (https://www.nap.edu/read/23409/chapter/1#ix).
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-47

The recommendations from the evaluation are consistent with NAGB’s strategic vision for NAEP 

and will help inform next steps in improving the reporting of NAEP results. The strategic vision, 

approved in November 2016, expands outreach efforts to promote the use and awareness of 

NAEP and related resources; emphasizes innovation to keep pace with changes in technology 

and standards; and outlines next steps that will advance the content, design, and reporting of 

NAEP, such as exploring ways to measure the complex skills that students need to transition 

into postsecondary education and careers. The strategic vision will focus the Governing Board’s 

work through the year 2020 and is available here: 

https://nagb.gov/content/nagb/assets/documents/newsroom/press-releases/2016/nagbstrategic-vision.pdf.

NAGB’s strategic vision will guide program activities implemented in fiscal year 2019. 

Specifically, the following activities will be supported with the $7.7 million request:

• Salaries, expenses, and operations of NAGB staff;

• Conducting follow-up work on improving and strengthening the NAEP achievement levels

based on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s 

recommendations and continued validation studies on achievement levels in other NAEP 

subject areas;

• Updating frameworks in NAEP mathematics, reading, U.S. history, civics, and geography to 

ensure that the frameworks reflect accurate and updated content and allow for digital 

deliveries;

• Conducting NAEP linking studies with other assessments, such as the ACT and the Trends 

in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS);

• Expanding outreach and engagement for initial public release efforts and efforts to enhance 

NAEP data use by continuously providing results to parents, educators and policymakers; 

and

• Conducting technical research to support implementation of activities in NAGB’s strategic 

vision and other legislative mandates.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-48

National Assessment of Educational Progress

Per authorizing statute, the Commissioner of Education Statistics must conduct the mandatory 

assessments and, to the extent time and resources allow, implement the non-mandatory 

assessments approved by NAGB. The current schedule of assessments 

(https://www.nagb.org/about-naep/assessment-schedule.html) includes:

Year Subject

National 

Grades 

Assessed

State Grades 

Assessed

Urban District

Grades 

Assessed

2017

Reading

Mathematics

Writing

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2018

U.S. History

Civics

Geography

Technology and Engineering Literacy

8

8

8

8

2019

Reading

Mathematics

Science

High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2021

Reading

Mathematics

Writing

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

8

4, 8

4, 8

2022

U.S. History

Civics

Geography

Economics

Technology and Engineering Literacy

8, 12

8, 12

8, 12

12

8, 12

2023

Reading

Mathematics

Science

High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2024 Arts

Foreign Language

8

12

The costs associated with this approved schedule are complex since they are a function of: the 

combination of assessments in the field; whether the subject areas content can be administered 

together with other subject areas for efficiency; what grade and subject area combinations are 

being assessed; at what scope grades and subject areas are being assessed (e.g., National 

only, or National and State); and a variety of other factors associated with bridge studies (such 

as the program’s bridge study for the transition from paper-and-pencil assessment to digitallybased technology) and changes in design, sampling, and methodology. Any changes in such 

key factors will directly impact the estimated cost of the schedule of assessments. As with all 

NAEP contracts, the cost for any given assessment is spread out over 4 or more years, multiple 

contracts, and hundreds of tasks. Additionally, since NCES contracts will be renewed in 2018, 

much of the data collection, scoring, analysis, and reporting cost of assessments scheduled in 

2018 and beyond are based on government cost estimates and not estimates obtained through 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-49

the contracting process. With these caveats in mind, the Administration anticipates that fiscal 

year 2019 funds will be used to support the following:

• Sampling and data collection: 2019 Reading, Mathematics, and Science assessments.

• Pilot testing: 2021 Reading, Mathematics, and Science assessments.

• Item development: 2022 U.S. History, Civics, Geography, Economics, and Technology and 

Engineering Literacy assessments. 

• Transitioning to Digitally-Based Assessments (DBAs): Beginning in 2017, all operational 

assessments were administered to students through digital-based technology. This 

innovation followed a trend in assessment delivery across the Nation as States transition to 

digital assessments. DBAs have a number of advantages, including providing data on 

students’ test-taking strategies and allowing students to demonstrate important skills in 

problem solving and analytical thinking through an enhanced platform and test items. For 

example, DBAs are capable of including more interactive question types, such as 

simulations and graphing, allowing for the measurement of skills not as easily assessed by 

paper-and-pencil assessments.

Funding for DBAs support technology costs, as well as bridge studies to compare results 

using paper-and-pencil assessments to results using DBAs. These studies guide NAEP in 

maintaining the NAEP data trend through the transition from paper-and-pencil assessments 

to DBAs. Such continuity is critical to NAEP because it allows policymakers, researchers, 

and practitioners to compare student achievement in key subject areas over time, and is one 

of the NAEP’s most prominent features. Maximum scientific rigor in assessment 

methodology must be implemented if NAEP’s decades-long trend lines for States and urban 

districts are to be maintained. The technology and bridge studies will also help to ensure 

uniform testing conditions across schools in order to maintain the validity and reliability 

necessary for NAEP data integrity.

• Supporting the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA): Since 2002, TUDA has explored 

the use of NAEP to report on the performance of public school students at the district level. 

Demand for TUDA has grown among urban districts, largely because the results have 

proven to be so useful. Specifically, TUDA results provide information about how well 

individual urban districts perform relative to other urban districts across the Nation, while 

simultaneously providing districts with high-quality data that may be used to improve 

instruction.

Examples of TUDA enabling districts to pursue meaningful innovations include: Atlanta 

Public Schools used TUDA data to redefine its professional development program in 

literacy; Boston Public Schools used TUDA 4th grade reading results to refocus its literacy 

instruction in the 2nd and 3rd grades; Houston Independent School District used NAEP 

4th grade mathematics data to modify its curriculum; and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools 

used the NAEP 8th grade mathematics frameworks to create a high school-readiness 

assessment. The eligibility criteria for participation of urban school districts in TUDA are set 

by NAGB and include cities having a population of 250,000 and a student enrollment of a 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-50

minimum of approximately 1,500 students per subject per grade level assessed. Eligible 

districts can submit an application to NAGB prior to the assessment year in which TUDA is 

to be conducted. NAGB staff review applications and recommend new districts for 

participation in TUDA to NAGB for final action. In 2015, 21 urban districts participated, and 

in 2017, the number of urban districts participating increased to 27.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2017 2018 2019

NAEP $149,000 $147,988 $149,000

NAGB $7,745 $7,692 $7,745

Total, Assessment $156,745 $155,680 $156,745

Number of full-time equivalent permanent

 personnel associated with NAGB 14 14 14

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

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

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

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal 

year 2019 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by 

this program.

Measure: The extent to which customers would recommend the Nation’s Report Card to others 

and would rely on the Nation’s Report Card in the future, as measured by the American 

Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI).

Year Target Actual

2010 81% 79%

2014 81 74

2016 81 72

2018 81

2020 81

Additional information: NCES collects customer satisfaction information through the ACSI 

(http://www.theacsi.org/), which provides satisfaction scores based on samples of customers. 

The baseline for this measure, which showed that 81 percent of respondents would recommend 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-51

the Nation’s Report Card to others and would rely on it in the future, was established using data 

for 2008. ACSI data will be collected approximately every other year. 

Measure: The number of website page views.

NAEP page views, excluding views of NDE

Year Target Actual

2016 1,028,662

2017 1,057,546

2018 1,050,000

2019 1,050,000

NRC page views (All NRC web site data)

Year Target Actual

2016 470,859

2017 440,904

2018 470,000

2019 470,000

NDE page views (to /nationsreportcard/naepdata/)

Year Target Actual

2016 153,459

2017 140,916

2018 150,000

2019 150,000

Additional information: NCES’ second performance measure tracks the use of the:

• NAEP website, which contains information about the NAEP program, sample cognitive 

assessment items, survey questionnaires and other information;

• Nation’s Report Card (NRC) website, which serves as the online home for the NAEP report 

cards; and

• NAEP Data Explorer (NDE), which is an online tool for analyzing NAEP results.

NCES changed its methodology in the way user data are collected, with baseline data collected 

in fiscal year 2016. The measure provides the number of unique page views for three separate 

web assets (NAEP, excluding views of NDE; NRC; and NDE). For example, in fiscal year 2016 

there were 1,028,662 sessions that viewed a page within the /nationsreportcard/ directory of the 

nces.ed.gov domain (excluding those views of NDE at /nationsreportcard/naepdata/). NCES 

tracks website page views as a proxy of public interest in the information contained on the 

pages. The NAEP page views provide information about the general level of interest in this 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-52

information, while the sub sections (NRC and NDE) provide a detailed view of how often users 

are viewing NAEP results content. NCES is committed to making data more accessible to an 

increasing audience and this data provides a quantitative measure for the program to use when 

considering enhancements for future reporting cycles.

There were a total of 1,652,980 page views across all three web assets in 2016, and 1,639,366 

page views in 2017.

Efficiency Measures

The following efficiency measures examine the actual time from the end of data collection to 

release of the initial national reading and mathematics assessments to NAGB. The goal is to 

ensure that NAEP results are available within 6 months of each reading and mathematics 

assessment, and the measure is an indication of how efficiently the Department analyzes and 

reports NAEP results. Because any year with new frameworks requires additional work to 

analyze the results (e.g., conducting trend studies and having achievement levels set by NAGB) 

and produce the final reports, NCES believes it is appropriate to exempt assessments with new 

frameworks from the efficiency measure calculations. This provides more comparable 

measurements from year-to-year, since different percentages of assessments may have new 

frameworks each year.

The measures are:

• The timeliness of the release of National NAEP data for Reading and Mathematics 

Assessments.

• The percentage of NAEP reports on State-level reading and mathematics assessments 

ready for release by NAGB within 6 months of the end of data collection.

• The percentage of NAEP initial releases, excluding national and State reading and 

mathematics assessments, ready for release by NAGB within 12 months of the end of data 

collection.

Timeliness of the Release of National NAEP Data for Reading and Mathematics Assessments: 

NCES has committed to releasing National NAEP results for reading and mathematics to NAGB 

within 6 months of the end of data collection in any year in which there are not new frameworks. 

It met this goal for 2009 (4th, 8th, and 12th grade mathematics) and 2011 (4th, 8th, and 12th grade 

reading and mathematics). In 2009, the reading assessment had new frameworks, and the 

results for the 4th, 8th, and 12th grade reading assessments were released to NAGB in 

12 months. NCES met the goal again in 2013 and 2015, when 4th, 8th, and 12th grade 

assessments were conducted in reading and mathematics. In 2017, NAEP transitioned from a 

paper-based assessment to a digitally-based assessment and, as such, the release of results 

will be more than 6 months after the end of data collection.

Timeliness of State-level Reading and Mathematics Assessments: NCES also has committed to 

releasing State-level reading and mathematics assessments to NAGB within 6 months, except 

when the assessments have new frameworks or new administration conditions. In 2009, the 4th,
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-53

8th, and 12th grades mathematics results were released in 6 months, and in 2011, both reading 

(4th and 8th grades) and mathematics (4th and 8th grades) were released within 6 months, all of 

which met the goal. (There was no 12th grade assessment in 2011.) The 2009 State reading 

results, which had new frameworks, were released in 12 months. NCES met the goal in 2013

and 2015, when State assessments were conducted in reading and mathematics for grades 4, 

8, and 12. In 2017, due to the transition from a paper-based assessment to a digitally-based 

assessment, the State results will be released more than 6 months after the end of data 

collection.

Timeliness of Other Assessments: NCES has committed to releasing results of all other 

assessments to NAGB within 12 months, except in years with new frameworks or new 

administration conditions. In 2007, 80 percent of other initial releases that did not have new 

frameworks were released within the 12-month time frame, and since then NCES has reported 

that all such assessments have met that time schedule.

Other Performance Information

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine completed an evaluation of 

the NAEP achievement levels (Basic, Proficient, and Advanced) in 2016 

(https://www.nap.edu/read/23409/chapter/1#ix), concluding that the achievement levels are a 

meaningful and important part of NAEP reporting. The evaluation report provided 

recommendations to ensure that the achievement levels represent the knowledge and skills of 

students at each level. Recommendations included:

• Evaluate the alignment of achievement levels for grade 4 and grade 8 mathematics 

assessments and revise them as needed.

• Regularly review the achievement-level descriptors to ensure they reflect both the 

frameworks and the incorporation of those frameworks in NAEP assessments.

• Research the relationships between the NAEP achievement levels and concurrent or future 

performance on measures external to NAEP, such as being on track for a college-ready 

high school diploma for 8th grade students and readiness for middle school for 4th grade 

students.

NAGB has awarded a contract to address some of these recommendations, particularly the 

alignment of achievement level descriptors with the scale. Also in response to the 

recommendations, NCES has raised the prominence of the cautionary language in the NAEP 

Report Cards regarding the developmental status of the achievement levels.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-54

Research in special education

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part E)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2018 

Annualized CR 2019

Change from 

Annualized CR

$53,633 $54,000 +$367

1

 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; the Administration proposes to continue funding this program in 

FY 2019 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Research in Special Education (RiSE) program supports research in critical areas of 

special education and early intervention services. The National Center for Special Education 

Research (NCSER), established within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) in 2005, 

conducts sustained programs of scientifically rigorous research that aim to improve a range of 

education outcomes for students with or at-risk for disabilities, including: developmental 

outcomes for infants and toddlers with disabilities; school readiness; achievement in core 

academic content areas (reading, writing, mathematics, science); behaviors that support 

learning in academic contexts for students with disabilities or at risk for disabilities; and 

functional skills that improve education outcomes and transitions to employment, independent 

living, and postsecondary education.

Investments in the special education research grants program have led to a number of 

important advances in knowledge and practice that have improved education outcomes for 

students with disabilities. Previous activities supported with RiSE funds include:

• Supporting Early Intervention Providers through Technology: Children without exposure to 

key language experiences prior to kindergarten face difficulties when learning to read and 

are at risk for reading disabilities. One way to enhance language experiences for these 

children is through home visitation by early intervention providers. In order to do this, home 

visitors need access to effective programs that can support them in identifying children who 

are at risk and giving appropriate guidance to parents/caregivers on how to provide their 

children with crucial language experiences. A project funded by NCSER in 2012 examined 

the impact of an online tool, Making Online Decisions (MOD), to assist home visitors in 

enhancing infants’ and toddlers’ communication skills. The MOD uses data on child 

communication skills to help providers make decisions about which children need more 

support and what types of strategies caregivers should use with their children to promote 

language development. Project findings showed that children whose home visitors used the 

MOD demonstrated significantly greater growth in communication skills than those who did 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-55

not have access to this decision-making tool (Buzhardt et al., in press). The MOD has been 

used with over 1,200 infants and toddlers. Researchers are extending this work in a 2017 

NCSER-funded project to develop a MOD tool for improving children’s cognitive problemsolving skills. 

• Improving Teachers’ Classroom Management and Students’ Behavioral Outcomes: 

Disruptive behaviors are one of the top concerns among educators, interfering with students’ 

ability to learn. As such, effective classroom management is critical in overcoming these 

behaviors and promoting student learning and achievement. However, many teachers do 

not receive training in classroom management and feel unprepared to implement effective 

strategies to serve students with behavior problems. A 2012 project funded by NCSER 

evaluated the impact of the Class-wide Function-based Intervention Teams (CW-FIT), an 

intervention designed to teach appropriate behavior skills (e.g., how to appropriately gain 

the teacher's attention) and reinforce the use of those skills through a game format. The 

intervention also includes more intensive strategies for students who do not successfully 

respond to the class-wide intervention. Project findings showed that student on-task 

behavior and teacher praise were higher in elementary school classrooms implementing 

CW-FIT as compared to classrooms without CW-FIT (Wills, Kamps, Caldarella, Wehby, & 

Swinburne, under review). Findings also showed that students at risk for emotional 

behavioral disorder who participated in CW-FIT demonstrated significant improvements in 

engagement and reductions in disruptive behavior. Overall, findings closely replicated those 

of a previous NCSER-funded study conducted in different states by different researchers 

and with greater researcher support for implementation 

(https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1070178.pdf). This provides stronger support for the 

efficacy of CW-FIT in improving students’ social-behavioral outcomes. Information and 

resources related to CW-FIT have been widely disseminated through the intervention 

website (http://cwfit.ku.edu) and an informational video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-

iFaWMDcEa4). CW-FIT is currently being implemented by over 1,600 educators across 10 

countries. In the U.S. alone, over 1,400 educators have accessed CW-FIT materials from 

492 cities across 47 states. Researchers are also extending this line of work by developing 

a middle school version of CW-FIT. 

• Improving Math Outcomes for Students with Intellectual Disability: Students with moderate 

to severe intellectual disability often experience difficulty accessing the general education 

curriculum, including participation in key aspects of the mathematics learning process. 

Teachers also have minimal guidance and resources on instructional strategies that are 

effective in improving math outcomes for these students. A 2013 project funded by NCSER 

addressed this gap by developing an intervention for students with moderate intellectual 

disability to improve their ability to solve math problems. The intervention is comprised of 

multiple components that have been shown to be effective for students with intellectual 

disability and other high incidence disabilities, including scripted lesson plans for teachers 

and materials for students (e.g., graphic organizers, manipulatives). Findings from this 

project showed that the intervention was associated with improved mathematical problem 

solving for students with moderate intellectual disability 

(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022466917721236). The findings have 

important implications for practice, including the need to maintain high expectations for 

these students.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-56

• Improving Reading Outcomes for Students with Disabilities: A substantial number of 

secondary students with learning disabilities experience difficulties in reading. However, 

finding time to provide intensive reading instruction is difficult in secondary schools when 

content area knowledge tends to take priority over reading skills. A 2012 project funded by 

NCSER sought to address this dilemma by developing BRIDGES, an intervention designed 

to improve students’ reading skills (i.e., reading multisyllabic words, understanding academic 

vocabulary, and comprehending what they read) and application of these skills to reading in 

the content area of U.S. History. Project findings indicated that 8th grade students with 

disabilities who participated in BRIDGES demonstrated more growth in vocabulary, 

comprehension and history knowledge relative to students with disabilities in typical special 

education history classes (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ldrp.12131/full). 

Researchers are extending this work with a 2016 NCSER-funded project to develop an 

intervention to promote academic vocabulary and its application across content areas 

among middle school students with disabilities who need more intensive reading support.

• Parents and Teachers Working as Partners in Rural Settings: Students with socialbehavioral problems early in school are at high risk of developing later pervasive behavioral 

and academic problems, and students can suffer when tensions over their behavioral

problems lead to a negative relationship between parents and teachers. Schools must 

intervene early to improve outcomes for these students; however, this is challenging in rural 

settings where resources and access to specialized services are limited. A 2012 project 

funded by NCSER evaluated the impact of an intervention, Teachers and Parents as 

Partners (TAPP; formerly known as Conjoint Behavioral Consultation), in rural schools. 

TAPP pairs teachers and parents with specially trained consultants who work together to 

reduce problem behavior and improve school performance by using data to identify 

problems and implement evidence-based solutions across home and school settings. 

Project findings indicated that students whose parents and teachers participated in TAPP 

showed greater improvements in their behavior relative to their peers whose teachers and 

parents did not participate in the program 

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440516300723). Additionally, 

participating parents and teachers reported improvements in the parent-teacher relationship; 

and parents also reported using more effective parenting strategies, gaining more 

competence in their problem-solving practices, and feeling more confident in their ability to 

help their child succeed in school 

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002244051730033X). TAPP is currently 

used by several schools and training programs for educational personnel (e.g., school 

psychologists). It has also been evaluated in multiple research studies, including a 2016 

NCSER-funded study to test its impact for Latino students. TAPP training modules will be on 

the program website (http://cyfs.unl.edu/TAPP/) and available to the public in 2018. 

• Understanding Factors that Promote Positive Transition Outcomes for Students with Autism 

Spectrum Disorders: There continues to be a gap in the post-high school outcomes of youth 

with disabilities compared to those without disabilities. Students with autism spectrum 

disorders (ASD) in particular have the lowest rates of postsecondary education enrollment 

and employment of youth across disability categories. As such, there is a need to better 

understand the types of school-based practices and programs that can improve post-high 

school outcomes for these students. A 2012 project funded by NCSER used existing data 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-57

from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 to identify factors associated with positive 

transition outcomes for students with ASD. Project findings identified a number of factors 

that contribute to the likelihood these students continue their education at the postsecondary 

level. For example, results showed that college enrollment rates were significantly higher for 

students who participated in transition planning and those who had a primary transition goal 

of college enrollment (http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0741932515581495). 

Findings also showed that students with ASD who took more advanced math classes in a 

general education setting were more likely to pursue a major in science, technology, 

engineering, or mathematics (STEM)

(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1088357615588489). These results provide a 

national perspective on school-based practices that support positive post-secondary 

outcomes for students with disabilities and have important implications for how educators 

can support students in achieving other positive outcomes after high school. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014.................................................................................. $54,000

2015.................................................................................... 54,000

2016.................................................................................... 54,000 

2017.................................................................................... 54,000 

2018.................................................................................... 53,633

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2019, the Administration requests $54.0 million for the Research in Special 

Education (RiSE) program, an increase of $367 thousand, to restore funding to the fiscal year 

2017 level. RiSE funding supports a comprehensive program of special education research 

designed to expand the knowledge and understanding of infants, toddlers, and children with 

disabilities, as well as answer questions about how children with disabilities develop and learn 

and how best to support their development through improved teaching and special education 

and related services. Continued investment in the long-term programs of research administered 

by the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) is necessary to enhance the 

research base on what works and develop evidence-based practices and policies that will result 

in improved developmental outcomes and school readiness, academic achievement, and 

transition from high school to postsecondary education, employment, and independent living for 

students with disabilities. 

In order to provide the flexibility IES needs to plan and administer a regular cycle of research 

competitions, the Administration requests that funding be available for two years, as it has been 

in previous years.

At the fiscal year 2019 request level, IES would support approximately $52.8 million in 

continuation costs of grants awarded in prior years and new grant awards; an additional 

$1.2 million would support peer review, logistical support, and other activities. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-58

IES is holding three competitions for awards in 2018; these competitions were announced in the 

Federal Register on May 30, 2017:

• Special Education Research Competition: The Special Education Research Grants program 

supports research on topics that are relevant to the needs of students with disabilities, their 

families, educators, and policymakers, spanning from the early intervention needs of infants 

and toddlers with disabilities to transition outcomes for students with disabilities leaving 

secondary education. For the 2018 competition, applicants can address 1 of the following 

11 research topics:

o Autism Spectrum Disorders; 

o Cognition and Student Learning in Special Education; 

o Early Intervention and Early Learning in Special Education; 

o Families of Children with Disabilities; 

o Mathematics and Science Education; 

o Professional Development for Teachers and School-Based Service Providers; 

o Reading, Writing, and Language Development; 

o Social and Behavioral Outcomes to Support Learning; 

o Special Education Policy, Finance, and Systems; 

o Technology for Special Education; and 

o Transition Outcomes for Secondary Students with Disabilities. 

The goal areas for the grants are:

o Exploration;

o Development and Innovation;

o Efficacy and Replication;

o Effectiveness; and 

o Measurement.

The award sizes and project lengths vary by the type of project; for example, the maximum 

award for an Exploration project solely involving secondary data is $600,000 over 2 years, 

while an Effectiveness project can receive up to $3.8 million over 5 years. The applications 

were due on August 17, 2017; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2018. Additional 

information on the competition is available at https://ies.ed.gov/funding/ncser_progs.asp.

• Research Training Programs in Special Education Competition: In 2018, IES will fund

applications for its Research Training Programs in Special Education under three topics: 

(1) Postdoctoral Training; (2) Early Career; and (3) Sequential, Multiple Assignment, 

Randomized Trial (SMART) Design Training. The purpose of the training programs is to 

prepare individuals to conduct rigorous and relevant special education and early intervention 

research that advances knowledge within the field and addresses issues that are critical to

education policymakers and practitioners. The Postdoctoral Training and Early Career topics

seek to build the next generation of special education and early intervention researchers. 

The maximum grant award and duration for the Postdoctoral Training topic is $766,000 over 

5 years. The maximum grant award and duration for the Early Career topic is $400,000 over 

4 years. The SMART Design Training topic supports advanced methodological training
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-59

related to using SMART designs as part of rigorous and relevant research on adaptive 

interventions focused on children with or at risk for disabilities. The maximum grant award 

and duration for this topic is $450,000 over 2 years. The applications were due on 

August 17, 2017; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2018. Additional information on the 

2018 competition is available at https://ies.ed.gov/funding/ncser_rfas/ncser_training.asp.

• Research Networks Focused on Critical Problems of Policy and Practice in Special 

Education: This new competition was launched for fiscal year 2018 and aims to focus 

resources and attention on high-priority issues in special education and to create both a 

structure and process for researchers who are working on these issues to share ideas, build 

new knowledge, and strengthen their research and dissemination capacity. For 2018, the 

competition will solicit proposals that address the needs of children with or at risk for 

disabilities within integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) in elementary schools. 

MTSS are frameworks that provide multiple levels of support through coordinated, evidencebased practices, strategies, and structures to meet the academic, social, emotional, and 

behavioral needs of all learners. Under this topic, MTSS must occur at the elementary 

school level, integrate both academic and behavioral supports, and address the needs of 

children with or at risk for disabilities. The maximum grant award and duration for this 

competition depends on the network role and scope of the project. Applications were due 

September 21, 2017; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2018. Additional information on 

the 2018 competition is at https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/projects/program.asp?ProgID=97.

The Research in Special Education program provides support for three additional grant areas: 

Special Education Research and Development Centers; a research initiative named “Accelerate 

the Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities;” and low-cost, short duration 

evaluations of special education interventions. 

• Special Education Research and Development Centers: Special education research and 

development centers (http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/RandD/) are intended to contribute significantly 

to solutions to special education problems in the United States by engaging in research, 

development, evaluation, and national leadership activities. Each research and development 

center conducts research and analyses within a specific topic area and provides national 

leadership in advancing evidence-based practices and policies within its topic area. Unlike 

special education research grants that support a single research study, the research and 

development center grants support a focused program of research that may include several 

researchers working on separate studies that are designed to contribute to our 

understanding of a particular topic. NCSER has funded six centers since 2008, the most 

recent of which was scheduled to end in fiscal year 2017. Due to limited funding, NCSER 

has been unable to fund new research and development since fiscal year 2012. 

• Accelerating the Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities Research 

Initiative: In 2012, IES invited applications for a new research initiative on developing and 

evaluating interventions to accelerate the reading and mathematics achievement of 3rd

through 8th grade students with or at risk for learning disabilities who demonstrate the most 

intractable learning problems. IES made one award in 2013.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-60

• Low-Cost, Short Duration Evaluation of Special Education Interventions: This program 

supports rigorous evaluations of education interventions that SEAs or LEAs believe will 

produce meaningful improvements in student outcomes within a short period of time; for 

example, within a single semester or academic year. The evaluations are low cost—up to 

$250,000 over 2 years—focusing on outcomes that can be easily measured using 

administrative records. Grants are carried out by partnerships between research institutions 

and SEAs or LEAs. IES made approximately $125,500 in new awards for fiscal year 2017.

Additionally, IES makes a small number of unsolicited awards for projects that are not eligible 

for funding under current grant competitions or that address time-sensitive questions. More 

information is available at http://ies.ed.gov/funding/unsolicited.asp. Program funds also pay for 

peer review of new grant awards and logistical support. The Department has budgeted for peer 

review costs each year; any funds not used for peer review could be used for grants.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures

2017 

Funds

2018

Funds

2019 

Funds

2017 

Awards

2018

Awards

2019

Awards

Research Activities:

Research Grants

 cation R esearch Gr ants: New grant awards $9,267 TBD TBD 20 TBD TBD

 ation R esearch Gr ants: Grant award continuations 38,141 $40,908 TBD 65 74 TBD

Special Education R esearch Gr ants: Total 47,408 TBD TBD 85 TBD TBD

Research Training

Research Trai ning: New grant awards 437 TBD TBD 4 TBD TBD

Research Trai ning: Grant award continuations 1,040 1,696 TBD 8 12 TBD

Special Education R esearch Gr ants: Total 1,477 TBD TBD 12 TBD TBD

Research Networks

Research N etwor ks: New grant awards 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Research Trai ning: Grant award continuations 0 0 TBD 0 0 TBD

Research Trai ning: Total 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Research and Development 

Centers

 d D evelopment Centers: New grant awards 0 0 TBD 0 0 TBD

 D evelopment Centers: Grant award continuations 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special Education R esearch and D evelopment Centers: Total 0 0 TBD 0 0 0

Students with Learning 

Disabilities Initiative

 abiliti es R esearch Initi ati ve Grant award continuations $2,000 TBD TBD 1 TBD TBD
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-61

Output Measures

2017 

Funds

2018

Funds

2019 

Funds

2017 

Awards

2018

Awards

2019

Awards

Low-Cost, Short Duration 

Evaluation of Special 

Education Interventions

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons New grant awards $126 0 TBD 1 0 TBD

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons Grant award continuations 133 $125 TBD 1 1 TBD

 Low-Cost Eval uation of Educati on Inter venti ons Total 259 125 TBD 2 1 TBD

Unsolicited Awards

Unsolicited Awar ds: New grant awards 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

 ds: Grant award continuations 0 0 TBD 0 0 TBD

Unsolicited Awar ds: Total 0 TBD TBD 0 TBD TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 9,830 20,440 TBD 25 TBD TBD

Subtotal, grant continuations 41,314 42,729 TBD 75 87 TBD

Subtotal, grants 51,144 63,169 $52,795 100 TBD TBD

Other activities:

Logistics and Support/Other 555 260 260

Peer review of new award 

applications 925 933 945

Subtotal, Other 

activities 1,480 1,193 1,205

Carryover from Previous Fiscal 

Year (9,353) (10,729) 0

Carryover to Next Fiscal Year 10,729 0 0

Total 54,000 53,633 54,000

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2018 and 2019 are 

estimates. The number and size of new research awards will depend on the quality of applications received. 

Continuation costs for 2019 are to be determined based on new awards in 2018.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

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

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

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-62

2019 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by the 

program. The Department established new measures for NCSER in fiscal year 2014.

Goal: Transform education into an evidence-based field.

Objective: Raise the quality of research funded or conducted by the Department.

Measure: The percentage of projects that result in peer-reviewed publications.

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 78%

2015 80% 81

2016 83 86

2017 88 91

2018 90

2019 91

Additional information: Peer-reviewed publications are an expected product of all research 

projects. NCSER has been funding research projects since 2006. Given the lag from time of 

award to completion of a study and the publication of results, the denominator for each reporting 

year is the cumulative number of grants that have been funded through the end of the fiscal 

year 3 years prior to the reporting year. Baseline data was established for fiscal year 2014. The 

percentage for fiscal year 2017 reflects all projects funded from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 

2014 (the total of which is 266). No research grant competitions in special education were held 

in 2014 due to budget constraints. Through grantee annual reporting requirements, NCSER 

gathers information about peer-reviewed publications produced with grant funding, and records 

those publications in the IES Catalog of Education Research (ICER). Counts are then generated 

from ICER.

Measure: The number of NCSER-supported interventions with evidence of efficacy in improving 

education outcomes for students with or at risk for disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 33

2015 35 39

2016 43 43

2017 47 48

2018 51

2019 53

Additional information: Since 2006, NCSER has supported efficacy evaluations of fully 

developed interventions to determine whether they produce a beneficial impact on student 

education outcomes. This measure reflects the cumulative number of interventions NCSER has 

funded that have demonstrated efficacy in improving student outcomes. Student education 

outcomes include school readiness for young children, and both academic outcomes and social 

and behavioral competencies for school-age students. School readiness outcomes include 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-63

reading, pre-reading, pre-writing, early mathematics, early science, and social-emotional skills 

that prepare young children for school. Student academic outcomes include achievement in 

core academic content (reading, writing, mathematics, science), and behaviors that support 

learning for students with disabilities or at-risk for disabilities from prekindergarten through high 

school. Additional education outcomes include developmental and functional outcomes that 

improve education results and transitions to employment, independent living, and 

postsecondary education for students with disabilities.

Results of intervention evaluations are typically not available until the end of a grant award 

period. Through grantees’ final performance reports, NCSER identifies peer-reviewed 

publications and reports produced with grant funding that provide evaluation results describing 

improved student outcomes. In addition, NCSER updates grantee publications annually in the 

ICER database. NCSER also reviews those updates to ensure that all publications of completed 

studies which examine causal impact are considered for review under this measure. 

NCSER submits these peer-reviewed publications and reports to the What Works 

Clearinghouse (WWC) for review. WWC-certified reviewers determine whether the evaluation 

meets the WWC standards with or without reservations, and whether the evaluation found the 

intervention to produce a statistically significant or substantively important positive effect for 

students on at least one relevant education outcome.

Thus, the reported data are the cumulative numbers of interventions since 2006 with evidence 

of meeting WWC standards and having positive effects on student outcomes as determined by 

WWC reviewers. The baseline was established in fiscal year 2014.

Measure: The number of newly developed or modified interventions with evidence of promise 

for improving education outcomes for students with or at risk for disabilities. 

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 27

2015 36 38

2016 43 45

2017 51 51

2018 60

2019 64

Additional information: Since 2006, NCSER has supported the development of new 

interventions and determined whether these interventions have promise to produce beneficial 

impacts on student education outcomes. This measure reflects the cumulative number of

interventions NCSER has funded through Development and Innovation projects that show 

promise for improving student outcomes. Student education outcomes include school readiness 

for young children, and both academic outcomes and social and behavioral competencies for 

school-age students. School readiness outcomes include reading, pre-reading, pre-writing, early 

mathematics, early science, or social-emotional skills that prepare young children for school. 

Student academic outcomes include achievement in core academic content (reading, writing, 

mathematics, science), and behaviors that support learning for students with disabilities or at 

risk for disabilities from kindergarten through high school. Additional education outcomes 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-64

include developmental and functional outcomes that improve educational results and transitions 

to employment, independent living, and postsecondary education for students with disabilities.

NCSER reviews grantees’ final reports and peer-reviewed publications for completed research 

grants and determine the number of projects that have generated evidence of promise. 

Evidence of promise must meet the Education Department General Education Regulations 

(EDGAR) standards for evidence of promise. To meet the standards, grantees must report pilot 

study evidence that the intervention produced a statistically significant or substantively important 

positive association (0.25 standard deviation or larger) for at least one student outcome.

The reported data are the cumulative numbers of newly developed or modified interventions 

since 2006 with evidence of promise meeting EDGAR standards as determined by NCSER 

based on grantee final performance reports and peer-reviewed publications, if available. In 

2014, NCSER established baseline numbers to report for this measure.

Efficiency Measures

Measure: The average number of research grants administered per each program officer 

employed in the National Center for Special Education Research.

Year Target Actual

2014 35 33

2015 30 38

2016 37 37

2017 33 35

2018 30

2019 37

Additional information: The principal efficiency measure for IES is the ratio of research staff to 

research grants. These data are collected from the official grant files for NCSER. Budget 

constraints led to a limited number of competitions and awards since 2013. The targets have 

been adjusted for each year accordingly. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-65

Statewide longitudinal data systems

(Educational Technical Assistance Act, Section 208)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

Annualized CR

$32,062 0 -$32,062

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Section 208 of the Educational Technical Assistance Act (ETAA) authorizes the Secretary to 

make competitive grants to State educational agencies (SEAs) to enable them to design, 

develop, and implement Statewide longitudinal data systems (SLDS) to efficiently and 

accurately manage, analyze, disaggregate, and use individual student data, consistent with the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. The goals of the program are to 

improve data quality, promote data linkages, encourage the accurate and timely generation of 

data for reporting and improving student achievement, and facilitate research to improve student 

achievement and close achievement gaps.

The grants are expected to help SEAs develop, expand, or improve data systems, and may 

support necessary training, technical assistance, and other activities to promote the effective 

use of data. Funds must supplement, not supplant, other State or local funds used for 

developing State data systems and may not be used to support ongoing implementation and 

maintenance of such systems. Administered by the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), SLDS grants are awarded 

competitively, based on the technical quality of the proposals.

IES has conducted six competitions to date. The first round of grants was awarded in November

2005 and the last round in 2015. The focus of the competitions has changed over time: early 

competitions focused on developing the necessary infrastructure for SEAs to develop their 

SLDS and to link K-12 data to early childhood, postsecondary, and workforce data, while the 

most recent competition focused on States using their SLDS data to address high-priority policy 

issues. To date, 47 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and 

American Samoa have received awards.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-66

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014..................................................................................... $34,539

2015....................................................................................... 34,539 

2016....................................................................................... 34,539 

2017....................................................................................... 32,281

2018....................................................................................... 32,062

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2019, the Department requests no funding for the Statewide Longitudinal Data 

Systems (SLDS) program, $32.3 million below the fiscal year 2017 appropriation and 

$32.1 million below the 2018 annualized continuing resolution (CR) level.

Longitudinal data systems serve as a vital source of information for educators, parents, 

policymakers, researchers, and the public on the performance of schools and what works in 

education. The Department’s investment in the SLDS program has ensured that States can 

answer key questions about education, such as whether students are ready for kindergarten, 

whether students are adequately prepared for college, or whether students can earn a living 

after completing their degrees. However, the SLDS has fulfilled its original purpose of enabling 

States to design, develop, and implement longitudinal data systems to efficiently and accurately 

collect, manage, and analyze individual student data. To date, 47 States, the District of 

Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa have each received awards to 

develop and implement longitudinal data systems. The only three States that have not received 

an SLDS award over five competition cycles are Alabama, New Mexico, and Wyoming. 

In 2015, recognizing that the SLDS program has provided resources to help nearly all States to

fulfill the original goals of the program, the Department re-focused SLDS grant competitions 

from building systems to using the data within the systems to inform decision-making. The final 

funding year for these grants is fiscal year 2018, so elimination of SLDS funding in fiscal 

year 2019 would not affect continuation costs. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-67

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2017 2018 2019

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ems development awar ds: New 0 0 0

 ems development awar ds: Continuations1 $26,281 $26,062 0

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Subtotal 26,281 26,062 0

Awards to improve data coordination,

quality, and use 6,000 6,000 0

Peer review 0 0 0

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Total 32,281 32,062 0

Number of Grant Awards

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition 16 16 0

Range of Awards (Entire Grant Period) Minimum Maximum

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition $3,483 $7,000

1

Continuation awards support grants awarded in fiscal year 2015.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

The Department of Education has identified priority performance goals that will help measure 

the success of the Department’s cradle-to-career education strategy, one of which is “make 

informed decisions and improve instruction through the use of data.” One strategy for ensuring 

that data are available to inform educational decisions is supporting States’ development and 

implementation of SLDS, and the Department has established three performance measures to 

assess progress. These measures assess progress of all States, not just the States with grants 

in the measurement years. The Department believes that assessing the progress of all States is 

appropriate, because the goal of the program is to ensure that critical information needed to 

improve student outcomes is available across the Nation. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-68

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 with early childhood data.

Year Target Actual

2014 23 26

2015 27 32

2016 29 35

2017 31 35

2018 33

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to track all public pre-K 

students into public kindergarten using the State longitudinal data system and by the inclusion 

of at least one additional source of early childhood data (e.g., Head Start or private pre-K) in the 

State data system. In 2012, 8 States had data systems that met the criteria, and by the end of 

2017, 35 had met the criteria, exceeding the target.

The Department has not developed targets for fiscal year 2019 because the Administration’s 

fiscal year 2019 budget request includes no funding for SLDS. 

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 with postsecondary data.

Year Target Actual

2014 28 33

2015 34 39

2016 36 44

2017 37 45

2018 45

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to link State

K-12 student data to State data from public 2- and 4-year institutions of higher education. As of 

the end of 2017, 45 States had met the target for this measure, exceeding the goal for the year.

The Department has not developed targets for fiscal year 2019 because the Administration’s 

fiscal year 2019 budget request includes no funding for SLDS. 

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 and postsecondary data with workforce data.

Year Target Actual

2014 14 20

2015 22 24

2016 25 28

2017 27 28

2018 29

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to track all public 2- and 

4-year postsecondary students to, at a minimum, State employment records (e.g., State 

unemployment insurance systems.) In 2012, the baseline year, 5 States were able to link their 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-69

K-12 and postsecondary data with workforce data, and in 2017, 28 States were able to do so, 

exceeding the target.

The Department has not developed targets for fiscal year 2019, because the Administration’s 

fiscal year 2019 budget request includes no funding for SLDS. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-70

Special education studies and evaluations

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 664)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2019 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2018

Annualized CR 2019

Change from

FY 2018

$10,745 $10,818 +$73

1

 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; the Department proposes to continue funding this program in 

FY 2019 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Special Education Studies and Evaluations program awards competitive grants, contracts, 

and cooperative agreements to assess the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) 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 statute authorizes the Department to support studies, evaluations, and assessments that:

• Analyze the results achieved by State and local educational agencies to improve services 

for children with disabilities;

• Analyze State and local needs for professional development, parent training, and other 

activities that can reduce the need for disciplinary actions involving children with disabilities;

• Measure educational and transitional services and outcomes for children with disabilities, 

including those from minority backgrounds; and

• Identify and report on the placement of children with disabilities by disability category.

In addition, the Department is required to submit an annual report to Congress summarizing the 

studies and evaluations conducted under this authority; the research conducted under part E of 

the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (which authorizes research on special education); 

and the data on children with disabilities required by section 618 of the IDEA.

The IDEA requires the Secretary to delegate responsibility for most studies and evaluations in 

special education to the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-71

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2014....................................................................................$10,818

2015......................................................................................10,818

2016......................................................................................10,818

2017......................................................................................10,818

2018......................................................................................10,745

FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2019, the Administration requests $10.8 million to support studies, evaluations, 

and assessments related to the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

(IDEA), an increase of $73 thousand, to restore funding to the fiscal year 2017 level. IES 

supports a range of evaluations that are designed to provide information about which programs 

and practices are effective for improving outcomes for children and youth with disabilities and 

thereby provide concrete guidance to educators and parents. Within IES, the National Center for 

Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) has primary responsibility for managing 

the studies and evaluations under Section 664 of IDEA, although the National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES) has primary responsibility for carrying out longitudinal studies with 

special education components (such as the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study and Middle 

Grades Longitudinal Study). NCEE consults with staff from the other IES research centers, the 

Office of Special Education Programs, and other policymakers in the Department to identify 

needs for new studies and the research questions that those studies would address. In some 

cases, NCEE has funded separate design contracts to identify options for new studies in 

particular areas.

At the Administration’s fiscal year 2019 request level, the following activities would be funded:

• $6.7 million for the Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices;

• $0.8 million for the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, Phase 2;

• $2.0 million for the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study;

• $0.4 million for the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study; and

• $0.9 million for NCEE reports on special education interventions.

Information on these activities, as well as ongoing and recently completed studies that will not 

receive funding from the 2019 appropriation, is provided below. Additional information on 

completed studies is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/disabilities.asp.

National Evaluation of the IDEA Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program: The IDEA 

Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) Program is the Department’s primary vehicle 

under IDEA for providing educators, policymakers, other service providers, and parents of 

children with disabilities with information on effective practices for meeting the needs of children 

with disabilities and their families. The national evaluation is designed to describe the products 

and services provided by program grantees, State and local needs for technical assistance, and 

the role the program plays in meeting these needs and supporting implementation of the IDEA. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-72

An interim report from the evaluation was released in October 2013 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20144000/pdf/20144000.pdf). 

Key findings include that TA&D centers most commonly reported providing technical assistance 

on the topics of “parent and family involvement” and “data systems and use of data for 

improvement” and that State staff rated the majority of experiences they had with the TA&D 

centers as “very satisfactory.” In addition, this analysis found some potential duplication of

services provided by technical assistance providers; however, this analysis was unable to 

establish whether such cases were indicators of inefficiency or coordination of complementary 

services. A final report was originally expected to be released in 2017. As of January 2018, the 

report has not yet been released, but the final report will be released at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/.

Study of Early Intervention and Special Education Services and Personnel: The Study of Early 

Intervention and Special Education Services and Personnel is analyzing extant data on early 

intervention and special education service delivery and personnel providing services. Key 

research questions include:

• How does early intervention service delivery vary across States? 

• How do special education and related services received by children and youth vary over 

time, across States, and by school characteristics? 

• How does the distribution of personnel providing special education services vary over time, 

across States, and by school characteristics? 

A final report was originally expected to be released in 2017. As of January 2018, the report 

has not yet been released, but the final report will be released at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/. 

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012): NLTS 2012 is the third longitudinal 

study in a series examining the characteristics, experiences, and post-high school outcomes of 

a nationally representative sample of youth with disabilities. NLTS 2012 focuses on students 

ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011) but also includes a small sample of students without 

disabilities to enable, for the first time, direct comparisons of students with and without 

individualized education programs (IEPs). It is part of the congressionally-mandated National 

Assessment of the IDEA. 

Phase 1 of the study addressed such questions as:

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

schools across the country? 

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

and accommodations do youth with disabilities receive? 

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

including those identified for services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-73

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

characteristics of youth? 

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

time? 

Phase 2 of the study will address such questions as:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

charter school, career/technical school, special education school, or other State or federallyoperated institution)?

Phase 1 of the study collected baseline data in the spring of 2012 through the summer of 2013 

on a nationwide sample of youth. Phase 2 of the study, which was awarded in September 2015, 

will continue to follow the sample through high school and beyond and will rely on administrative 

data, including: high school transcripts and records; National Student Clearinghouse data on 

postsecondary enrollment and persistence; financial aid information from the Department’s 

Office of Federal Student Aid; disability program participation, employment, and earnings 

information from the Social Security Administration; and vocational rehabilitative services and 

supports information from the Department’s Rehabilitative Services Administration.

IES has published two volumes (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20174016/index.asp) of a multivolume descriptive report based on the study. The first volume compares the characteristics and 

experiences of youth with an IEP to their non-IEP peers, while the second volume compares 

youth across disability groups. Overall, youth with an IEP feel positive about school but are 

more likely than their peers to struggle academically and to lag behind in taking key steps 

toward postsecondary education and jobs. Among youth with an IEP, those with autism, deafblindness, intellectual disability, multiple disabilities, and orthopedic impairments are most atrisk for not transitioning successfully beyond high school. The third and final volume of the 

Phase 1 report was originally expected to be released in 2017. As of January 2018, the report 

has not yet been released, but the final report will be released at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/.

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices: IDEA provides funding to States to 

support special education and related services for children and youth with disabilities, including 

young children ages 3- to 5-years old, but limited information is available on the special

education services and supports that young children are receiving and the preschool practices 

and interventions being used in programs across states. This evaluation will research the impact 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-74

of an intervention that integrates a content-focused curriculum for all children in inclusive 

classrooms with targeted instructional support for children with disabilities. 

Phase 1 of this evaluation is the design and feasibility phase. This phase will: (1) assess the 

feasibility of conducting an impact study of curricula or interventions promoting the literacy, 

language, and/or social-emotional skills of preschool-age children with disabilities; (2) identify 

feasible study design options for an impact study; and (3) prepare for the impact study, if 

deemed feasible to conduct. The feasibility work includes gathering descriptive data on current 

special education programs, services, and practices; these data are needed to identify 

interventions and practices to target in an impact study and to inform sampling. 

If IES identifies feasible options for conducting a study to examine the relationship between 

service receipt and outcomes for children receiving services under the IDEA Grants for Infants 

and Families program (Part C) and/or the IDEA Preschool Grants program (Part B Section 619), 

then Phase 2 will be initiated. Phase 2 of the evaluation is an impact study, which would be 

awarded in fiscal year 2018. 

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered Systems of Support for Behavior: This evaluation, 

which was formerly known as the Evaluation of School-wide Positive Behavior Support, will 

examine the effectiveness of strategies for training school staff to address problematic 

behaviors. Training school staff in supporting student behavior is becoming increasingly 

attractive to districts and schools as a vehicle for school improvement. Implementation of multitiered systems of support for behavior (MTSS-B) is an approach to improving school and 

classroom climate as well as student outcomes. MTSS-B is a multi-tiered, systematic framework 

for teaching and reinforcing behavior for all students as well as for providing additional support 

to those who need it, and over one-third of U.S. districts report implementing multi-tiered 

systems of behavior support at the elementary school level. Although previous evaluations of 

the MTSS-B framework have found positive outcomes, such as reductions in the number of 

disciplinary referrals, these evaluations have been conducted on a relatively small scale. The 

study will be a randomized trial evaluation of the impact of training in MTSS-B and will address 

the following questions:

• What is the impact on school climate, school staff practice, and student outcomes of 

providing training in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I)? 

• What is the impact on school climate, school staff practice, and student outcomes of 

providing training in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I) plus targeted 

interventions for at-risk students (Tier II)? 

• What is the impact of additional training in targeted interventions for at-risk students (Tier II) 

for schools already trained in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I)? 

• What are the impacts for relevant subgroups including students with at-risk behavior, 

students with disabilities, and teachers with less experience? 

• Which strategies are correlated with improvement in student outcomes?
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-75

The evaluation will be conducted in approximately 90 elementary schools located in 

9 geographically diverse school districts. The study will randomly assign schools to either 

training in promising MTSS-B strategies or a business-as-usual control group. Data collection 

and analyses scheduled for the 2015−2016 and 2016−2017 school years will include 

information about fidelity of implementation; implementation challenges; and impacts on student 

behavior, achievement, and identification for special education. IES anticipates releasing the 

impact report in 2018.

State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019: The most recent study of State and local 

implementation of IDEA collected data from SEAs and a national representative sample of 

school districts in 2009. In order to provide updated information on the implementation of IDEA 

in a substantially different policy context, the Department awarded an implementation study 

contract to develop plans to collect descriptive information on the implementation of early 

intervention and special education programs at the State and school district levels.

Middle Grades Longitudinal Study (MGLS): The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 

modified the MGLS (https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/mgls/) to add an oversample of students with 

IEPs. The MGLS is the first longitudinal study to provide information on children’s development 

in grades 6 through 8 and on factors associated with successful transition from elementary to 

high school. The study includes a nationally representative sample of students in grade 6 during

the 2016−2017 school year. Funds from the Special Education Studies and Evaluation program

will enable NCES to provide information about students in three IDEA disability categories: 

autism, emotional disturbance, and specific learning disability.

Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS): Administered by NCES, ECLS 

(http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/) are a series of longitudinal studies that examine child development, 

school readiness, and early school experiences, including special education experiences. 

Children in the most recent ECLS administration comprise a nationally representative sample 

selected from both public and private schools attending both full-day and part-day kindergarten 

in 2010-2011. The most recent study provides data relevant to emerging policy-related domains 

not fully measured in previous studies, which has enabled researchers to study how a wide 

range of family, school, community, and individual factors are associated with school

performance over time. Funds from the Special Education Studies and Evaluation program will 

enable NCES to collect disability data as part of the planning and administration of ECLS.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-76

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2017 2018 2019

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices $6,850 $6,729 $6,650

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 70 2,016 874

State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019 2,823 0 0

NCES: Middle Grades Longitudinal Study 0 2,000 2,000

NCES: Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey (ECLS:K) 0 0 400

NCEE: Special Education Reports 1,075 0 894

 Total, Special education studies and evaluations 10,818 10,745 10,818