Department of Education

INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Fiscal Year 2017 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

Summary of Request ..............................................................................................................V-7

Activities:

Research, development, and dissemination .....................................................................V-10

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

Regional educational laboratories.....................................................................................V-39

Assessment......................................................................................................................V-49

Research in special education ..........................................................................................V-58

Statewide longitudinal data systems .................................................................................V-67

Special education studies and evaluations .......................................................................V-76

Account

V-1
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Appropriations Language

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

National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act, section 208 of the Educational 

Technical Assistance Act of 2002, and section 664 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act, [$618,015,000] $693,818,000, which shall remain available through September 30, [2017] 

2018: 1 Provided, That funds available to carry out section 208 of the Educational Technical 

Assistance Act of 2002 may be used to link Statewide elementary and secondary data systems 

with early childhood, postsecondary, and workforce data systems, or to further develop such 

systems: 2 Provided further, That up to [$6,000,000] $18,000,000 of the funds available to carry 

out section 208 of the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 2002 may be used for awards to 

public or private organizations or agencies to support activities to improve data coordination, 

quality, and use at the local, State, and national levels3 [: Provided further, That $157,235,000 

shall be for carrying out activities authorized by the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress Authorization Act]. 4

 (Department of Education Appropriations Act, 2016.)

NOTE

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

Provisions and Changes document which follows the appropriation language.

V-1

V-1
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1 ...[$618,015,000] $693,818,000, which shall 

remain available through September 30, 

[2017] 2018:

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.

2 Provided, That funds available to carry out 

section 208 of the Educational Technical 

Assistance Act of 2002 may be used to link 

Statewide elementary and secondary data 

systems with early childhood, postsecondary, 

and workforce data systems, or to further 

develop such systems:

This language provides the authority to use 

funds to expand Statewide longitudinal data 

systems to include postsecondary and 

workforce information and information on early 

childhood.

3 Provided further, That up to [$6,000,000] 

$18,000,000 of the funds available to carry out 

section 208 of the Educational Technical 

Assistance Act of 2002 may be used for 

awards to public or private organizations or 

agencies to support activities to improve data 

coordination, quality, and use at the local, 

State, and national levels.

This language provides the authority to make 

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards to 

agencies and organizations, in addition to 

State educational agencies, in order to further 

the purposes of the program.

4

 [: Provided further, That $157,235,000 shall 

be for carrying out activities authorized by the 

National Assessment of Educational Progress 

Authorization Act]

This language specifies the amount of funding 

available for the Assessment program. The 

language is not required in order to provide a 

specific level of funding for the program.

V-2
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Appropriation, Adjustments and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2015 2016 2017

Discretionary:

Appropriation ...................................................... $573,936 $618,015 $693,818

V-3
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2016 .............................................................................................................. $618,015

2017 .............................................................................................................. $693,818

Net change............................................................................ +75,803

Increases: 2016 base

Change 

from base

Program:

Increase for Research, Development, and Dissemination to 

support expanded research and dissemination activities $195,000 +$14,273

Increase for Statistics to support a wide range of activities, 

including re-initiating the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Birth 

Cohort, developing a study on college loan performance, collecting 

additional data through the Teaching and Learning International 

Survey, supporting statistical work for the My Brother’s Keeper 

initiative, and creating P–12 and postsecondary information hubs 112,000 +13,360

Increase for Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems to provide 

funding to support new grant awards and InformED activities 34,539 +46,478

Increase for Special Education Studies and Evaluations to support 

a new study on the implementation of IDEA 10,818 +2,182

Subtotal, increases +76,293

Decreases 2015 base

Change 

from base

Program:

Decrease for National Assessment Governing Board to reflect 

need to focus on key activities 8,235 -490

Subtotal, decreases -490

Net change +75,803

V-4
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2016

Authorized

footnote

2016

Actual

2017

Authorized

footnote

2017

Request

Research and Statistics

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

except section 174)

0

1, 2

$195,000 0

2

$209,273

Statistics (ESRA, part C) 0

1, 2

112,000 0

2

125,360

Regional educational laboratories (ESRA, section 174) 0

2

54,423 0

2

54,423

Assessment

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

2

149,000 0

2

149,000

National Assessment Governing Board (NAEPAA, section 302) 0

2

8,235 0

2

7,745

Research in special education (ESRA, part E) 0

3

54,000 0

3

54,000

Statewide longitudinal data systems (ETAA, section 208) 0

2

34,539 0

2

81,017

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

3

 10,818 0

3

 13,000

Total appropriation 618,015 693,818

Portion of request not authorized 618,015 693,818

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 2017 under appropriations 

language. 3 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in FY 2017 under appropriations 

language.

V-5
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Foot-note

Senate 

Allowance Foot-note AppropriationFoot-note

2008 $594,262 $535,103 $589,826 $546,105

2009 658,247 615,7471 642,4421 617,175

Recovery Act Supplemental

 (P.L. 111-5)  250,000  250,000

2010 689,256 664,256 679,2562 659,006

2011 738,756 659,0063 722,7562 608,7864

2012 760,473 620,9035 609,7882 593,664

2013 621,150 593,6646 618,6616 562,612

2014 671,073 N/A7 652,9372 576,935

2015 637,180 N/A7 579,0218 573,935

2016 675,883 409,9569 562,9789 618,015

2017 693,818

1 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2009 appropriations bill, 

which proceeded in the 110th Congress only through the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee. 2 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Committee action only. 3 The level for the House allowance reflects the House-passed full-year continuing resolution. 4 The level for appropriation reflects the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 

2011 (P.L. 112-10). 5 The level for the House allowance reflects an introduced bill. 6 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. 7 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. 8 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only. 9 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. 

V-6
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Summary of R equest

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FISCAL YEAR 2017 PRESIDENT'S BUDGET

(in thousands of dollars)

Click here for accessible version 

Amount Percent

Institute of Education Sciences

1. Research and statistics:

(a) Research, development, and dissemination (ESRA I-A, B and D) D 179,860 195,000 209,273 14,273 7.32%

(b) Statistics (ESRA I-C) D 103,060 112,000 125,360 13,360 11.93%

2. Regional educational laboratories (ESRA section 174) D 54,423 54,423 54,423 0 0.00%

3. Assessment (NAEPAA):

(a) National assessment (section 303) D 129,000 149,000 149,000 0 0.00%

(b) National Assessment Governing Board (section 302) D 8,235 8,235 7,745 (490) -5.95%

Subtotal 137,235 157,235 156,745 (490) -0.31%

4. Research in special education (ESRA, Part E) D 54,000 54,000 54,000 0 0.00%

5. Statewide longitudinal data systems (ETAA section 208) D 34,539 34,539 81,017 46,478 134.57%

6. Special education studies and evaluations (IDEA, section 664) D 10,818 10,818 13,000 2,182 20.17%

Total D 573,935 618,015 693,818 75,803 12.27%

NOTES: D = discretionary program; M = mandatory program; FY = fiscal year 

Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. 

2017 President's Budget

2016 Compared to 2016 Appropriation

Account, Program and Activity Appropriation

Category 

Code

2015 

Appropriation

2017 President's 

Budget

V-7
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Summary of Request

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 

$693.8 million for this account for fiscal year 2017, an increase of $75.8 million over the 

2016 appropriation.

The Administration requests $209.3 million for research, development, and dissemination, an 

increase of $14.3 million from the 2016 appropriation. 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. Included in the 

request is increased funding for research related to postsecondary education and funds to 

enhance the Department’s program performance data.

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

related to education at all levels, the Administration requests $125.4 million, $13.4 million more 

than the 2016 appropriation. 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 increase would provide $7.1 million to 

re-initiate the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Birth Cohort, $2.5 million to support a study on 

student loan repayment and defaults, $2.8 million to collect additional data through the Teaching 

and Learning International Survey, $0.5 million to support statistical work on the My Brother’s 

Keeper initiative, and $0.5 million to create P–12 and postsecondary information hubs.

The Administration requests $54.4 million for the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

program, the same as the 2016 level. The RELs serve as a necessary bridge between 

education research and practice, with an emphasis on providing technical assistance on 

performing data analysis functions, evaluating programs, and using data from State longitudinal 

data systems for research and evaluation that address important issues of policy and practice.

A total of $156.7 million is requested for Assessment in 2017. 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, the same as the 

2016 level. 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 

V-8
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Summary of Request (continued)

with disabilities; improve social and behavioral outcomes; and assist adolescents with 

disabilities to be college- and career-ready.

The Administration requests $81.0 million for the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems 

program, an increase of $46.5 million from the 2016 appropriation. The request would allow the 

Department to support $34.7 million in new grants to improve data systems and ensure that 

data are available to answer key policy questions in such core areas as financial and resource 

equity and teacher preparation, compensation, and advancement. The increase would also 

support State data liaisons and a Support and Service Center to support States with the 

collection and reporting of high quality data. 

The request includes $13.0 million for Special Education Studies and Evaluations, an increase 

of $2.2 million. 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, four of these studies would receive 

funding from the 2017 appropriation: an evaluation of preschool special education practices; a 

study of State and local implementation of IDEA; a study of post high school outcomes for youth 

with disabilities; and the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study.

V-9
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

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

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01 2 3

Budget Authority:

2016 2017 Change

$195,000 $209,273 +$14,273

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

program in FY 2017 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 ($85,000 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 findings, IES has also transformed the way that the Federal Government 

disseminates research information, translating complex methodological and statistical details 

into information that can be more easily understood and applied to classroom instruction and 

policy decisions. IES also continues to work with the field to help States, districts, schools, and 

higher education institutions access available evidence to make more informed decisions 

through 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 and 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 

V-10
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

the IES account, as well as evaluation funding 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 awarded over 800 grants and 

contracts to build a diverse NCER research portfolio that includes national research and 

development centers, field-initiated research projects, education research training projects, fieldinitiated evaluations of State and local programs and policies, and research on 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 are leading to better education 

practices across the country. For example:

• Studies to evaluate the effectiveness of curricula designed to teach math to preschool 

children found that the curricula strengthened children’s math skills and reduced the math 

achievement gap between lower- and middle-income children. The research contributed to 

the development of resource materials on math instruction for the Head Start Program’s 

Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center (http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/ttasystem/teaching/practice/curricula/MKandS.html) and to a What Works Clearinghouse 

(WWC) Practice Guide on Teaching Math to Young Children 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide.aspx?sid=18). In addition, WestEd, in 

partnership with the University of Oregon, Westat, and a consortium of LEAs in California, 

drew upon the research to write a successful 2012 Investing in Innovation (i3) grant 

application, and is using the funds to expand an early mathematics curriculum to 

38,000 pre-kindergarten and kindergarten students. 

• A study of Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR), an intervention for struggling adolescent 

readers that helps students develop metacognitive awareness and learn specific strategies 

associated with reading comprehension, showed that CSR yielded positive outcomes for 

many at-risk students, including English Learners and students with learning disabilities, as 

well as for average and high-achieving students. In response to these findings, Denver 

Public Schools is incorporating CSR into a middle school curriculum that will serve 

15,000 students (http://www.csrcolorado.org/en/).

• A 2006 research grant funded an evaluation of Early College High Schools, an initiative 

designed to increase the number of students who graduate from high school and are 

prepared for postsecondary education. The evaluation found significant positive effects on 

the number of high school students who completed rigorous college courses and were on 

track for high school graduation. In 2014, North Carolina New Schools received an i3 grant 

for a scale-up project to serve over 13,000 students 

(http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/2014/ncnewschools.pdf).

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

dedicated to the pursuit of finding solutions to problems in education. The pre-doctoral training 

program has trained over 700 students and the postdoctoral program has trained 114 fellows 

V-11
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

since they were launched, and nearly all of the fellows who completed their training are leading 

or contributing to education research projects as employees of universities, research firms, or 

government agencies. NCER also funds programs to help early- and mid-career education 

researchers develop their skills and learn new methods. Recent training areas have included 

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, both through 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), the National Library of Education (NLE), and the RELs. 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, while funding for 

the RELs is requested as a separate program in this account. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012...................................................................................$189,787

2013.....................................................................................179,860

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

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

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

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $209.3 million, an increase of $14.3 million over the fiscal 

year 2016 level, for the RDD program. 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 NCER and NCEE as well as the 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

V-12
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

• National Board for Education Sciences (NBES).

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

evidence-based practices in the field and in the Department and would allow IES to make

approximately $52.3 million in new research awards (an increase of $14.2 million from 2016) 

and provide an increase of $2.0 million to make enhancements to 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 $175.7 million in 2017. 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 Web site. Staff also discuss priorities with the NBES 

and with officials within the Department. Competitions for new 2016 grants were announced in 

the April 15, 2015, Federal Register; awards will be made by July 1, 2016. 

Plans for 2017 competitions will be influenced by continued analysis of national need and 

research funded to date. Possible new areas of investment in education research for 2017 at 

the request level include research networks focused on promoting postsecondary access, 

program completion, and high quality, affordable education programs; understanding effective 

teaching practices in elementary schools; improving rural education; improving outcomes for

English learners; research and development centers focused on State efforts to implement the 

Next Generation Science Standards and on improving writing instruction in middle and high 

school; and additional support for low-cost evaluations. IES anticipates publishing the Requests 

for Applications (RFA) on its Web site in January 2016.

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 2016 awards, NCER invited

proposals on the following 10 topics:

o Cognition and student learning;

o Early learning programs and policies;

o Education technology;

o Effective teachers and effective teaching;

o English learners;

o Improving education systems: policies, organization, management, and leadership;

o Mathematics and science education;

o Postsecondary and adult education;

o Reading and writing; and 

o Social and behavioral context for academic learning.

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

their goals for the research:

V-13
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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.

Funding level and duration depend on the type of project. Possible areas of investment for 

2017 at the request level include:

o Research to test approaches that promote postsecondary access, program completion, 

and high quality, affordable education programs. 

o Research on understanding and promoting the use of effective teaching practices in 

elementary schools. At the request level, IES could include more researchers and 

expand the focus to include middle school teachers.

o Research focused on improving rural education, including the evaluation of technologies 

to support teaching and learning in rural schools and the development and evaluation of 

strategies to help rural high school students successfully transition to work or college.

o Research to evaluate models of dual language instruction to identify the effects on 

different ethnic or language groups.

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

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncer/RandD/) are 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 

V-14
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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

research on strategies to improve college readiness among students entering community 

colleges and less selective 4-year institutions, and on the implementation and effectiveness 

of gifted and talented programs for children and youth. IES is holding a 2016 competition for 

one new center in the area of Virtual Learning. The 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. Ten centers are currently active, four of which (the National Center 

for Research in Policy and Practice; the Center for Analysis of Postsecondary Readiness; 

the Center on Standards, Alignment, Instruction, and Learning; and the Center for Research 

Use in Education) will receive 2017 RDD funding.

At the request level, IES would consider funding a new R&D Center. This center would 

likely focus on: 1) a center designed to support and evaluate the Next Generation Science 

Standards, with an emphasis on increasing participation and achievement in science 

courses among low-income and minority students; or 2) a center on developing and 

evaluating strategies to improve writing instruction in middle and high schools.

• 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 provide training in areas such as conducting exploratory 

research, implementing rigorous evaluation studies, developing and validating tests and 

measures, and other areas that contribute to the advancement of knowledge and theory in 

education. For fiscal year 2016, NCER invited new proposals under one topic, Pathways to 

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

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

partner with MSIs. Pathways provides upper-level undergraduates, recent graduates, or 

master’s students with education research experience and professional development in 

order to prepare these students to pursue doctoral study in the education sciences or in 

fields relevant to education research. The maximum allowable award for 2016 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. 

This program supports the development of new statistical and methodological approaches to 

research, the extension and improvement of existing methods, and the creation of other 

tools that would enhance researchers’ ability to conduct high quality research and evaluation 

projects, regardless of whether these projects are directly funded by the Federal 

government. Recent grants have supported efforts to study models for evaluating teacher 

performance, and to facilitate use of State longitudinal data systems by researchers through 

the development of better techniques for safeguarding individual student information. For 

the 2016 competition, IES accepted applications under the Early Career topic only; these 

grants provide support to recent Ph.D. recipients to improve the statistical and 

methodological tools available to applied research scientists. Areas of particular interest in 

the 2016 competition were improving methods, variability in effects, generalizability of 

V-15
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

findings, and analyzing big data. The maximum funding for the 2016 competition was 

$100,000 per year for up to 2 years.

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

collaboration with practitioners and policymakers, and focuses on partnerships among 

research institutions, State education agencies (SEAs), and local education agencies 

(LEAs). Through this program, IES seeks to improve the quality of education for all 

students, from prekindergarten through postsecondary and adult education by advancing 

the understanding of and establishing best practices for teaching, learning, and organizing 

education systems. Research collaboration grants encourage the development of 

partnerships between researchers and education agencies to advance the relevance of 

education research and the accessibility and usability of the findings for the day-to-day work 

of education practitioners and policymakers. Three funding topics are available under this 

grant program to help partnerships plan and initiate new projects, conduct research focused 

on supporting continuous improvement, and perform rigorous evaluations of State and local 

education policies and programs. These topics include Research-Practitioner Partnerships 

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

and Local Education Programs and Policies. For the 2016 competition, IES accepted 

applications under the Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research topic to 

carry out 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 2016 competition was $200,000 per year for up to 2 years. 

Past projects include a study of the Boston Public Schools expanded learning time research 

collaborative, a study of students in foster care, and a project to promote English language 

learners’ science learning in the elementary grades.

• 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. IES invited proposals in two areas for 2016 awards, which will be 

awarded by July 1, 2016: (1) Supporting early learning from preschool through early 

elementary grades and (2) scalable strategies to support college completion. The maximum 

funding amount is $1.1 million per year for up to 5 years. Funds requested for 2017 would

be used to support continuation costs for awards made in 2016, as well as to fund a new

topic on college completion.

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

announced on September 28, 2015, will support 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 will be low cost—up to $250,000 over 2 years—because they will 

focus on outcomes that can be easily measured using administrative records. The grants 

will be carried out by partnerships of research institutions and SEAs or LEAs. IES 

anticipates making four awards in 2016; at the request level, it would be able to fund a 

similar number of new awards in 2017.

V-16
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR): This program 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 

$22.2 million in 2017. 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 Web site.

• Data Quality Initiatives (DQIs): The Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) requires 

Federal departments and agencies to clearly describe the goals and objectives of their 

programs, identify resources and actions needed to accomplish goals and objectives, 

develop a means of measuring progress made, and report regularly on achievement. The 

goals of GPRA include improving program effectiveness by promoting a focus on results, 

service quality, and customer satisfaction and improving congressional decision making by 

providing objective information on achieving statutory objectives, and on the relative 

effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs and spending. DQIs are designed to 

improve the Department's program performance data and reporting and thus are an 

important mechanism for supporting the goals of GPRA. The current DQI contract at the 

Department will end in March 2016 and has supported a wide range of elementary and 

secondary education programs in improving GPRA measures, reducing data reporting 

burden, developing leading indicators for monitoring, and training program staff on working 

with grantees. To continue and expand this work, particularly in respect to increasing the 

quality of information available about the Department’s postsecondary programs, 

approximately $2.0 million of 2017 funds will support an elementary and secondary 

education DQI and a postsecondary and adult education DQI. The DQIs will provide 

program office staff with guidance on how to structure grant competitions in ways that 

encourage grantees to plan for, collect, and use high-quality program performance and 

evaluation data; provide technical assistance to grantees as they collect the data; and 

provide assistance to program offices and program analysis staff to improve the quality of 

analysis and use of data.

V-17
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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

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

bibliographic and full-text database of education research and information. During 2014, 

ERIC revised its selection policy to strengthen its focus on education research, continued 

improvements to products and services, and realized cost savings, while increasing use of 

ERIC. ERIC has taken on an additional role in responding to the Presidential directive for 

agencies to provide open access to federally funded research. In 2014, IES and ERIC staff 

negotiated agreements with the publishers of the mostly frequently used peer-reviewed 

education research journals that will enable IES to offer full-text versions of publications 

resulting from federally funded education research at no cost to the public through the ERIC 

Web site within a year of publication. With more than 300,000 visitors daily, ERIC is already 

the most visited Web site operated by the Department. Through these and other 

enhancements, IES is continuing to improve the ERIC user experience through a simpler, 

more powerful 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 to make 

decisions and build evidence of program effectiveness. One example of such services is 

the recently launched State Information Sites developed by the NLE in collaboration with the 

Department’s Office of State Support. The State Information Sites are internal resources 

that provide Department staff, particularly those that work with SEAs and LEAs, with Statespecific information related to program policies and guidance. The Department’s InformED 

initiative, described in more detail in the Statistics and Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems 

requests in this account, will use the State Information Sites as an example to improve how 

data generated by the Department is organized and made available. The NLE plays an 

active role in this effort and, in 2016, will also be working with the Department’s Office of 

Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development to develop an evidence toolkit to support 

program offices in the use of evidence in their grant competitions.

• What Works Clearinghouse (WWC): The WWC (http://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 10,000 studies and published more than 550 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 

writing in the elementary grades and teaching algebra in the middle grades and high school. 

The Find What Works tool (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/findwhatworks.aspx) 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. 2017 funds 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. 

V-18
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures

2015

Funds

2016

Funds

2017

Funds

2015

Awards

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

Research activities:

Education research grants

ducation r esearch: New grant awards $44,911 $31,192 TBD 81 TBD TBD

ducation r esearch: Grant award continuations 66,704 85,756 $84,784 108 157 __99

Education r esearch: Total 111,615 116,948 TBD 189 TBD TBD

National research and development 

centers

 nd development centers: New grant awards 3,088 2,000 0 2 1 0

 nd development centers: Grant award continuations 9,556 9,339 8,114 6 6 5

 nd development centers: Total 12,644 11,339 8,114 8 7 5

Research training

esearch tr aini ng: New grant awards 2,431 $960 TBD 8 4 TBD

esearch tr aini ng: Grant award continuations 6,945 11,648 $12,208 17 22 __18

esearch tr aini ng: Total 9,376 12,608 TBD 25 26 TBD

Statistical and research methodology 

in education

 odol og y in education: New grant awards 2,878 400 TBD 12 4 TBD

 odol og y in education: Grant award continuations 2,196 5,432 2,875 12 21 __13

 h methodol og y in education: Total 5,074 5,832 TBD 24 25 TBD

Research collaborations grants

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: New grant awards 5,488 1,000 TBD 15 5 TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Grant award continuations 8,490 12,429 7,092 20 22 15

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Total 13,978 13,429 TBD 35 27 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 0 2,009 TBD 0 9 TBD

 cal pr obl ems of education practice: Grant award continuations1 0 0 $7,448 0 0 ___9

 or ks focused on critical pr obl ems of education practice: Total 0 2,009 TBD 0 9 TBD

Low-Cost Evaluation of Education 

Interventions

 ati on of Education Inter ventions: New grant awards 0 500 TBD 0 4 TBD

ati on of Education Inter ventions: Grant award continuations 0 0 500 0 0 ___4

Low-C ost Evaluati on of Education Inter ventions: Total 0 500 TBD 0 4 TBD

V-19
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

Output Measures

2015

Funds

2016

Funds

2017

Funds

2015

Awards

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

Unsolicited awards

Unsolicited awar ds: New grant awards 765 0 TBD 2 TBD TBD

Unsolicited awar ds: Grant award continuations 0 316 351 0 1 TBD

Unsolicited awar ds: Total 765 TBD TBD 2 TBD TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 59,561 38,061 52,286 120 TBD TBD

Subtotal, grant award continuations 93,891 124,920 123,372 163 _229 TBD

Subtotal, grants 153,452 162,981 175,658 283 TBD TBD

Small Business Innovation 

Research Contracts 7,490 7,500 7,500 21 20 TBD

Dissemination Activities

Educational Resources Information 

Center 4,028 3,695 3,590

What Works Clearinghouse 6,602 10,372 8,688

National Library of Education 2,382 2,452 2,500

Dissemination/Logistical/Technical 

Support 2,134 _4,050 7,387

Disseminati on Acti vities: Total 15,146 20,569 22,165

Peer review 3,650 3,650 3,650

National Board for Education 

Sciences $122 $300 $300

Total 179,860 195,000 209,273

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2016 and 2017 are 

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

Continuation costs for 2017 reflect estimates of new awards in 2016. 1 In 2016, funds from the Preschool Development Grants program within the Innovation and Improvement 

account were used for the research network on early learning from preschool through early elementary grades. In 

2017 and beyond, continuation costs for this award will be funded from the IES account.

V-20
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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 

2017 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

2013 Baseline 69%

2014 72% 73

2015 75 75

2016 78

2017 80

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 non-research study projects are not included.) Thus, for 2013, the total number of projects 

(the denominator) is 509, which is the total number of research projects funded across all NCER 

programs from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2010. The number of these projects with peerreviewed publications was 353. NCER gathers information about peer-reviewed 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.

V-21
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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

improving student outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2012 53 56

2013 67 67

2014 75 73

2015 82 84

2016 94

2017 104

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

2012 40 34

2013 41 31

2014 41 31

2015 40 35

2016 40

2017 40

V-22
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, dissemination

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.

V-23
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01, 2

Budget Authority:

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

program in FY 2017 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 

$85,000 thousand.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is one of the 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; 

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

progress of education; and

2016 2017 Change

$112,000 $125,360 +$13,360

V-24
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

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

NCES may also 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, 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 nations. 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 Kindergarten Cohort of the 

2010−11 Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey (ECLS-K), and the National Science Foundation 

participated in the 2009 High School Longitudinal Study. 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.

• 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.

V-25
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

• Cross-cutting Activities include items in the Bureau of the Census Current Population 

Survey, as well as activities designed to enhance the quality and usefulness of statistical 

data collections, key publications, information technology, and printing across NCES.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012.................................................................................$108,748

2013...................................................................................103,060

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

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

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

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $125.4 million in fiscal year 2017 for the Statistics program, an 

increase of $13.4 million over the fiscal year 2016 level. The request includes funds for a broad 

range of surveys and activities that provide information on education at all levels. The 

Administration requests that funding be available for 2 years, as it was in prior years.

The increase requested for 2017 would allow the Department to collect critical and timely 

information on a wide range of high priority policy issues, including postsecondary educational 

costs and student progress, global competitiveness, and early childhood education. More 

specifically, the increase would fund the following:

• The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort of 2018 (ECLS-B:18) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/) will provide nationally representative data about early childhood 

development that will allow direct analyses of early developmental processes. These data 

have been often used and cited in existing early childhood research, but by 2018, children 

from the first ECLS-B sample will be entering into adulthood, indicating a need for more 

current data for researchers and policymakers to improve early childhood education services 

and outcomes. Funding for a new round of the ECLS-B is an important tool in increasing 

early learning research and evaluation to support States as they expand high quality

preschool programs to their communities under Preschool Development Grants. 

Approximately $7.1 million of the requested increase would support a large sample field test 

in 2017. 

• The Student Loan Repayment and Default Study would help address the lack of information 

on student loan borrower choices and behavior, including better understanding why certain 

students and their parents default on education loan payments. Approximately $2.5 million 

of the Administration’s requested increase would support a nationally representative study of 

students and parents who default on education loans and comparison groups of students in 

good standing. Funding in 2017 would support questionnaire development and sample 

design work for a field test. 

V-26
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

• The Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/talis/)

is an international cross-sectional survey of teachers and school principals first administered 

in 2008. The study is conducted every 5 years and, in 2013, the U.S. joined 33 other 

countries in participating; the next administration will be in 2018. The core TALIS survey, 

which samples teachers and principals of students in grades 7–9 in the U.S., provides 

information to help countries identify policies that support effective teacher preparation, 

professional development, and instruction. Approximately $2.8 million of the 

Administration’s requested increase would support collecting additional data through the 

TALIS school level surveys (administered in grades 1–6 and 10–12 in the U.S.) and the 

TALIS Video Study, which will be the first international large-scale, in-depth study of 

classroom teaching since the 1999 TIMSS Video Study (http://www.timssvideo.com/timssvideo-study). To enable the comparison of instructional practice to student outcomes, the 

study will include the collection of videotaped observations of 200 teachers providing 

instructional support during a common focus lesson (e.g., introduction of algebraic 

expressions). Products from the study will include a report with country-specific teaching 

profiles and comparisons, and a database of classroom observation videos for further 

analysis. 

• The My Brother’s Keeper (MBK) (http://mbk.ed.gov/) initiative was launched in 2014 to 

address persistent opportunity gaps faced by boys and young men of color. MBK included 

an extensive set of statistical indicators related to environment and family structure, 

education, jobs and earnings, health, and crime to highlight where problems exist, as well as 

a set of clearinghouses to disseminate information about programmatic interventions shown 

to improve conditions for youth in this country. Federal statistical agencies worked within 

existing resources to support the development of the indicators and the provision of related 

data. Specifically, NCES has supported the development of a basic dissemination Web site

and has featured disparities in educational outcomes among male youth in the Condition of 

Education 2015. Approximately $0.5 million of the requested increase would support more 

extensive use of existing Federal data on health, nutrition, poverty, education, and economic 

opportunity to provide better indicators for highlighting problems and tracking improvements 

over time.

• Approximately $0.5 million of the requested increase would support the development of

P-12 and Postsecondary Information Hubs. The information hubs would be part of the 

Department’s InformED initiative, a new effort designed to transform how the Department 

makes information available and actionable for internal users and for the public. In general, 

InformED is intended to support open access to education data and centralize the 

dissemination of other evidence by improving the Department’s data infrastructure to 

manage the collection, quality, release, and analysis of data. One part of the InformED 

initiative will be to build on the lessons learned from the new College Scorecard 

(https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/) by creating information hubs that would pull together the 

Department’s diverse array of data and research on a specific topic (such as early childhood 

or financial aid), make these materials more easily accessible with intuitive tools, and enable

open data access. The information hubs would help a wide range of potential users unlock 

answers to pressing education questions and needs. As with the College Scorecard, the 

hubs would also enable external developers to create innovative new tools to further serve 

students.

V-27
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

This additional investment in data collections and dissemination will help ensure that the 

Department’s policies on postsecondary education, global competitiveness, early childhood 

education, and high need youth are based on recent and relevant information. In addition, the 

requested funding would allow NCES to maintain its core activities, 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 $19.8 million of the 2017 request for support of the Student Loan Repayment and 

Default Study, the MBK initiative, and 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, parent perceptions of school safety and discipline, before- and after-school 

activities of school-age children, adult participation in education and training for work, parent 

involvement in education, school choice, homeschooling, and civic involvement. Funding in 

2017 will be used for data processing and reporting for the 2016 data collection and largescale feasibility testing to prepare for the 2019 data collection.

• 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 United States, 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 focus on flexibility, timeliness, and integration with 

other Department data collections. Data collection for NTPS is currently underway in 2015–

2016, and 2017 funds will be used to support data analysis and the 2017–2018 data 

collection. 

• 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 

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. One recent study was the 2013–14 survey on public school safety and 

V-28
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

discipline, the report of which was released in May 2015

(http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015051.pdf). Key findings from this study include: student 

bullying was reported to occur at least once a month at 37 percent of public schools; 

88 percent of public schools had a written plan of procedures in case of shootings or active 

shooters in the school; and 65 percent of public schools reported that at least one violent 

incident occurred at school during the 2013–14 school year. 

• 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, is currently being conducted in 2015–2016 and 2017 funds will 

support data analysis and preparation for the 2017–2018 survey.

• 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 

disorder 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. Fiscal year 2017 funds will support data collection for the 2017 SCS and 

development of the 2018 SSOCS.

• 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 

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 analysts with 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 2017 request, funding for these 

longitudinal surveys would be an estimated $43.8 million. In addition to ECLS-B:18, key 

activities include:

• The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K:11) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/) is the third in an important series of longitudinal studies that 

examine child development, school readiness, and early school experiences. The 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 

V-29
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

ECLS-K:11 will provide data relevant to emerging policy-related domains not fully measured 

in previous studies, which will enable researchers to study how a wide range of family, 

school, community, and individual factors are associated with school performance over time. 

Data collections have already been completed in the fall and spring of 2010–2011, 2011–12, 

and 2012–2013, as well as the spring of 2014 and 2015. The last planned data collection is 

scheduled for the spring of 2016, and 2017 funds will be used to support data analysis. 

• The High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (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 next round of data collection is scheduled for 2016. Subsequent 

waves of data collection will follow the sample members into 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 coursetaking 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. Recently, NCES used data from the HSLS:09 to analyze the 

characteristics of early high school dropouts, finding that students with the lowest 

socioeconomic status were almost eight times more likely to drop out of high school than 

students in the highest socioeconomic status. The Data Point report on this topic was 

released in February 2015 (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015066.pdf). 

• The Middle Grades Longitudinal Study (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/mgls/) will be 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 secondary school. 

The study will include a nationally representative sample of 6th graders in the 2016–2017 

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 test for the study will be conducted in early 2016, while 

baseline data will be collected in spring 2017 with annual follow-ups in spring 2018 and 

spring 2019, 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. In 2016, the Department will use funding for NPSAS to allow for the collection 

of administrative data every 2 years, ultimately allowing the data to better reflect periods of 

rapid economic or social change. 

V-30
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

• 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. The third BPS cohort was based on the 2004 NPSAS, which 

collected information on students in 2006 and 2009, and did so for a final time in 2011. The 

fourth BPS is using the 2012 NPSAS as a base, with scheduled follow-ups in 2014 and 

2017. These follow-ups will include revised strata for institution sampling to reflect the 

recent growth in enrollment in for-profit 4-year institutions.

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 $23.1 million in 2017. Along with 

the TALIS, surveys and activities include:

• 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 United States 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 

V-31
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

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 United States’ investment in the next 

cycle of ICILS. 

• The International Early Childhood Outcomes Study, 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. In time, the data can also provide 

information on the links between early learning outcomes and those at age 15. 

• 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 PIACC assessment was conducted again in 

the U.S. from August 2013 through April 2014 to collect supplemental data from households, 

as well as from a separate sample of adults in State, Federal, and private prisons.

• 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. While some elements covered 

by PISA are likely to be part of the school curriculum, PISA goes beyond mastery of schoolbased 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. This cycle has repeated since 2009. In 2015, PISA will also 

assess collaborative problem solving and financial literacy. 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/). PISA 2012 found that, 

compared with the 33 other OECD nations, the United States ranked 27th in mathematics 

literacy, 20th in science literacy, and 17th in reading literacy. 

• 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 will next be conducted in spring 2016, with an 

V-32
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

expected data release in December 2017. 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 most recent data collection began in March 2015. 

The 2015 TIMSS includes 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 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 2017 request, funding for administrative data collections would be 

an estimated $26.4 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 United States, 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 Web site where users can construct 

custom tables using the “Build-A-Table” tool (http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/bat/). The CCD data 

collection is coordinated with the EDFacts Education Data Exchange Network (EDEN), 

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, and staff. IPEDS also collects academic library statistics on a 2-year cycle 

from approximately 3,700 postsecondary institutions. Students and families make extensive 

use of IPEDS data to assist them in college choice through the NCES College Navigator 

V-33
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

(https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator) and the new 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 key policymakers to shape discussions on student 

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

collected every year.

• The Library Statistics Program (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/libraries/) includes the Academic 

Libraries Survey and the School Library Media Center Survey. NCES collects information 

on library collections, expenditures, services, and staffing on a biennial basis from 

approximately 3,700 degree-granting postsecondary institutions. The most recent Academic 

Libraries Report was released in February 2014.

• The School District Demographics System (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sdds/) is a Webbased resource that allows public access to school district demographic and related 

geographic data. The program also provides support for the Census Mapping project, which 

uses school district geographic boundaries to map census blocks to school districts, and for 

the Decennial Census School District Project, which allows users to view aggregated 

Census data for public school districts across the Nation.

• Technical assistance to Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems

(http://nces.ed.gov/programs/slds/) helps propel the successful design, development, 

implementation, and expansion of K–12 and P–20W longitudinal data systems. These 

systems are intended to enhance the ability of States to efficiently and accurately manage, 

analyze, and use education data, including individual student records. Statistics funding 

provides support to SLDS grantees through the CEDS and the Educational Data Technical 

Assistance Program (EDTAP).

Cross-cutting Activities

The Cross-cutting Activities category would receive approximately $12.3 million in 2017. 

Activities receiving funding would include support for MBK, P–12 and postsecondary 

information hubs, and the following:

• 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” (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/projections/projections2021/). 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 

V-34
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

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 

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/). Improvements to the Data 

Inventory are also a part of the Department’s InformED initiative, described above.

• Information technology funding includes support for NCES Web servers and related 

activities, such as NCES Licensing and Inspection, NCES Logistics Support, NCES Web 

Support, and EDUCATE.

• 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, including the National Forum on Education 

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

NCES, other Department offices, and State and local educational agencies from the 

50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the 

Department of Defense Dependents Schools. The program also includes funding for 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.

• 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 technical training for researchers who use NCES data along with nontechnical 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.

V-35
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Measures 2015 2016 2017

Cross-Sectional Studies $16,360 $18,480 $19,796

Longitudinal Studies 34,597 38,860 43,771

International Studies 13,820 18,014 23,070

Administrative Data Collections and Support 24,863 24,306 26,445

Cross-Cutting Activities 13,420 12,340 12,278

Total 103,060 112,000 125,360

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 

2017 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.

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

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, and NCES met the 

performance target of 74 percent in 2014.

V-36
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

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%

2012 9 18 2 11%

2013 14 31 16 52

2014 13 45 12 27

2015 10 37 6 16

2016 11 16 3 19

2017 21 47 18 38

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 2015 either had an 85 percent response rate or 

higher or had nonresponse bias analyses conducted and weight adjustments, as needed.

In 2015, NCES released 10 reports that included 37 survey components. The response rates 

for 73 percent of survey components were 85 percent or above and the remaining 27 percent 

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 has declined in both 2014 and 

2015. 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 2016 and 2017 are 

projections based on data collections for which reports are scheduled to be released in 2016 or 

2017. 

Efficiency Measures

NCES adopted two new efficiency measures for 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. 

V-37
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

Measure: The percentage of reports for certain periodic data collections meeting their annual 

or biennial release dates 

Data Collection

Number of 

Reports in 2015 Frequency

Percentage of Reports 

Meeting Annual or Biennial 

Release Date

Target Actual

IPEDS 3 Annual Baseline 100%

CCD 3 Annual Baseline 100

PSS 1 Biennial Baseline 100

Condition of 

Education

1 Annual Baseline 100

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, CCD, PSS, 

and the Condition of Education. Baseline data for 2015 indicate that NCES released 100 

percent of reports under IPEDS, CCD, PSS, and the Condition of Education by the 

predetermined release dates. Targets will be established using baseline data for 2016 and 

beyond. 

The second NCES efficiency measure is still being developed by NCES and will track 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. In 2016, 

NCES will monitor various elements of its data collections to develop this measure and evaluate 

whether extensions to data collection periods are associated with changes in response rates. 

V-38
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

(Education Sciences Reform Act, section 174)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2016 2017 Change

$54,423 $54,423 0

1

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

program in FY 2017 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Regional Educational Laboratories (REL) program (http://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-reliant education system. A map displaying 

the regions served by each REL is displayed on the following page.

RELs support a wide range of activities to implement the program’s mission, including: 

conducting applied research and evaluations; developing and disseminating products and 

processes based on the best available research findings; and providing training and technical 

assistance to SEAs, local educational agencies (LEAs), school boards, and State boards of 

education. Through these activities, RELs build local and State capacity to use data and 

evidence, ultimately working with SEAs and LEAs to understand the nature and scope of

specific educational challenges, access high-quality research to inform decisions, identify

opportunities to conduct original research, and track progress over time using high-quality data 

and methods

Administered by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance within 

the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the RELs are part of the Department’s wide-ranging

technical assistance network that includes the Comprehensive Centers, What Works 

Clearinghouse (WWC), Equity Assistance Centers, and Office of Special Education Programs 

Technical Assistance Centers. This network is organized by the Department to provide high 

quality support to SEAs, LEAs, and schools that is accessible, comprehensive, and relevant as 

these entities rise to the challenge of ensuring a high quality education for all students.

V-39
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

Allocation of resources among the RELs is based on the number of LEAs and the number of 

school-age children, as well as the cost of providing services within the geographic area 

encompassed by the region. RELs are funded via 5-year contracts with research organizations, 

institutions of higher education, or partnerships among such groups.

REL technical assistance takes a variety of forms, but the focus is always on using data and

research to systematically understand and address real-world problems, and the RELs tailor

technical assistance to the level of experience of the SEAs and LEAs with which they work. For

example, RELs provide assistance to build capacity among State and district personnel to

access their data; identify opportunities to use data to improve student achievement; conduct a

wide range of types of research studies; and present research findings in clear, understandable

formats.

The current REL contracts were awarded in fiscal year 2012 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. Much of the work is conducted through REL research alliances, a type 

of research-practitioner partnership in which a group of education stakeholders who share a 

V-40
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

specific concern work together to use their research and practitioner knowledge to investigate 

a problem and generate solutions for improving student outcomes. Each research alliance

focuses on a particular challenge that has an actionable component, such as college access

and readiness, so that the research and technical assistance are closely linked to a clear goal. 

There are currently 72 research alliances operating across the 10 RELs. Of these alliances, 

32 include State and district representatives from a single State and 40 include members from 

multiple States.

Although the research alliances and regions are the primary partners of each REL, the 

Department also requires that RELs develop materials for national distribution through the IES

Web site. In addition to reports and studies, these materials include tools (such as rubrics or

data organizers) and technical assistance documents (such as PowerPoint presentations,

workshop activities, and facilitators’ guides) that can be used by others who are not directly

involved in the RELs’ work. 

Examples of REL products funded under the current contracts include:

• Professional Learning Communities Facilitator's Guide for the WWC Practice Guide on 

Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle 

School: The Professional Learning Communities Facilitator's Guide 

(http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015105) was developed by REL 

Southwest to assist teams of educators in applying the evidence-based strategies presented 

in the Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and 

Middle School educator's practice guide, produced by the WWC

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide.aspx?sid=19).

• Webinar Series on Successfully Evaluating a Professional Development Program:

Designed by REL Southeast, this series of five webinars focuses on developing a strong 

evaluation design for professional development programs. Through these webinars, 

participants gain a working knowledge of the critical components that make up a 

professional development program impact evaluation and have the chance to ask questions 

(http://ies.ed.gov/whatsnew/calendar/?id=1469&tid=14&cid=6&va=1&ts=1-2016-1|m).

• Study on the Effects of the Elevate Math Summer Program on Math Achievement and 

Algebra Readiness: REL West conducted a quick turnaround, randomized control trial and 

produced a report that was published by IES in July 2015 

(http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015096). The report describes how 

summer math programs such as that of Elevate Math may be important tools for improving 

math achievement among rising eighth grade students, but most targeted students will need 

additional support in order to ensure success in algebra. 

• Study on the Changes in Financial Aid and Student Enrollment at Historically Black Colleges 

and Universities (HBCUs) after the Tightening of Parental Loans for Undergraduate 

Students (PLUS) Credit Standards: REL Mid-Atlantic examined the changes in financial aid 

and student enrollment at HBCUs after the Department increased the credit history 

requirements necessary to obtain PLUS. Results indicate that PLUS loans declined 

substantially at HBCUs during the 2012–2013 academic year, and that the decreases were 

V-41
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

not fully replaced by other types of Federal financial aid. A report of the study was released 

in April 2015 (http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015082). 

• Studies on Disproportionality in School Discipline: Both REL Mid-Atlantic and REL 

Northwest produced reports on suspension and expulsion patterns. REL Mid-Atlantic used

Maryland data to examine whether disproportionate rates of suspensions and expulsions 

exist for racial/ethnic minority students and special education students. The study found 

that disproportionalities between Black and White students in Maryland increased during the 

2011–2012 academic year despite an overall decrease in the number of out-of-school 

suspensions and expulsions. Moreover, Black students received out-of-school suspensions

or expulsions at more than twice the rate of White students, and special education students 

were removed from school at more than twice the rate of students who are not in special 

education. The report was published in March 2014 

(http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2014017). REL Northwest used 

Oregon data to examine student suspension and expulsion rates in six diverse school 

districts during the 2011–2012 academic year. The study found that the most common 

reasons for suspensions and expulsions were for physical and verbal aggression and 

insubordination/disruption, and that nearly 40 percent of student who were suspended 

received more than one suspension. The report was published in May 2014. 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northwest/pdf/REL_2014028.pdf) 

• Study on Using Evidence-based Decision Trees Instead of Formulas to Identify At-risk 

Readers: REL Southeast examined whether the early identification of students who are atrisk for reading comprehension difficulties is improved using logistic regression or 

classification and regression tree (CART). This research question was motivated by State 

education leaders’ interest in maintaining high classification accuracy while simultaneously 

improving practitioner understanding of the rules by which students are identified as at-risk 

or not at-risk readers. Results indicated that CART is comparable to logistic regression, 

suggesting that CART should be used due to its ease in interpretation by practitioners and 

its technical advantages over logistic regression. A report of the study was published in July 

2014 (http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2014036).

• Practitioner’s Guide to Implementing Early Warning Systems (EWS): As part of the REL 

Northwest Toolkit, this report

(http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015056) summarizes the 

experiences and recommendations of EWS users throughout the United States. This 

information was presented at a Department meeting related to EWS and is helping to frame 

the EWS work that the RELs are doing in a coordinated series of events in 2016. 

IES is also required to establish a system for technical and peer review to ensure that applied 

research activities, research-based reports, and products of the RELs are consistent with the 

rigorous standards applied to all other research grants and contracts administered by IES. 

Information on the process and standards IES uses to ensure REL products meet IES 

standards can be found at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/peerreview/index.asp. Using IES 

standards ensures that REL research meets high standards for scientific quality and that the 

information is valid and reliable. 

V-42
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

In 2009, IES awarded a contract to evaluate the REL program under the 2006–2011 contract

cycle; the final report was issued in April 2015. The evaluation examined: (1) how well the 

RELs respond to the needs of their regions by providing short- and long-term research 

assistance and evidence-based technical assistance and (2) the effectiveness of the program’s 

coordination activities across the RELs. The evaluation found that all of the impact study 

reports produced by the RELs that were selected for review for the report were rated as, on 

average, between “strong” and “very strong” in quality. In addition, the evaluation found that 86 

percent of SEA administrators and 52 percent of LEA administrators reported being “very 

familiar,” “somewhat familiar,” or “a little familiar” with the REL program; and approximately half 

of SEA administrators who were at least “a little familiar” with the REL program were “very 

satisfied” with it. See the Program Performance Information section of this request for additional 

information on this evaluation.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012....................................................................................$57,426

2013......................................................................................54,423

2014......................................................................................54,423

2015......................................................................................54,423

2016......................................................................................54,423

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $54.4 million in fiscal year 2017, the same as the fiscal 

year 2016 level, for the REL program. The REL program is a comprehensive mechanism to 

help SEAs and LEAs use up-to-date, credible, and rigorous education research to improve 

student outcomes, which is particularly crucial as SEAs and LEAs transition under the Every 

Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA requires that the activities, strategies, or interventions of 

States, LEAs, or schools be evidence-based in many programs. Given these new evidence 

provisions in ESSA, the partnerships between the RELs and SEAs and LEAs will continue to be 

important as evidence-based activities are identified and implemented to meet local needs. 

To fulfill their mission, RELs carry out three broad types of work: applied research; 

dissemination of findings from rigorous research; and technical assistance for use of research, 

which often takes the form of training and consultation. The 5-year REL contracts awarded in 

2012 focused on providing short, clear, plain-language research reports on topics of pressing 

concern to education stakeholders. This REL cohort also made important strides in developing 

research-practitioner partnerships through REL research alliances, which the Department 

proposes to build upon with the new contracts in 2017. 

The REL program serves as the primary dissemination partner for the What Works 

Clearinghouse through virtual and in-person events based on practice guides. The Department 

relies, in part, on webinars and tools developed by the RELs to help applicants and grantees 

understand and meet evidence requirements in discretionary grant competitions.

V-43
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

By law, each REL has a Governing Board, which includes the region’s chief State school 

officers or designees and helps set direction and prioritize REL projects. The Department 

requires RELs to make their work accessible and relevant to other regions in order to avoid 

duplication and to amplify impact.

The 2017 request would support the first year of activities for 9 of the 10 RELs under new 

5-year contracts. REL Southwest is on a different schedule and will be competed in fiscal 

year 2017. The draft performance work statement, which was announced on August 7, 2015, is 

available at: 

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=25fd4d16a34b1b587d76e3458e19cf6

f&tab=core&tabmode=list&=%20for%20details.

The new awards will support improved services by:

• Increasing clarity of the purpose and work of the RELs: For this competition, IES developed 

a logic model that maps out key inputs and strategies and expected program outcomes to 

clarify the purpose and types of work that RELs support, which will ultimately enable SEAs 

and LEAs to understand how RELs can best be leveraged to help address local needs.

• Focusing on high leverage projects: The RELs have had to justify their work on the basis of 

regional need, but the new competition requires RELs to address high-leverage problems in 

their projects. High-leverage problems are defined as those that: (1) if addressed could 

result in substantial improvements in education outcomes for many students or for key 

subgroups of students; (2) are priorities for regional policymakers, particularly at the State 

level; and (3) policymakers in the region believe require research or research-related 

support to address well.

• Increasing regional concurrence with the REL’s approach: Each year, the Department will 

ask for assurance from the Governing Board that it is in agreement with the REL’s proposed 

annual plan of work. Additionally, the Department will require RELs to collect direct 

feedback from the Governing Board on REL performance.

• Measuring how RELs change stakeholder behavior: The new program logic model 

identified the desired activities and behavior that should result from strong REL work,

including the:

o Development of sustained partnerships with policymakers and practitioners focused on 

using research to address critical problems in education;

o Completion of ambitious, coherent, and cumulative agendas of high quality research, 

technical assistance, and dissemination;

o Recognition among State and LEA leaders of the REL as a key resource for credible 

research and support;

o Increased State and local capacity to access, understand, interpret, critique, apply, and 

conduct research; and

V-44
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

o Increased use of research findings in education decisionmaking, particularly at SEAs.

The Department will establish strategies for measuring the performance of the RELs in each 

of these areas in order to assess the value of the REL work.

Each of the RELs funded in 2017 will work with its Governing Board and with regional 

policymakers and practitioners to set its agenda, but, to the extent possible, the Department will 

encourage the RELs and their regions to address four specific areas of need, as defined in the 

draft performance work statement: (1) early childhood education and school readiness;

(2) college- and career-readiness; (3) professional development and teacher preparation; and 

(4) education access and attainment for traditionally underserved groups.

The funds requested for 2017 would also continue support for an independent peer review of 

REL products and publications, which helps ensure they are technically sound, readable, 

usable, and relevant to the needs of education practitioners and stakeholders before they are 

disseminated. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2015

footnote

2016

footnote

2017

footnote

Annual support for each REL:1

Northeastern Region Educational Laboratories $4,884 $4,884 TBD

Mid-Atlantic Region Educational Laboratories 4,412 4,412 TBD

Southeastern Region Educational Laboratories 4,588 4,588 TBD

Appalachian Region Educational Laboratories 4,171 4,171 TBD

Midwestern Region Educational Laboratories 7,147 7,147 TBD

Central Region Educational Laboratories 4,964 4,964 TBD

Southwestern Region Educational Laboratories 9,160 9,160 TBD

Western Region Educational Laboratories 5,635 5,635 TBD

Northwestern Region Educational Laboratories 3,744 3,744 TBD

Pacific Region Educational Laboratories 3,287 3,287 _TBD

Subtotal, Regional educational laboratories 51,992 51,992 $52,000

Program activities:2

Regional educational laboratory contracts 52,343 52,597 52,423

Independent review of REL plans and products 2,080 1,826 2,000

Total 54,423 54,423 54,423 

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.

V-45
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

The Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 established standards for the REL program. IES 

awarded the first contracts subject to these requirements in 2006, and the new contracts 

awarded in fiscal year 2012 continued to reflect those standards. The Department identified 

common performance indicators for its technical assistance programs that assess their quality, 

relevance, and usefulness. In 2014, the Department established two performance measures for 

the RELs:

Goal: Increase effective use of data and research, and capacity for use, among State and 

local education agencies.

Objective: Increase the use of data and research, and capacity for use, among members of 

REL research alliances.

Measure: Annual rating of impact of REL research alliance participation on agency use of data 

and research.

Year Target Actual

2014 3.1

2015 3.2 3.0

2016 3.2

2017 3.2

RELs are required by their contracts to survey research alliance (RA)1 members each spring

and report the results to IES, using a common set of customer satisfaction survey questions 

approved by the Office of Management and Budget. This measure averages the RA members’ 

responses to four survey questions to create a single score. These items are:

• Participation in this research alliance has increased my ability to use my agency’s or 

organization’s available data.

• Participation in this research alliance has increased my ability to conduct high quality 

research and evaluation.

• Participation in this research alliance has provided information that informed my agency’s 

selection of programs and/or strategies related to this topic area.

1 The 2012−2017 REL program required the use of researcher-practitioner partnerships known as research 

alliances. Research alliances were defined in the Performance Work Statement as groups of practitioners, 

policymakers, and researchers who worked together over time to use data and research to better understand and 

address a particular education concern.

V-46

 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

• Participation in this research alliance has led my agency to design and conduct an 

evaluation study.

Performance data are analyzed by calendar year and are reported under the fiscal year 

corresponding to the last quarter of the calendar year; e.g., data reported for fiscal year 2014 

were collected from January through December of 2013. During the course of the REL 

contracts, as research alliances mature and more research and technical assistance is 

conducted, the score on these items should increase. The baseline for this measure was set in 

2014 and is a rating of 3.1 on a scale where 1 equates to “Strongly Disagree” and 4 equates to 

“Strongly Agree.” In 2015, the rating was similar, at 3.0, and missed the target by 0.2.

Objective: Disseminate research findings and methods, showing the relevance of the content 

for education policy and/or practice.

Measure: Annual participant rating of the quality and relevance of REL dissemination events, 

including online events.

Year Target Actual

2014 3.4

2015 3.5 3.4

2016 3.5

2017 3.5

RELs also are 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 is 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.

IES will examine whether these measures are appropriate for the new RELs and will work with 

OMB to ensure that new measures, including, for example, measures to help examine whether 

RELs have changed the specific stakeholder behaviors identified in the logic model, are in place 

before the next contracts are awarded.

V-47
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

Other Performance Information

The Department began an independent evaluation of the REL program in 2009. The evaluation 

addressed the following evaluation questions for each REL funded between fiscal years 

2006 and 2011 and for 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).

A clear majority of State administrators (86 percent) reported being at least “a little familiar” with 

the REL program, and half of those who were “a little familiar” were “very satisfied” with the 

services received. Only 3 percent were not at all satisfied. About half (52 percent) of district 

administrators reported being at least “a little familiar” with the REL program, and about a 

quarter (26 percent) of those reported being very satisfied. Sixteen percent reported being “not 

at all satisfied.”

Findings from the evaluation have helped shape decisions about the next REL competition; for 

example, the new program logic model to measure how RELs change stakeholder behavior. 

There are no plans to repeat the study. IES will continue to support an independent review of 

REL products and will collect performance measurement data.

V-48
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

(National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

Program area 2016 2017 Change

National Assessment of Educational Progress $149,000 $149,000 0

National Assessment Governing Board 8,235 7,745 -490

Total 157,235 156,745 -490

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

program in FY 2017 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 

intervals in additional subjects, including writing, science, history, geography, civics, economics, 

V-49
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

foreign languages, and arts; may conduct 12th grade State reading and mathematics 

assessments; and may conduct 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 http://www.nagb.org/.

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 

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 has supported 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 21 districts 

participating in 2013. 

• 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 organizations. 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 

through the Internet (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/). In addition, an online data tool 

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/) allows users to create their own data tables 

with national and State data.

V-50
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

The NAEP legislation requires biennial State assessments in reading and mathematics in 

grades 4 and 8 and requires reporting of NAEP results, where feasible, by disability status and 

limited-English 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.

Maintenance of 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 is 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)

2012..................................................................................$138,306

2013....................................................................................131,070

2014....................................................................................140,235

2015....................................................................................137,235

2016....................................................................................157,235

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $156.7 million in fiscal year 2017 for the Assessment program, a 

decrease of $0.5 million from the fiscal year 2016 level. Of this amount, $149.0 million would 

provide support for NAEP and $7.7 million would support NAGB. As the largest continuing and 

national representative source of data of 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 

V-51
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

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 Department 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 tested; taking appropriate actions to improve the form, content, use, and 

reporting of NAEP; developing test objectives and specifications for assessments in each 

subject area; plan and execute 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. 

The $7.7 million of NAGB funds are necessary to carry out these responsibilities and are used 

for the salaries, expenses, and operations of NAGB staff, in addition to developing achievement 

levels and NAEP frameworks, supporting outreach for initial public release efforts, and 

developing of guidelines for the dissemination of assessment results.

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/naep/assessment-schedule.html), approved by NAGB in November

2015, includes:

Year Subject

National 

Grades 

Assessed

State Grades 

Assessed

TUDA Grades 

Assessed

2016 Arts 8

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

V-52
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

Year Subject

National 

Grades 

Assessed

State Grades 

Assessed

TUDA Grades 

Assessed

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 are grades and subject areas 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 four 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 the contracting process. With these caveats in mind, the Department 

anticipates that fiscal year 2017 funds will be used to support the following: 

• Scoring, analysis, and reporting: 2016 Arts assessment.

• Sampling and data collection: 2017 Reading, Mathematics, and Writing 

assessments.

• Pilot testing: 2018 U.S. History, Geography, and Civics assessments, and the 

2019 Reading, Mathematics, and Science assessments.

• Item development: 2021 Reading, Mathematics, and Writing assessments.

V-53
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

• Transitioning to Digitally-Based Assessments (DBAs): Beginning in 2017, all 

operational assessments will be administered to students through digital-based 

technology. This innovation follows 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 TUDAs 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.

• Expanding 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. Recent 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 

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. The requested funding would enable NAGB to meet the 

increased demand by allowing 10 out of the 17 additional urban districts eligible to 

be included in the 2017 TUDA. 

V-54
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Measures 2015 2016 2017

NAEP $129,000 $149,000 $149,000

NAGB____________ 8,235 8,235 7,745

Total, Assessment 137,235 157,235 156,745

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 2017 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

2016

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 

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. The figure for 2010 was 

79 percent. Data for 2014 is still being compiled by NCES. 

V-55
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

NCES’ second performance measure tracks the use of the NAEP Web site and NAEP Data 

Explorer (an online tool for analyzing NAEP data sets). NCES recently changed its

methodology in the way user data are collected and is redesigning the NAEP Data Explorer to 

include higher quality data for performance measurement and improvement. Baseline data for 

this measure will be collected in 2016. 

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.

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. In 2009, the 4th, 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 

V-56
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

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.

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. In 2007, 

80 percent of other initial releases that did not have new frameworks were released within that 

time period, and since then NCES has reported that all such assessments met that time 

schedule.

Other Performance Information

The Department completed an evaluation of NAEP in 2009 

(http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g915933415) that provides 

information on key aspects of the assessment. The study found that the assessment is well-run 

and of high quality, but it did identify areas for improvement. These recommendations included 

that the NAEP program should specify the intended uses of NAEP, identify unintended uses, 

and develop a validity research agenda around current and proposed uses. The study also 

recommended that technical documentation should be released at the same time as 

assessment results. In response to concerns regarding an organized program of validation 

research, NCES identified staff members who are focused on research and development and 

created a steering committee that is responsible for identifying emerging issues and making 

recommendations for a NAEP research and development agenda. In addition, NCES 

established a Technical Documentation Web site (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/) 

that provides access to documentation for the assessment.

V-57
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part E)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2016 2017 Change

$54,000 $54,000 0

1

 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; the Administration proposes to continue funding this 

program in FY 2017 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 focus on a range of areas 

that are critical to the success of programs 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. Past studies include:

• Learning Experiences – An Alternative Program for Preschoolers and Their Parents (LEAP): 

Special education research has seen a sharp increase in the past three decades in the 

range of practices shown to impact the behavioral characteristics of autism, though relatively 

little research exists to demonstrate the efficacy of a comprehensive early intervention 

model. A 2006 NCSER-supported efficacy study of LEAP, a long-standing comprehensive 

intervention program for young children with autism, showed that participating preschool 

children with autism had improved cognitive, communication, and social skills 

(http://ies.ed.gov/funding/grantsearch/details.asp?ID=371). The study was the largest 

experimental trial of an intervention program focused on early childhood and autism, and a 

follow-up study, also funded by NCSER, has evidence indicating that the LEAP model 

produces gains that persist over time. Over 100 sites are using LEAP, and the 2011 study 

was cited by the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee as one of the 10 most 

significant autism studies of that year (http://iacc.hhs.gov/summaryadvances/2011/index.shtml). 

V-58
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

• Early Reading Intervention (ERI): Research has shown the promise of targeted and 

evidence-based interventions for preschool age children in language, early literacy, and 

cognitive skills as a preventative tool to reduce the number of children in need of costly 

special education services in kindergarten and beyond. A 2006 NCSER grant evaluated the 

efficacy of one such intervention: ERI, a widely-used commercial program designed for 

kindergarten children at risk of reading difficulty. The study found that ERI had statistically 

significant effects on foundational alphabetic, phonemic, and decoding skills. A follow-up 

study compared the standard implementation of ERI to an enhanced version that adjusted 

instruction based on student performance data. The researchers found that frequently 

adjusting instruction based on students’ strengths and weaknesses led to reading gains that 

were maintained in later grades (http://ecx.sagepub.com/content/80/1/25.full.pdf).

• Improving Mathematics Outcomes for Students with Disabilities: Students with disabilities 

tend to lag behind their peers in mathematics achievement. On the 2007 National 

Assessment of Educational Progress, 19 percent of students with disabilities in Grade 4, 

and 8 percent of students with disabilities in Grade 8 were at or above the proficient level in 

mathematics for their grade. A number of interventions have been developed to address the 

mathematics needs of students with disabilities, but relatively little high quality research has 

been conducted to test the efficacy of such interventions. To address this issue, a 2007 

NCSER grant used data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Cohort 

of 1998−99 to examine mathematics performance over time and to identify practices that are 

potentially effective for preventing or remediating math difficulties. The study found that use 

of more teacher-directed strategies, such as routine practice and drill, were significantly 

associated with gains in math achievement for students with math difficulties 

(http://epa.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/06/20/0162373714536608.full.pdf+html). The 

learning difficulties apparent in mathematics by the end of kindergarten reliably predict 

children’s mathematics growth over the next 5 years of schooling. These results indicate 

that early intervention is as critical for mathematics as it is for reading.

• Improving Outcomes through the Use of Technology: The use of technology as a means of 

improving outcomes for special education students has led to ongoing NCSER-funded 

research on the use of technology to tackle pressing problems in special education. For 

example, the iSkills program is a video repository of life skills tutorials for students with 

intellectual disabilities and autism. Designed to be delivered via handheld electronic 

devices, iSkills assists with direct instruction and self-instruction across several domains 

including independent living, employment, leisure, community involvement, and community 

navigation. Another intervention developed with NCSER funds is the Social Competence 

Intervention for Adolescents, a school-based version of an effective clinic-based intervention 

designed to help students with autism spectrum disorders with recognition of facial 

expressions, sharing of ideas, conversational turn taking, recognition of emotions, and social 

problem solving. The study results indicated significant improvement on those targeted 

student outcomes (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10803-010-0959-1#0). 

• On the Way Home: A Family-Centered Academic Reintegration Intervention Model:

Adolescents with disabilities in residential or other out-of-home placements often receive 

services and supports for emotional, behavioral, and academic issues. These students 

make substantial progress but often face difficulties again when they transition from these 

V-59
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

placements. On the Way Home: A Family-Centered Academic Reintegration Intervention 

Model was developed to address this need. The research team reported improved 

transition outcomes and a reduction in the rate of returning to care for participating students 

(compared to non-participants) in a recent experimental study 

(http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.046).

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012.................................................................................. $49,905

2013.................................................................................... 47,295

2014.................................................................................... 54,000 

2015.................................................................................... 54,000 

2016.................................................................................... 54,000

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $54.0 million for RiSE in fiscal year 2017, the same as the fiscal 

year 2016 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 and 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 academic achievement, social and emotional well-being, behavior, 

and physical development for children 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 2 years, as it has been in 

previous years.

At the 2017 request level, IES would support approximately $49.2 million in continuation costs 

of grants awarded in 2016 and prior years and $3.2 million in new grant awards; an additional 

$1.5 million would support peer review, logistical support, and other activities. The actual 

amounts will depend on the results of the 2015 and 2016 competitions. Given the amount of 

money available for new awards from the 2017 appropriation at the request level, it is unlikely 

that IES would hold a new competition. Instead, depending on the quality of the applications 

received for the 2016 competition, IES may fund down the 2016 slate.

IES is holding two competitions for awards in 2016; these competitions were announced in the 

Federal Register on April 15, 2015:

• 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. 

V-60
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

The program uses a topic and goal structure to divide the research process into stages by 

field for both theoretical and practical purposes. All work must focus on children with or 

at-risk for a disability, and applicants must submit proposals for one topic area and one goal. 

The topic areas for the competition are:

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 Related 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 $700,000 over 2 years, 

while an Effectiveness project can receive up to $4.0 million over 5 years. Information on 

the competition is available at http://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2016_84324A.pdf.

IES anticipates making approximately $28.0 million in new awards using 2016 funds. The 

applications were due on August 6, 2015; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2016.

• Research Training Programs in Special Education Competition: For 2016, IES accepted 

applications for the Research Training Programs in Special Education under three topics: 

(1) Postdoctoral Research Training, (2) Early Career Development and Mentoring, and 

(3) Methods Training Using Single-Case Designs. 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 Research Training 

and Early Career Development and Mentoring programs seek to build the next generation of 

special education and early intervention researchers. The Methods Training Using SingleCase Designs topic supports advanced methodological training in single-case research 

designs often used to conduct rigorous research in special education and early intervention. 

The Postdoctoral training competition was last held in 2012; the Early Career competition 

was held in 2015; and 2016 marks the first time that the Single-Case Designs competition is 

being competed through the Research Training Program. 

V-61
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

The maximum grant award and duration are: Postdoctoral, $700,000 over 5 years; Early 

Career, $400,000 over 4 years; and Single-Case Designs, $700,000 over 3 years. 

Additional information on the 2016 competition is available at 

http://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2016_84324B.pdf.

IES anticipates making approximately $1.0 million in new awards using 2016 funds. The 

applications were due on August 20, 2015; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2016.

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 (http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/RandD/): 

Special education research and development centers 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 have an end date in fiscal year 2017. Due to limited funding, 

NCSER has been unable to fund new research and development centers 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; this grantee will receive 

continuation funding in 2017.

• Low-Cost, Short Duration Evaluation of Special Education Interventions. This program, 

which was announced in September 2015, 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 will be low cost—up to $250,000 over 2 years—because they will 

focus on outcomes that can be easily measured using administrative records. The grants 

will be carried out by partnerships of research institutions and SEAs or LEAs. The 

applications were due on January 12, 2015; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2016.

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 

V-62
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

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

2015

Funding

2016

Funding

2017

Funding

2015

Awards

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

Research Activities:

Research Grants

 cation R esearch Gr ants: New grant awards $17,419 $28,102 TBD 30 TBD TBD

 ation R esearch Gr ants: Grant award continuations 26,008 16,587 $45,619 34 29 _28

Special Education R esearch Gr ants: Total 43,427 44,689 TBD 64 TBD TBD

Research Training

Research Trai ning: New grant awards 86 1,013 TBD 1 8 5

Research Trai ning: Grant award continuations 319 _ 91 1,117 5 1 _9

Research Trai ning: Total 405 1,104 TBD 6 9 14

Research and Development 

Centers

 D evelopment Centers: New grant awards 0 0 0 0 0 0

 D evelopment Centers: Grant award continuations 6,473 4,197 0 3 2 0

Special Education R esearch and D evelopment Centers: Total 6,473 4,197 0 3 2 0

Students with Learning 

Disabilities Initiative

 abiliti es R esearch Initi ati ve Grant award continuations 2,000 2,000 2,000 1 1 1

Low-Cost, Short Duration

Evaluation of Special 

Education Interventions

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons New grant awards 0 500 TBD 0 4 4

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons Grant award continuations 0 0 500 0 0 4

 Low-Cost Eval uation of Educati on Inter venti ons Total 0 500 TBD 0 4 8

V-63
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

Output Measures

2015

Funding

2016

Funding

2017

Funding

2015

Awards

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

Unsolicited Awards

Unsolicited Awar ds: New grant awards $200 TBD TBD 1 TBD TBD

 ds: Grant award continuations 173 0 TBD 1 0 TBD

Unsolicited Awar ds: Total 373 TBD TBD 2 TBD TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 17,705 $29,615 $3,244 32 TBD TBD

Subtotal, grant continuations 34,973 22,875 49,236 44 33 TBD

Subtotal, grants 52,678 52,490 52,480 76 TBD TBD

Other activities:

Logistics and Support/Other 72 260 270

Peer review of new award 

applications 1,250 1,250 1,250

Subtotal, Other activities 1,322 1,510 1,520

Total $54,000 $54,000 $54,000

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2016 and 2017 are 

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

Continuation costs for 2017 reflect estimates of new awards in 2016.

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 

2017 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.

V-64
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

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

2017 85

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 2015 reflects all projects funded from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal 

year 2012 (the total of which is 251). 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

2017 47

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 

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.

V-65
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

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 will also review 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 will be 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.

This measure replaces previous measures that reported findings separately for reading, writing, 

or language outcomes; school readiness outcomes; and behavior outcomes. Since 2006, 

NCSER has refined and expanded the number of topic areas in which research is supported, 

and the new measure more accurately captures the range of research now supported, including 

research areas such as mathematics and science that were not included in the old measures. 

The baseline was established for fiscal year 2014.

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

2012 38 40

2013 40 38

2014 35 33

2015 30 38

2016 37

2017 33

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 decrease in the number of new grants IES was able to fund in 2013, and no 

research grant competitions in special education were held in 2014. The 2015 target was 

lowered accordingly. NCSER exceeded the 2015 target due to a greater number of requests for 

no-cost extensions to complete grant activities and fewer full-time program officers than 

anticipated. 

V-66
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

(Educational Technical Assistance Act, Section 208)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2016 2017 Change

$34,539 $81,017 +$46,478

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

in FY 2017 through appropriations language.

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.

V-67
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

The 2015 grants, which ranged in size from $3.5 million to $7.0 million for 4-year projects, 

focused on supporting individual States’ needs to collect and use SLDS data to address specific 

priorities. States could apply for funding to address up to two of the following priority areas:

• Fiscal Equity and Return on Investment;

• Educator Talent Management;

• Early Learning;

• College and Career;

• Evaluation and Research;

• Instructional Support.

The 2015 awards included 16 grants that, combined, addressed all six data use priority areas. 

The new awards included American Samoa as a first-time grantee, and also Tennessee, which 

had not received funding since fiscal year 2006. Given the high volume and quality of 

applications for the 2015 grant competition (the IES panel reviewed 43 applications), IES plans 

to hold the next SLDS competition in 2017. 

Beginning in 2008, the Department of Education Appropriations Act authorized the program to 

use a portion of the appropriation for activities to improve data coordination and use. In 

addition, the 2009 Appropriations Act authorized the use of funds for SLDS that include 

postsecondary and workforce information and the 2010 Appropriations Act added inclusion of 

information on children of all ages, including early childhood, as an authorized activity. Since 

2012, the Department has had the authority to use funds to link Statewide elementary and 

secondary data systems with early childhood, postsecondary, and workforce data systems, or to 

further develop such systems.

In every grant competition, the Department expects States to use funds to significantly improve 

the ability of data systems to provide appropriate, high quality information, consistent with

national and State privacy laws and regulations, needed to improve student outcomes. States 

should use funds to develop the necessary linkages with other agencies and States to provide 

information on early childhood services, high school graduation, college completion, and 

workforce participation. Systems developed with support from the Department must also 

improve States’ ability to report required data to the Department. Finally, funded data systems 

must improve the ability to provide regular feedback to teachers to enable them to use data to 

improve instruction, allow State and local educational agencies to devise methods for identifying 

effective teachers and teaching practices, and provide accurate information about student and 

school progress.

V-68
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012..................................................................................... $38,077

2013....................................................................................... 36,085

2014....................................................................................... 34,539 

2015....................................................................................... 34,539 

2016....................................................................................... 34,539

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Department requests $81.0 million in fiscal year 2017 for the SLDS program, an increase of 

$46.5 million over the fiscal year 2017 level. The 2017 funds for this program would provide 

support for continuation costs of grants awarded in 2015; a new competition in fiscal year 

2017 that would allow more States to leverage existing data to examine local education issues 

and concerns; and national activities to improve data coordination, quality, and use.

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 has invested significant resources in the SLDS program; 

approximately $721.0 million since 2005 has been devoted to ensuring that States can answer 

key questions about education, such as whether students are ready for kindergarten, whether 

students are being adequately prepared for college, or whether students can earn a living after 

completing their degrees. As of the 2015 SLDS competition, 47 States, the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa have received awards. 

Through these grants, States are leveraging newly linked data to understand pressing State and 

local educational issues. For instance, many States have been able use these data to produce, 

for the first time, a comprehensive picture on what early childhood services are available and 

which children are participating in them, allowing States to prioritize students with the greatest 

needs. This type of analysis was not feasible before SLDS because these data were not 

collected at the State level. Additionally, States have used linked student and teacher data to 

understand how to improve teacher equity. Delaware, for example, is analyzing SLDS data to 

understand the impact of State teacher retention incentives on the equitable distribution of 

highly effective educators. States have also leveraged SLDS data to produce robust, highly 

contextualized information about their State education system. Vermont has done just this by 

using its SLDS data to create statistical indicators that reflect the quality of Vermont’s schools 

and support units across various domains. These indicators will be used to develop annual 

snapshot reviews that will be used by State and local education officials to examine quality and 

equity, both within and across localities (http://brook.gs/1Ooi5nx).

SLDS data are also used to inform work at the local level. For example, Minnesota now uses

SLDS data to produce high school feedback reports for principals that show how former 

students’ perform in postsecondary education, including their need for remedial coursework. 

Principals use these reports to better align secondary education for college success. Other 

States, like Georgia, have created powerful tools using SLDS data that provide educators 

access to seamless, timely information on students as well as relevant resources to help 

address diverse learning needs. North Carolina and Mississippi, along with some other States, 

V-69
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

have created early warning systems to identify students at risk of dropping out so that educators 

and counselors can provide them with additional supports and also monitor their educational 

progress to ensure their success. 

Supporting the use of longitudinal data is also vital as States transition under the Every 

Students Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA introduces new reporting requirements that will require 

States to collect and provide new data to the public. For example, States’ SLDS are wellpositioned to assist in meeting new postsecondary enrollment, teacher qualification, and perpupil expenditure data requirements outlined in ESSA.

To continue to support the use of longitudinal data, as well as assist States in improving data 

quality, coordination, and use as they transition to the new reporting requirements under ESSA, 

the following activities would be supported at the 2017 request level:

Grant Competitions

• 2015 Grant Competition: Approximately $28.3 million would support continuation costs of 

grants awarded in 2015. This competition focused on increasing the use of newly linked 

data to State policy and program priorities. Grants funded State-identified use cases, 

ranging from the creation of powerful human capital management systems to new tools 

educators can use to improve everyday instruction. States must have identified which one 

to two use cases would be supported by the grant along with any needed data linkages, 

planned reporting tools, and support resources to ensure these tools would be useful to 

stakeholders. Under this competition, 16 4-year grants were awarded in September 2015, 

with States receiving, on average, $6.5 million in total. Allowable use cases included: 

o Fiscal Equity and Return on Investment (ROI). Grants addressing this data use case 

proposed to use school-level financial data to examine how funds are distributed across 

schools and how school-level investments relate to student outcomes.

o Educator Talent Management. This data use case will allow States to develop 

comprehensive educator human capital data systems to help them understand the 

impact of various educator preparation programs and to provide personalized 

professional development to increase teacher effectiveness. Educator data can include 

preparation, performance, professional development, pay, and placement information 

and could be linked to student data. 

o Early Learning. States needing to better understand the availability and characteristics 

of early learning services provided in the State applied to this data use case. States 

could have applied for SLDS funds to link disparate early learning data to understand 

which children and families have access to early learning services and how these 

services impact later student outcomes. 

o College and Career. States that applied under this data use case would use grant funds 

to link K–12 data to postsecondary and workforce data, providing information from data 

linkages to students and parents in order to inform their postsecondary decisions and to 

V-70
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

administrators on the success of their graduates in college and careers to better align 

curriculum. 

o Evaluation and Research. Grants for the evaluation and research data-use case will

build the capacity of States and districts to use SLDS for research and program 

evaluation in order to generate timely and meaningful information for improving 

accountability, assessment, and school support systems. Grants will fund research 

partnerships and/or increase the use of quick-turnaround evaluations to produce 

information in shorter cycles.

o Instructional Support. This data use case will enable States to use data to create realtime instructional improvement systems that give educators the information they need on 

student learning in order to improve and personalize college- and career-aligned 

instruction and outcomes for students, particularly high needs students.

2017 Grant Competition: Approximately $34.7 million would support a new competition that 

would continue the data use focus of the 2015 grant competition by funding State-identified use 

cases. In 2015, the IES panel reviewed 43 applications for the grant round, 16 of which were 

awarded. Given the high demand and quality shown by States applying for the 2015 grant 

competition and the data implications of new activities pursued under ESSA, the Administration 

proposes running a new competition in 2017 to allow States not funded in 2015 to apply to 

priorities focusing on data use. Regardless of their status as grantees, all States will receive 

ongoing technical assistance on data collection, quality, and use. This technical assistance will 

also include general and targeted assistance on protecting student privacy and ensuring the 

security of State and local data systems, as described below.

Grants funded by the 2015 and 2017 competitions would continue to support data systems that 

help States meet reporting requirements (including data elements required for the Department’s 

EDFacts and the Consolidated State Performance Report); support decisionmaking at the State, 

district, school, and classroom levels; facilitate research needed to eliminate achievement gaps 

and improve student learning and educational productivity; and provide critical information on 

education to parents and the public. The improvements to data systems supported by 2015 and 

2017 grant awards will also ensure that data are available to answer key policy questions that 

will improve outcomes for all students, particularly those in high need.

National Activities

The SLDS program and its partners offer a wide and growing range of support to help State 

educational agencies design, develop, and use longitudinal data systems. Approximately 

$18.0 million would support ongoing and new activities to improve data quality, coordination, 

and use, including: 

• $3.0 million for the Education Data Technical Assistance Program (EDTAP) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/programs/slds/index.asp), which would continue to provide assistance to 

State educational agencies (SEAs) in the planning, development, expansion, and 

implementation of their longitudinal data systems. This activity provides a broad range of 

support, including a public domain clearinghouse that provides a platform for all States, 

V-71
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

regardless of grantee status, to share non-proprietary products developed for their 

longitudinal data systems; best practice briefs; “collaboration communities,” where staff from 

small groups of States work together to identify challenges, brainstorm solutions, and share 

best practices; webinars; listservs; and State-specific technical assistance. The array of 

technical assistance services provided by EDTAP has helped States improve the 

development and alignment of data systems to local needs. 

• $2.0 million for the Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC), which would continue to 

serve 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 the privacy, security, and confidentiality of student records. 

Protecting the privacy of individuals is a key support needed when building data systems 

and using student data to improve education. Additional information on the PTAC and 

resource materials is available on the Web site (http://www.ed.gov/ptac). 

• The InformED initiative is designed to transform how the wide range of information 

generated by ED programs and evidence-building activities is made available and utilized by 

internal users and the public. InformED would change how we use and access often 

disconnected data and resources that, when linked, have the potential to unlock answers to 

pressing education questions for parents, researchers, grantees, educators, and 

policymakers at all levels. A central part of the InformED initiative is ensuring that the data 

being reported to and collected by the Department are high quality. Approximately $13.0 

million of SLDS funds would support this InformED component, including:

o $8.0 million to support State Data Liaisons in 51 States and jurisdictions to support SEAs 

with the collection and reporting of high quality data. High quality data requires 

dedicated staff at the State level, but limited resources have led to the elimination of 

many State staff that could focus on high quality data collection and reporting. State 

data liaisons would enable States to improve the quality of data they currently collect 

and also assist States with meeting the new reporting requirements under ESSA. The

primary role of the State data liaisons will be to coordinate data collection and reporting 

between SEAs and the Department so that reported data are more accurate and 

reliable. 

o $5.0 million to fund a Support and Service Center that would serve as the central point of 

support for the State data liaisons. The Support and Service Center will provide ongoing 

support and training for State data liaisons, including conducting orientations for new 

coordinators, workshops and webinar trainings, and coordinating across State data 

collections for consistency, quality, and fidelity to reporting requirements. 

The Department requests that funding for fiscal year 2017 be available for 2 years, as it has 

been in prior years. The Department also requests new appropriation language to allow an 

increase in the amount of awards to support activities to improve data coordination, quality, and 

use at the local, State, and national levels.

V-72
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2015 footnote2016 Footnote2017 footnote

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ems development awar ds: New $25,902 0 $35,687

 ems development awar ds: Continuations 2,6371$28,289

2

27,2303

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Subtotal 28,539 28,289 62,917

Awards to improve data coordination, quality, and use 5,914 6,000 18,000

Peer review of new award applications 0 250 100

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Total 34,539 34,539 81,017

Number of Grant Awards

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2012 grant competition 3 0 0

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition 16 16 16

 ystems development awar ds: 2017 grant competition 0 0 25

Range of Awards (Entire Grant Period) Minimum Maximum

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2012 grant competition $3,034 $4,997

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition 3,483 7,000

 ystems development awar ds: 2017 grant competition 1,500 7,000

1

The fiscal year 2015 continuation awards supports grants awarded in fiscal year 2012. 2

The fiscal year 2016 continuation awards supports grants awarded in fiscal year 2015.

3

The fiscal year 2017 continuation awards supports 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. New grant competitions take into 

V-73
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

consideration areas where States are having difficulty making progress and establish 

competition priorities that help direct resources to areas where additional resources are 

necessary.

Measure: Number of States linking K–12 with early childhood data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 8

2013 12 19

2014 23 26

2015 27 32

2016 29

2017 31

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 

2015, 32 had met the criteria, exceeding the target.

Measure: Number of States linking K–12 with postsecondary data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 9

2013 21 25

2014 28 33

2015 34 39

2016 36

2017 37

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 2015, 39 States had met the target for this measure, exceeding the goal for the year.

Measure: Number of States linking K–12 and postsecondary data with workforce data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 5

2013 10 12

2014 14 20

2015 22 24

2016 25

2017 27

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 

V-74
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

unemployment insurance systems.) In 2012, the baseline year, 5 States were able to link their 

K–12 and postsecondary data with workforce data, and in 2015, 24 States were able to do so, 

exceeding the target.

Key barriers and challenges to meeting these measures include States’ and districts’ limited 

resources, State procurement practices, difficulties with cross-agency governance and data 

sharing, privacy issues, and concerns about the long-term sustainability of data systems without 

long-term Federal funding. Linkages to workforce data have presented challenges for States 

due to the lack of a common identifier, the need to comply with multiple privacy laws, and the 

challenges of multi-agency coordination. To help overcome these challenges, the Department 

of Education has increased coordination with the Department of Labor and their Workforce Data 

Quality Initiative (WDQI), which provides support to allow States to develop or improve their 

longitudinal workforce data systems and create linkages to education data.

Specific activities undertaken by the Department include providing ongoing technical assistance 

to both grantees and non-grantees as they develop their State data systems; coordinating 

monitoring and technical assistance to States with both SLDS and WDQI grants through crossprogram monitoring calls, joint site visits, technical assistance resource sharing, and conference 

presentations; and providing support for common education data standards to improve the utility 

of data for research and evaluation.

V-75
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 664)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2017 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2016 2017 Change

$10,818 $13,000 +$2,182

1

 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; the Administration proposes to continue funding this 

program in FY 2017 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Special Education Studies and Evaluation 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.

V-76
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2012....................................................................................$11,415

2013......................................................................................10,818

2014......................................................................................10,818

2015......................................................................................10,818

2016......................................................................................10,818

FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $13.0 million, a $2.2 million increase over the fiscal year 2016

level, to support studies, evaluations, and assessments related to the implementation of IDEA. 

The increase would allow the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to support a new study to 

enable data collection from State education agencies (SEAs), local districts, and schools, 

providing Congress, the Administration, and other stakeholders with updated information on the 

implementation of IDEA.

IES supports a range of evaluations that are designed to provide information about which 

programs and practices are effective and ineffective for improving outcomes for children and 

youth with disabilities and thereby provide concrete guidance for 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 request level, four studies, which are discussed in more detail below along with other 

ongoing studies, would receive funding from the 2017 appropriation. The studies and estimated 

2017 amounts are:

• Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices, $5.3 million;

• Study of Post High School Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities, $1.5 million;

• State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019, $3.7 million; and

• Middle Grades Longitudinal Study, $2.5 million.

Information on these studies, as well as recent and ongoing studies that will not receive funding 

from the 2017 appropriation, is provided below. Additional information is available at 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/disabilities.asp.

V-77
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

Recently Completed and Ongoing Studies

Study Cost Duration

Evaluation of the IDEA Personnel 

Development Program (completed)

$2,729,875 over 

6 years

September 2007 to 

September 2013

Study of School Accountability for Students 

with Disabilities 1 (completed)

$3,626,218 over 

7 years

February 2008 to 

February 2015

Evaluation of Response to Intervention 

Practices for Elementary School Reading 2

(completed)

$14,204,339 over 

7 years

March 2008 to 

December 2015

National Evaluation of the IDEA Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination Program 3

(ongoing)

$2,995,352 over 

7 years 

September 2009 to 

September 2016

Study of Early Intervention and Special 

Education Services and Personnel 4

(ongoing)

$1,149,233 over 6

years

September 2010 to 

September 2016

Study of Transition Outcomes for Youth with 

Disabilities, Phase I (completed)

$22,897,534 over 

5 years 

September 2010 to 

September 2015

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education 

Practices, Phase I 5 (ongoing)

$6,669,202 over 

50 months

November 2013 to 

January 2018

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered 

Systems of Support for Behavior 6 (ongoing)

$17,770,151 over 

5 years

November 2013 to 

November 2018

Post High School Outcomes for Youth with 

Disabilities (ongoing)

$7 million from the 

2014 through 2017

appropriations

Awarded in September 

2015

State and Local Implementation of 

IDEA 2019 (proposed) 7

$1,477,000 from 

2017 funds

To be determined.

1 The timeline has been revised. In the 2015 justification, the Administration reported the study would end in 

February 2014. 2 The timeline has been revised. In the 2015 justification, the Administration reported the study would end in 

March 2014. 3 The timeline has been revised. In the 2015 justification, the Administration reported the study would end in 

September 2014. 4 The funding and timeline have been revised. In the 2015 justification, the Administration reported $985,601 

over 3 years (September 2010 to September 2013). 5 The funding has been revised. In the 2016 justification, the Administration estimated that $9,506,843 would be 

used for the study. 6 The funding has been revised. In the 2016 justification, the Administration estimated that $18,894,244 would 

be used for the study. 7 The funding and timeline have been revised. In the 2016 justification, the Administration estimated that we 

would use $500,000 from 2015 and $2,500,000 from 2016 funds and award a study in the summer of 2015.

Evaluation of the IDEA Personnel Development Program: The Evaluation of the IDEA 

Personnel Development Program (PDP) was a descriptive study of the PDP national technical 

assistance centers and training grants. The study relied on a combination of extant data and 

new data collection from grantees and applicants between the fall of 2008 and the summer of 

V-78
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

2010. Panels of experts rated the quality and usefulness of products and services from 

12 national centers and the course-of-study components developed or significantly modified by 

training grant recipients. The final report, which was released in January 2014 and is available 

at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20144007/pdf/20144007.pdf, provides information on the types of 

products developed and services provided by the national centers and expert ratings of the 

usefulness of selected products and services. A majority of these products and services were 

rated as being of “high” or “very high” quality and usefulness. The study also provides detailed 

descriptive information on the training grants.

Study of School Accountability for Students with Disabilities: The Study of School Accountability 

for Students with Disabilities (SWD) used descriptive statistics to study patterns of school 

accountability across States and over time and to examine how school practices vary with 

respect to school accountability for the SWD subgroup. Data sources for the evaluation include 

extant data from the Department of Education's EDFacts database and 2011 surveys of 

principals and special education designees from elementary and middle schools in 12 states. 

An interim report was released in May 2012; an update with information through the 

2009−10 school year was released in October 2013; and a third report that provides the results 

of analysis of 2011 survey data on school practices in 12 States was released in February 2015 

and is available at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20154006/. The study found that, when surveyed 

in 2011, elementary schools accountable for the SWD subgroup were 15.8 percentage-points 

more likely than never-accountable elementary schools to report moving students with 

disabilities from self-contained settings to regular classrooms over the previous 5 years. Middle 

schools accountable for the SWD subgroup were 16.7 percentage-points more likely than 

never-accountable middle schools to report moving students with disabilities from self-contained 

settings to regular classrooms over the previous 5 years.

Evaluation of Response to Intervention (RtI) Practices for Elementary School Reading: This 

study relied on a combination of descriptive data collected from school staff and regression 

discontinuity methods to address three key research questions:

• What are the effects of providing intensive early interventions to children who have been 

identified as at risk for reading difficulties on Grade 1−3 reading achievement?

• How do RtI practices for early grade reading vary across schools? 

• How do schools experienced with RtI vary the intensity of reading instruction to children 

based on student benchmark reading performance? 

The report for the study was released in November 2015 and found that, for the 2011−12 school 

year, schools implementing three or more years of RtI approaches in reading provided more 

support to students reading below grade-level standards than those reading at or above gradelevel standards. For those students reading just below the grade-level standards (as measured 

by a school-determined eligibility cut point on a screening test) in Grade 1, RtI reading 

interventions did not improve reading outcomes, but actually produced negative impacts (e.g., 

lower scores compared to the initial screening test) for such students. For Grades 2 and 3, the 

estimated effects on reading outcomes were not statistically significant. Researchers stated 

that some plausible factors that may be related to negative impacts of assignment to 

V-79
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

intervention on some Grade 1 students include: (1) false or in-correct identification of students 

for intervention, (2) mismatch between reading intervention and the instructional needs of 

students near the cut point, and (3) poor alignment between reading intervention and core 

reading instruction. Overall, the study found that the estimated impacts of reading interventions 

on reading outcomes vary significantly across schools. It is also worth noting that this study 

focused on a very specific population in one subject area, and did not assess whether the RtI 

may be effective in improving student outcomes in other subjects areas and grade levels, or 

whether RtI elementary literacy interventions may be effective for students performing well 

below grade-level standards. The final report and key findings are available at 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20164000/. 

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. 

An interim report 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 of complementary and coordinated services. A final report is 

expected to be released in September 2016.

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 the 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? 

The study is scheduled to end in September 2016.

Study of Transition Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities: This study, which is also referred to as 

the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012), is the third in a series examining 

the characteristics and school experiences of a nationally representative sample of youth with 

disabilities. NLTS 2012 focuses on students ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011) but also 

V-80
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

includes a small sample of students without disabilities to enable direct comparisons of students 

with and without individualized education programs (IEPs). It is part of the congressionallymandated National Assessment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act 

of 2004. The study collected baseline data in the spring of 2012 through the summer of 2013 

on a nationwide sample of youth. The study is addressing 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? 

• 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? 

The first phase of NLTS 2012 draws exclusively on surveys of youth and parents and is coming 

to a close. Three reports have been drafted and will soon enter IES’ peer review process. IES 

anticipates that at least two of these reports will be published by summer 2016. A contract for 

the second phase of the project was awarded in summer 2015. This next phase will collect 

administrative records to examine the trajectory and outcomes of students with and without 

disabilities. 

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. The objectives of the first phase of the 

evaluation are threefold: (1) to 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) to identify feasible study design options for an impact study; and 

(3) to 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 it plans to award a contract for a 5-year impact evaluation in fiscal year 2017.

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 effectively address 

V-81
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

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 multi-tiered 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 a 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 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?

The randomized trial evaluation will be conducted in approximately 120 elementary schools 

located in a purposive sample of 12 geographically diverse school districts. The study will 

randomly assign schools to one of two promising MTSS-B strategies or to 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.

Post High School Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities: Helping students, particularly those with 

disabilities, to complete high school prepared to pursue postsecondary education or begin 

productive jobs is a national priority. IDEA places emphasis on transition services focused on 

improving the academic and functional achievement of students with disabilities in order to 

facilitate their transition from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education 

and employment. The study, which was awarded in September 2015, builds on an earlier 

survey of a nationally representative set of students with and without Individualized Education 

Plans (IEPs) and will address such question 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 coursetaking and completion rates changed over the past few decades?

V-82
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

• 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)?

This new study will utilize administrative records data to follow a sample of youth with disabilities 

beyond high school. The sample for this study will focus on the youth who participated in the 

baseline study of the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012). The NLTS 

2012 sample included a group of over 12,000 students ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011), 

including a small sample of students without disabilities.

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 plans to use 2017 funds to award a 

new 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. The contract would support the development of plans for a new data collection 

and descriptive analysis to inform research questions for an evaluation of the program.

National Center for Education Statistics Studies: Funds also will be used for National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES) studies. Specifically, NCES modified the Middle Grades 

Longitudinal Study to add an oversample of students with Individualized Education Programs 

(IEPs). The Middle Grades Longitudinal Study will be 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 will include a nationally 

representative sample of 6th graders in the 2016−2017 school year, and Special Education 

Studies and Evaluation funding will enable NCES to provide information about students in five 

or six disability categories. Collecting information on transition of students with disabilities has 

proven to be difficult and, thus, costly, yet the need for this information is crucial to 

understanding what interventions and strategies improve outcomes for students with disabilities 

and informing reauthorization of IDEA. This pilot work could lead to uncovering a valid and 

reliable method for collecting information on the transition of students with disabilities.

V-83
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2015 2016 2017

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices $400 $4,794 $5,329

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered Systems of 

Support for Behavior 9,878 1,946 0

Post High School Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities 500 1,500 1,500

State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019 0 0 3,659

NCES: Middle Grades Longitudinal Study 0 2,509 2,512

NCES: Early Childhood Longitudinal Study: Kindergarten 40 69 0

 Total, Special education studies and evaluations 10,818 10,818 13,000

V-84