400 MARYLAND AVE. SW, WASHINGTON, DC 20202

www.ed.gov

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering 

educational excellence and ensuring equal access

April 10, 2017

Dear Colleague:

I am writing to apprise you of two matters concerning implementation of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): (1) to follow 

up on the Dear Colleague Letter sent on January 13, 2017, regarding school support and improvement 

activities in the 2017–2018 school year and (2) to clarify the stakeholder consultation requirements that 

apply to consolidated State plans. I want to thank you for the substantial work that you continue to do

for a successful transition to the new law. The reauthorized ESEA provides a significant opportunity for 

States and school districts to develop and implement new plans to help secure educational equity for all 

children and close achievement gaps by supporting students, families, and educators. 

As you know, on March 9, 2017, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. §§ 801-

808), Congress approved a joint resolution disapproving the U.S. Department of Education’s 

(Department’s) regulations related to State plans, including consolidated State plans, statewide 

accountability systems, and data reporting. The President signed the Congressional resolution on March 

27, 2017, which means that the regulations have no force or effect. In anticipation of this action under 

the CRA, the Department released a revised consolidated State plan template (available at: 

https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/stateplan17/plans.html) on March 13, 2017, to support States 

in meeting the requirements of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA.

The Department retained its original two windows for State plan submissions established prior to the 

Congressional resolution—April 3, 2017 and September 18, 2017. We anticipate that many States will

not have their State plans, including their methodologies for identifying schools for comprehensive or 

targeted support and improvement, approved prior to the start of the 2017–2018 school year and,

therefore, will not be ready to fully implement their new accountability system in the 2017–2018 school 

year. Consequently, the purpose of this letter is to address key questions relating to the implementation 

timeline, school improvement requirements for the 2017–2018 school year, and stakeholder consultation 

requirements that apply to consolidated State plans. 

Transition to School Support and Improvement Under the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA

Timeline for Implementation

In the absence of the regulations that extended the ESSA implementation timeline, but consistent with 

the provisions of the ESSA that authorize the Department to ensure an orderly transition to the new law, 

a State may delay, until the 2018–2019 school year, identification of: (1) schools for comprehensive 

support and improvement and (2) schools in which any subgroup of students, on its own, would place 

the school among the lowest-performing five percent of all schools receiving Title I, Part A funds and 

that must implement targeted support and improvement plans.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
Supporting Low-Performing Schools in the 2017–2018 School Year

Each State without an approved ESSA State plan must continue to provide supports and interventions in 

the State’s low-performing schools in the 2017–2018 school year in the same manner as in the 2016–

2017 school year. However, a State has options with respect to how it identifies the low-performing 

schools it will support in the 2017–2018 school year. In particular, pursuant to the authority to ensure an 

orderly transition to the new law, to identify its low-performing schools for 2017–2018 as described

previously:

• A State that operated under ESEA flexibility prior to the termination of that flexibility on 

August 1, 2016, may either: (1) continue to support and intervene in its existing priority and 

focus schools, except that the State may remove from the list of priority and focus schools any 

school that has met the State’s exit criteria; or (2) refresh its list using the methodology in place 

prior to the start of the 2017–2018 school year.

 

• A State that did not operate under ESEA flexibility prior to August 1, 2016, may continue to 

support and intervene in schools or local educational agencies (LEAs) that were identified in the 

2016–2017 school year by the State as in need of improvement, corrective action, or 

restructuring, except that the State may remove from the list any school or LEA that has met 

State-determined criteria to no longer be identified for improvement, corrective action, or 

restructuring.

Alternatively, pursuant to the authority to ensure an orderly transition to the ESEA, as amended by the 

ESSA, a State may, in order to identify the low-performing schools it will support in the 2017–2018 

school year, choose to refresh its list using a methodology the State determines is consistent with the 

State’s new plan under the ESSA, even if the Department has not yet approved that plan. If a State 

chooses to use this new option to identify low-performing schools for the 2017–2018 school year, it 

must do so prior to the start of the school year. Note, however, that based on the result of the 

Department’s peer review of the State plan, the State may need to modify the methodologies for 

identification of low-performing schools within its State plan for school years beginning in 2018–2019 

to meet the statutory requirements in sections 1111(c) and 1111(d) of the ESEA, as amended by the 

ESSA. Although a State must submit, as part of its State plan, these methodologies, the State is not 

required to submit its list of low-performing schools for the 2017–2018 school year to the Department 

for review or approval.

Each State must allocate fiscal year 2017 funds (i.e., for use in the 2017–2018 school year) under section 

1003(a) of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, by competition or by formula to LEAs with lowperforming schools identified consistent with the options described above. A State that does not allocate 

all of the school improvement funds it reserves in fiscal year 2017 to serve identified schools in the 

2017–2018 school year may, under section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act, carry over 

any remaining funds for use in the 2018–2019 school year, once it has an approved State plan and 

identified schools to implement comprehensive and targeted support and improvement plans. 

In particular, we encourage a State choosing to exit schools from improvement status in the 2017–2018 

school year—without refreshing its lists of low-performing schools—to consider carrying over a portion 

of its fiscal year 2017 school improvement funds for use in the 2018–2019 school year. By doing so, a 

State would have additional funds to support its first cohort of schools identified under the ESEA, as 
amended by the ESSA, when LEAs and schools will require additional support to implement the new 

school improvement provisions, including evidence-based interventions, required by the new law. In 

addition, a State may choose to use the funds that it reserves in fiscal year 2017 to support full 

implementation of SIG awards initially made with prior-year funds, as described in the Department’s 

letter to SIG Directors from March 2016.

Stakeholder Consultation regarding Consolidated State Plans

I also want to take this opportunity to clarify that, in developing its consolidated State plan, your State 

must meet the statutory consultation requirements of the individual programs included in the 

consolidated State plan. For example, if you include Title I, Part A in your consolidated State plan, your 

State must meet the consultation requirements in sections 1111(a)(1)(A) and 1111(a)(8) of the ESEA, as 

amended, for the Title I portion of its plan. (See also ESEA section 1304(c)(3) for Title I, Part C; ESEA 

section 2101(d)(3) for Title II, Part A; ESEA sections 3113(b)(2) and 3113(b)(3)(G) for Title III, Part A;

and ESEA section 4203(a)(12)(A) for Title IV, Part B). A State is not required to include in its 

consolidated State plan a description of how it met those consultation requirements. However, a State 

may include supplemental information such as its efforts to consult with and engage stakeholders in 

compliance with the requirements of the law when developing its consolidated State plan. Most States 

acting in accordance with the statute and regulations prior to Congressional action should have already 

met these requirements. 

The Department’s guidance related to the transition to the ESSA can be found at 

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/index.html. If you have any questions or need additional 

information, I encourage you to reach out to your Office of State Support contact at 

OSS.[State]@ed.gov (e.g., OSS.Nebraska@ed.gov). Additionally, I encourage you to sign up to receive 

updates on ESSA guidance, including transition guidance, by clicking here. 

Thank you for your ongoing commitment to improving educational outcomes for all students. 

Sincerely,

/s/

Monique M. Chism, Ph.D.

Acting Assistant Secretary 

Elementary and Secondary Education

cc: State Title I Directors

State Title II Directors

State Title III Directors

State Title IV Directors

State Assessment Directors

State 21st Century Community Learning Center Directors

State Directors for McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act: Education for Homeless 

Children and Youths Program

State SIG Director