OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED TITLE I 

REGULATIONS: 

SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT

SEPTEMBER 2016
EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT

 ESSA provides time and authority for the U.S. 

Department of Education (ED) to work with our State 

and local partners to ensure an orderly transition

from NCLB and ESEA flexibility.

 ED is in the process of issuing regulations, guidance, 

and technical assistance to support States and 

districts in high-quality implementation of the law by 

2017-2018.

 ED will continue to provide guidance to States and 

districts over the coming weeks and months to 

support the transition.

TRANSITION AND IMPLEMENTATION

2
EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT

 Funds awarded under State formula grant programs in the

2016-2017 school year will be administered in accordance 

with NCLB.

 ED is receiving input from a variety of stakeholders to help 

support high-quality transition to, and implementation of, the 

new law.

 Transition FAQ’s and additional resources are available on 

our ESSA webpage at www.ed.gov/ESSA.

TRANSITION AND IMPLEMENTATION, CONTINUED

3
STAKEHOLDER INPUT

 Extensive Stakeholder Input: 

– Request for information and two public meetings (DC & CA).

– Over 200 meetings held across the country and hundreds of 

public comments considered.

 Negotiated Rulemaking:

– The Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, including representatives 

of Federal, State and local administrators, Tribal leaders, parents 

and students, teachers, principals, other school leaders, 

paraprofessionals, and the civil rights and business communities, did 

not come to consensus but provided invaluable feedback and input.

 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM):

– Comment period closes on November 7, 2016.

SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT UNDER TITLE I, PART A

4
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

 Preamble 

– Executive Summary, including purpose of the regulatory action

– Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action

– Costs and Benefits

– Background, including description of public participation

– Significant Proposed Regulations

 Statute

 Proposed Regulations

 Reasons for Regulating

– Regulatory Impact Analysis

 Proposed Regulations

 NPRM available at: 

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/09/06/201

6-20989/title-i-improving-the-academic-achievement-of-thedisadvantaged-supplement-not-supplant

5
TITLE I, PART A 

SUPPLEMENT 

NOT SUPPLANT

REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 

1118(b) of the ESEA

6
 The supplement not supplant provision was added to Title I in 

1970 after documentation of egregious misuses of Title I 

funds.

 The proposal will help ensure that Title I funds are additive 

and do not take the place of state and local funds in lowincome schools.

 In the vast majority of districts – more than 90 percent – Title 

I schools already receive at least as much state and local 

funding per student as their non-Title I schools.

 However, in approximately 1,500 districts there are more 

than 5,000 Title I schools receiving substantially less state and 

local funding than their non-Title I peers within the same 

district. Title I funds spent in these schools are often, in effect, 

being used to make up some or all of that shortfall, instead 

of providing additional resources.

7
SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT IN TITLE I, 

PART A

 ESSA changed the requirement in Title I, Part A of the ESEA, 

which prompted the need for the proposed regulations. 

 ESEA Section 1118(b)(2) Compliance –

“[A] local educational agency shall demonstrate that the 

methodology used to allocate State and local funds to each 

school receiving assistance under [Title I, Part A] ensures that 

such school receives all of the State and local funds it would 

otherwise receive if it were not receiving assistance under 

[Title I, Part A].”

 Proposed regulations clarify ways LEAs can meet this 

requirement

 Supplement not supplant requirements in other ESEA 

programs (e.g. Title III, Migrant, Title IV) are not impacted.

8
STRUCTURE OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS

 § 200.72 (a): General requirements

 § 200.72 (b): Compliance

(1) Annual demonstration 

 4 approaches from which a district may choose

(2) Flexibilities 

(3) Transition timeline

(4) Rules of construction 

9
§ 200.72(a): IN GENERAL

 Reiterates statutory requirement that an SEA and LEA must use Title 

I, Part A funds only to supplement, and not to supplant, State and 

local funds.

 Clarifies that, to comply with this requirement, a district is not

required to:

– Identify that any individual cost or service supported with Title I, 

Part A funds is supplemental; or

– Provide services with Title I, Part A funds using a particular instructional 

method or in a particular instructional setting.

Note: Prior to passage of the ESSA, under Department guidance, 

most compliance determinations were made by identifying whether 

each individual cost or service supported with Title I, Part A funds was 

supplemental (e.g., whether it was previously paid for using State 

and local funds, supported for non-Title I students using State and 

local funds, or required by law).

10
§ 200.72(b)(1): COMPLIANCE

 Requires that each year, an LEA receiving Title I, Part A funds 

must--

– Publish its methodology for allocating State and local funds; and

– Demonstrate to the SEA, at such a time and in such a form as the 

SEA requires, that the methodology ensures that each Title I school 

receives all of the State and local funds it would otherwise receive 

if it were not a Title I school.

 Outlines four approaches each LEA may choose from in making 

this demonstration to the SEA. 

– Three “options” and a “special rule.”

11
§ 200.72(b)(1)(ii): COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)

 Each LEA must distribute almost all State and local funds in a 

way that meets one of the following tests:

(A) Distribution of State and local funds based on student 

characteristics. 

(B) Distribution of State and local funds based on personnel and 

non-personnel resources 

(C) Distribution of State and local funds based on an SEAestablished compliance test 

(D) Special Rule 

12
§ 200.72(b)(1)(ii)(A): STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS

(A) Distribution of State and local funds based on student 

characteristics. A districtwide per-pupil formula based on the 

characteristics of students in each school, such that 

1. Students living in poverty, English learners, students with 

disabilities, and other such subgroups an LEA determines are 

associated with educational disadvantage, generate 

additional funding for their school; and

2. Each Title I school receives for its use all of the funds to which 

it is entitled under the formula.

Note: This is often referred to as “weighted student funding.” 

13
§ 200.72(b)(1)(ii)(B): PERSONNEL AND NONPERSONNEL RESOURCES

(B) Distribution of State and local funds based on personnel and 

non-personnel resources. A districtwide personnel and nonpersonnel resource formula such that each Title I school receives 

for its use an amount of actual State and local funds at least 

equivalent to the sum of:

1. The average districtwide salary for each category of school 

personnel (e.g., teachers, principals, librarians, school counselors), 

multiplied by the number of those personnel in each category 

assigned by the formula to the school; and

2. The average districtwide per-pupil expenditure for non-personnel 

resources, multiplied by the number of students in the school.

14
§ 200.72(b)(1)(ii)(C): SEA-ESTABLISHED COMPLIANCE 

TEST

(C) Distribution of State and local funds based on an SEAestablished compliance test . A methodology applied 

consistently districtwide that meets a funds-based compliance 

test established by the SEA that is as rigorous as options (A) or 

(B) and has been approved through a Federal peer review 

process. To be "as rigorous" as the approaches in Options A or 

B, an SEA-determined test would need to result in substantially 

similar amounts of State and local funds for Title I schools in the 

district as would the use of the approaches in A or B.

Note: An SEA is not required to establish a compliance test; nor is an LEA 

required to use such a test if the SEA establishes it. The LEA may choose 

among all approaches available under the proposed regulations. 

15
§ 200.72(b)(1)(iii): SPECIAL RULE

Special Rule. Distribution based on any methodology that results in the district 

spending an amount of State and local funds per pupil in each Title I school that 

is equal to or greater than the average amount of State and local funds spent 

per pupil in non-Title I schools, as reported under Section 1111(h)(1)(C)(x) of the 

ESEA.

• De minimis annual variation. An LEA may comply with the special rule in 

a specific year if the amount of State and local funds spent per pupil in 

each Title I school is no more than 5 percent less than the average amount 

spent per pupil in non-Title I schools.

• Schools with fewer than 100 students. An LEA may exclude from its 

special rule calculations any school that enrolls fewer than 100 students.

• Demonstrating Compliance. An LEA may comply with the special rule if 

one or more non-Title I schools receives additional funding to serve a 

proportion of students with disabilities, English learners, or students from low 

income families and these additional expenditures disproportionately affect 

the amount of State and local funds allocated per pupil, on average, to nonTitle I schools in the LEA or in a particular grade span within the LEA, and 

absent such school or schools, the district would be in compliance. 

16
§ 200.72(b)(2): FLEXIBILITIES 

• Grade-span compliance. An LEA may demonstrate compliance on a districtwide 

or grade-span basis (e.g., elementary, middle, high school)

• Single school LEA. An LEA is not required to meet the compliance requirements if 

it has a single school or in any grade span in which it has a single school.

• State/local funds meeting the intent and purpose of Title I. An LEA may exclude 

supplemental State or local funds expended for programs that meet the intent 

and purposes of Title I, Part A. 

• For example: a State-funded program provides additional services only for students 

most at risk of not meeting State academic standards.

• Districtwide activities. If an LEA spends State or local funds for districtwide 

activities, the LEA may exclude those funds, so long as each Title I school receives 

a share of those activities equal to or greater than the share it would otherwise 

receive if it were not a Title I school.

• May include, e.g., districtwide administrative costs, summer school or preschool, 

personnel providing services such as curriculum development or data analysis.

• May not include personnel or non-personnel resources associated with an individual 

school. 

Note: flexibilities apply to all four approaches for demonstrating compliance. 

17
§ 200.72(b)(3): TIMELINE

• By December 10, 2017 an LEA must either:

• Demonstrate to the SEA that it has a methodology for allocating State and 

local funds to schools that meets the proposed regulations that it will use no 

later than the 2018-2019 school year; or

• Submit a plan to the SEA for how it will fully implement a methodology that 

meets the proposed regulations beginning no later than the 2019-2020

school year.

• Transition. Prior to either the 2018-2019 or 2019-2020 school year (as 

applicable), an LEA may comply with the Title I, Part A supplement not supplant 

requirement using either:

• The method of compliance it would use to comply with the proposed 

regulations; or 

• The method of compliance it used for complying with the applicable Title I 

supplement not supplant requirement in effect on December 9, 2015.

18
§ 200.72(b)(4): RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

• Nothing in the proposed regulation shall be construed to require the forced or 

involuntary transfer of any school personnel.

• Nothing in the proposed shall be construed to require equalized spending per 

pupil for a State, LEA, or school.

• Equalized spending per pupil means equal expenditures per pupil as 

reported under section 1111(h)(1)(C)(x) of the ESEA.

• Nothing in the proposed regulation requires an LEA to adopt a specific 

methodology to allocate State and local funds to comply with the supplement not 

supplant requirement.

• Nothing in the proposed regulation shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect 

the rights, remedies, and procedures afforded to school or LEA employees under 

Federal, State, or local laws (including applicable regulations or court orders) or 

under the terms of collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of 

understanding, or other agreements between such employers and their 

employees.

19
 Submit official comments through the Federal Register notice 

available at the following link by November 7th, 2016:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/09/06/2016-

20989/title-i-improving-the-academic-achievement-of-thedisadvantaged-supplement-not-supplant

 Main ESSA Web Page: www.ED.gov/ESSA.

 ESSA Resources, including link to the Notice, Fact Sheet, and 

other ESSA resources: 

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/index.html.

 Email Inbox: ESSA.Questions@ed.gov.

 This webinar will be repeated on September14 from 3:00 

pm to 4:00 pm EDT.

20

NEXT STEPS