Department of Education

INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request

CONTENTS

Page

Appropriations Language..............................................................................................................1

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

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers...................................................................................4

Summary of Changes ...................................................................................................................5

Authorizing Legislation..................................................................................................................7

Appropriations History...................................................................................................................8

Significant Items in FY 2022 Appropriations Reports .................................................................10

Summary of Request ..................................................................................................................14

Activities:

Education innovation and research ........................................................................................16

Teacher and school leader incentive grants...........................................................................24

American history and civics education ...................................................................................31

Supporting effective educator development ...........................................................................36

Charter schools grants ...........................................................................................................40

Magnet schools assistance ....................................................................................................49

Ready to learn programming ..................................................................................................54

Arts in education.....................................................................................................................59

Javits gifted and talented education .......................................................................................66

Statewide family engagement centers....................................................................................70

School leader recruitment and support...................................................................................74

Fostering diverse schools.......................................................................................................77

Account Summary Table.............................................................................................................81
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

1

Appropriations Language

For carrying out activities authorized by subparts 1, 3 and 4 of part B of title II, and parts 

C, D, and E and subparts 1 and 4 of part F of title IV of the ESEA, $1,472,000,000: Provided, 

That $280,500,000 shall be for subparts 1, 3 and 4 of part B of title II and shall be made 

available without regard to sections 2201, 2231(b) and 2241:1 Provided further, That 

$677,500,000 shall be for parts C, D, and E and subpart 4 of part F of title IV, and shall be made 

available without regard to sections 4311, 4409(a), and 4601 of the ESEA:

2 Provided further, 

That section 4303(d)(3)(A)(i) shall not apply to the funds available for part C of title IV:3 Provided 

further, That of the funds available for part C of title IV, the Secretary shall use not less than 

$330,000,000 to carry out sections 4303, 4305(a)(2), and 4305(b):

4 Provided further, That the 

funds for section 4305(b) shall remain available through March 31, 2024:

5 Provided further, That 

none of the funds available for part C of title IV may be used by the Secretary to make new 

awards that support any charter school, whether as a grantee or subgrantee or otherwise as a 

recipient of financing or other financial assistance, that is operated or managed by a for-profit 

education management organization or other similar for-profit entity, including through a 

contract with such an organization or entity, except that this proviso does not limit the ability of a 

charter school to contract with a for-profit entity for discrete purposes other than managing or 

operating the charter school, such as providing food services or payroll services:6 Provided 

further, That notwithstanding section 4601(b), $514,000,000 shall be available through 

December 31, 2023 for subpart 1 of part F of title IV.

7

NOTES

A full-year 2022 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, 

the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division A of P.L. 117-

43, as amended). The amounts included for 2022 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.

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

Provisions and Changes document, which follows the appropriations language.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

2

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1Provided, That $280,500,000 shall be for 

subparts 1, 3 and 4 of part B of title II and 

shall be made available without regard to 

sections 2201, 2231(b) and 2241:

This language provides funding for Teacher 

and School Leader Incentive Grants, 

American History and Civics Education, 

Supporting Effective Educator Development, 

and School Leader Recruitment and Support 

without regard to the sections of the ESEA 

that specify the distribution of funds 

appropriated under title II of the ESEA. 

2Provided further, That $677,500,000 shall 

be for parts C, D, and E and subpart 4 of part 

F of title IV, and shall be made available 

without regard to sections 4311, 4409(a), and 

4601 of the ESEA:

This language provides funds for Charter 

Schools Grants, Magnet Schools Assistance, 

Ready to Learn Programming, Arts in 

Education, Javits Gifted and Talented 

Education, and Statewide Family 

Engagement Centers without regard to the 

sections of the ESEA that specify the 

distribution of funds appropriated under title 

IV of the ESEA. 

3Provided further, That section 

4303(d)(3)(A)(i) shall not apply to the funds 

available for part C of title IV:

This language overrides the statutory 

provision under the Charter Schools Grants 

program that requires the Department to 

award at least 3 grants to State entities and 

to frontload funding for year 2 of those 

awards. 

4Provided further, That of the funds available 

for part C of title IV, the Secretary shall use 

not less than $330,000,000 to carry out 

sections 4303, 4305(a)(2), and 4305(b):

This language establishes, within the Charter 

Schools Grants appropriation, a minimum 

funding amount for State Entity, Developer, 

and Charter Management Organization 

grants combined. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes—continued 

Language Provision Explanation

5Provided further, That the funds for section 

4305(b) shall remain available through March 

31, 2024.

This language extends the period of 

availability 6 months beyond the end of the 

appropriation year for the funds for Charter 

Management Organization grants. 

6 Provided further, That none of the funds 

available for part C of title IV may be used by 

the Secretary to make new awards that 

support any charter school, whether as a 

grantee or subgrantee or otherwise as a 

recipient of financing or other financial 

assistance, that is operated or managed by a 

for-profit education management 

organization or other similar for-profit entity, 

including through a contract with such an 

organization or entity, except that this proviso 

does not limit the ability of a charter school to 

contract with a for-profit entity for discrete 

purposes other than managing or operating 

the charter school, such as providing food 

services or payroll services:

This language prohibits the Secretary from 

making new awards under Charter Schools 

Grants that support charter schools that are 

operated or managed by for-profit entities, 

including through contractual relationships. 

The language also clarifies that charter 

schools receiving program support may 

contract with for-profit entities for purposes 

other than operating or managing the school.

7 Provided further, That notwithstanding 

section 4601(b), $514,000,000 shall be 

available through December 31, 2023 for 

subpart 1 of part F of title IV.

This language provides a specific funding 

amount for Education Innovation and 

Research (EIR) overriding the authorized 

level. It also extends the period of Federal 

availability 3 months beyond the year of 

appropriation.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

4

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2021 2022 2023

Discretionary:

Discretionary Appropriation $1,114,250 $1,114,250 $1,572,000

Total, discretionary appropriation 1,114,250 1,114,250 1,572,000
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

5

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2022 $1,114,250

2023 1,572,000

Net change +457,750

Increases: 2022 base

Change

from base

Program:

Increase funding for Education Innovation and Research 

to support the creation, development, implementation, 

replication, and scaling up of evidence-based innovations 

to improve achievement and attainment for underserved 

students. $194,000 +$320,000

Increase funding for American History and Civics 

Education to improve the quality of teaching and learning 

in American history, civics, and government. 5,250 +5,250

Increase funding for Magnet Schools Assistance to 

support local educational agencies in the desegregation of 

schools by establishing and operating magnet schools that 

offer special curricula or instructional programs that 

appeal to students from diverse backgrounds. 109,000 +40,000

Increase funding for Statewide Family Engagement 

Centers to promote parent and family engagement in 

education and provide comprehensive training and 

technical assistance that support partnerships between 

families and schools. 12,500 +2,500

Provide funding for School Leader Recruitment and 

Support to improve the recruitment, preparation, 

placement, support, and retention of effective principals or 

other school leaders in high-need schools. 0 +40,000

Provide funding for the proposed Fostering Diverse 

Schools program to support the development and 

implementation of comprehensive plans by local 

educational agencies to increase school racial and 

socioeconomic diversity in preschool through grade 12. 0 +100,000

Subtotal, increases +507,750
G. INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

H. Summary of Changes—continued 

6

Decreases: 2021 base

Change

from base

Program:

Decrease funding for Teacher and School Leader 

Incentive Grants to help eligible entities develop, 

implement, improve, or expand human capital 

management systems or performance-based 

compensation systems in schools served by those entities. $200,000 -$50,000

Subtotal, decreases -50,000

Net change +457,750
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

77

7

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2022

Authorized footnote

2022

Estimatefootnote

2023

Authorizedfootnote

2023

Request

Education innovation and research (ESEA IV-F-1) 0 $194,000 To be determined1 $514,000

Teacher and school leader incentive grants 

(ESEA II-B-1) 0 200,000 To de determined1 150,000

American history and civics education (ESEA II-B-3) 0 5,250 To be determined1 10,500

Supporting effective educator development (SEED) 

(ESEA II-B-4, section 2242) 0 80,000 To be determined1 80,000

Charter schools grants (ESEA IV-C) 0 440,000 To be determined1 440,000

Magnet schools assistance (ESEA IV-D) 0 109,000 To be determined1 149,000

Ready to learn programming (ESEA IV-F-4, 

section 4643) 0 29,500 To be determined1 29,500

Arts in education (ESEA IV-F-4, section 4642) 0 30,500 To be determined1 30,500

Javits gifted and talented education (ESEA IV-F-4, 

section 4644) 0 13,500 To be determined1 13,500

Statewide family engagement centers (ESEA IV-E) 0 12,500 To be determined1 15,000

School leader recruitment and support (ESEA II-B-4, 

section 2243) 0 0 To be determined1 40,000

Fostering diverse schools (proposed legislation) 0 0 To be determined2 100,000

Total definite authorization 0 TBD

Total appropriation 1,114,250 1,572,000

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021. Reauthorization for fiscal year 2023 is expected through appropriations action. 2 Authorizing legislation is sought for fiscal year 2023.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

8

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget 

Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Footnote

Senate 

Allowance Footnote Appropriation

Foot

note

2014 Discretionary1 5,335,000 N/A 1,331,598 931,317

2015 Discretionary2 5,335,000 N/A 868,721 852,111

2015 Mandatory3 5,000,000 N/A 0 0

2016 Discretionary4 1,601,559 275,000 694,616 1,181,226

2016 Mandatory5 1,000,000 0 0 0

2017 Discretionary6 1,411,556 632,938 942,743 887,575

2017 Mandatory7 4,299,982 0 0 0

2018 Discretionary8 1,208,026 757,904 880,375 982,256

2019 Discretionary9 1,777,647 1,058,441 1,042,256 1,035,556

2020 Discretionary10 1,107,000 1,224,315 1,055,556 1,103,815

2021 Discretionary11 0 1,076,315 1,085,815 1,114,250

2022 Discretionary12 1,284,250 1,385,286 1,355,585 1,114,250

1 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. The level for the Senate 

allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only. 2 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. The level for the Senate 

allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only.

3 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. The level for the Senate 

allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only.

4 The levels for the 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. 5 The levels for the 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.

6 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2017 appropriation 

bill; the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017. 7 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2017 appropriation 

bill; the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017. 8 The level for the House allowance reflects floor action on the Omnibus appropriations bill; the Senate allowance 

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

Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141). 9 The levels for the House and Senate allowance reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2019 appropriations 

bill; the Appropriation reflects enactment of the Department of Defense and Labor, Health and Human Services, and 

Education Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 115-245). 10 The Senate allowance reflects the Chairman’s mark; the Appropriation reflects the Further Consolidated

Appropriation Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94). 11 The level for the House allowance reflects subcommittee action. The level for the Senate Allowance reflects the 

Chairman’s mark; the Appropriation reflects Division H of the FY 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-

260).

12 The House allowance reflects floor action on the FY 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act; the Senate Allowance 

reflects the Chairman’s mark; and the Appropriation reflects the annualized continuing resolution.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations History—continued

9

Year

Budget 

Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Footnote

Senate 

Allowance Footnote Appropriation

Foot

note

2022 Mandatory1 $1,800,000 0 0 0

2023 1,572,000

1 The House allowance reflects floor action on the FY 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act; the Senate Allowance 

reflects the Chairman’s mark; and the Appropriation reflects the annualized continuing resolution.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

10

Significant Items in FY 2022 Appropriations Reports

Education Innovation and Research (EIR)

House: The Committee requests a briefing within 90 days of enactment of this Act on 

plans for carrying out the social and emotional learning (SEL) competition. In 

addition, the Department shall provide notice to the Committees at least seven 

days before grantees are announced.

Response: The Department will provide a briefing on the competition and a notice of grant 

awards to the Committees as requested.

Senate: The Committee appreciates the Department is developing a technical assistance 

plan for disseminating findings and lessons learned to stakeholders. The 

Department should expeditiously and effectively implement this plan. The 

Committee requests an update in the fiscal year 2023 and future CJs on the 

Department’s goals, outcome measures and corrective measures for achieving 

the widest possible dissemination and use of this information in SEA and LEA 

decisionmaking.

Response: The Department continues to refine and implement its technical assistance and 

dissemination plan with support from the program’s contractor. By April 2022

(the end of the contract’s base year), the Department will have finalized a variety 

of products showcasing grantee success and expert perspectives from the field, 

including: four cross-projects summaries on issues such as college preparation 

in rural areas and micro-credentials in computer science; three project evaluation 

reports (in addition to the evaluation summaries and evidence reports available 

on the program website); three public webinars on topics including elevating the 

teaching profession and providing online professional development; and a white 

paper with extensive recommendations for designing and implementing social 

and emotional learning programs. In addition, the Department is expanding its 

dissemination strategy by, among other things, creating a new resources page 

on the program website (see https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionarygrants-support-services/innovation-early-learning/education-innovation-andresearch-eir/frequently-asked-questions-faqs-2/, which will be updated with new 

deliverables as available), developing partnerships for information sharing with 

other Department program offices, and engaging with social media with support 

from the Department’s Office of Communications and Outreach. Finally, the 

Department is taking steps to improve stakeholder awareness of the Education 

Innovation and Research program in advance of publishing notices inviting grant 

applications, including the first-ever “EIR 101” webinar, on March 24, providing 

an overview of program eligibility, grant tiers, and evidence requirements.

Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED)

House: Within SEED, the Department is directed to support professional development 

that helps educators incorporate SEL practices into teaching, and to support 

pathways into teaching that provide a strong foundation in child development and 

learning, including skills for implementing SEL strategies in the classroom. The 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Significant Items in FY 2022 Appropriations Reports—continued

11

Committee is supportive of the Department’s competitive preference priority for 

SEL in the fiscal year 2020 SEED competition and directs the Department to 

include a similar competitive preference priority in any new SEED competition in 

fiscal year 2022. The Committee requests a briefing within 90 days of enactment 

of this Act on plans for carrying out the SEL competitive preference priority in 

SEED. In addition, the Department shall provide notice to the Committees at 

least seven days before grantees are announced.

Senate: The Committee directs the Secretary to use a portion of funds made available for 

SEED for new awards supporting the preparation of principals and other school 

leaders.

Response: The Department intends to include in the fiscal year 2022 competition an 

absolute priority for projects supporting the preparation of principals and other 

school leaders and a competitive priority for projects that incorporate SEL 

strategies and will provide a briefing on the competition and a notice of grant 

awards to the Committees as requested.

Charter Schools Grants (CSP)

Senate: The Committee appreciates information included in the fiscal year 2022 CJ on 

activities taken or planned by State Entity grantees to strengthen charter school 

authorizing and oversight practices and looks forward to receiving the report on 

State Entity grantee use of funds expected in summer 2021. The Committee 

requests an update in the fiscal year 2023 CJ on actions the Department will take 

to ensure that charter schools receiving CSP grants are equipped to 

appropriately serve all students, including students with disabilities.

Response: The Department continues to monitor the extent to which State Entity grantees 

use funds to strengthen charter school authorizing and oversight practices and to 

ensure that charter schools receiving program funds are equipped to 

appropriately serve all students, including students with disabilities and English 

learners.1 In addition, the Department is taking steps to ensure that funded 

schools are intentionally designed to identify and address the needs of students 

and families in the community, including rulemaking that would, among other 

things, require funded schools to be informed by community impact analyses that 

promote the involvement of families of all students, including underserved 

students.

Senate: The Committee directs the Department to brief authorizing and appropriations 

committees of Congress on actions taken and planned for eliminating the risk to 

Federal funds of charter school contracting relationships with for profit entities not 

later than 30 days of enactment of this act.

1 The report on State Entity grantee use of funds for these purpose is available at: 

https://charterschoolcenter.ed.gov/publication/how-2017-2019-state-entity-grantees-are-using-technical-assistanceset-aside-funds.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Significant Items in FY 2022 Appropriations Reports—continued

12

Response: The Department is pursuing rulemaking that would, among other things, impose 

requirements on grantees and subgrantees to improve transparency and 

strengthen oversight of charter schools receiving program funds that are 

operated or managed by for-profit entities through a contract. In addition, the 

Administration’s fiscal year 2023 request includes appropriations language that 

would prohibit the new award of funding to charter schools with such contractual 

relationships. The Department is considering how best to respond to the directive 

for a briefing on this issue in light of these actions. 

Senate: The Committee directs the Secretary to describe in the fiscal year 2023 and 

future CJs the Department’s plan for ensuring sufficient staffing and oversight of 

CSP.

Response: The Department is considering options for responding to this directive.

Magnet Schools Assistance (MSAP)

House: To address the urgent issue of inter-district segregation, the Committee directs 

the Department to include a priority for applicants seeking to establish new interdistrict magnet schools.

Senate: The Committee strongly encourages the Department to include a priority for a 

portion of new grant funds in fiscal year 2022 for Magnet Schools Assistance 

applications that are connected to a nearby public housing redevelopment 

project, including developments funded through the HUD Choice Neighborhoods 

Initiative and the HUD Rental Assistance Demonstration. The notice inviting 

applications (NIA) shall prioritize MSAP applications that seek to provide an 

opportunity for children in the public housing redevelopment to attend a racially 

and economically integrated school in or near their neighborhood. The 

Department of Education is, to the extent feasible, directed to coordinate with 

HUD and the HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, and to issue any 2022 

MSAP NIA on or about the same date as the HUD Choice Neighborhoods notice 

of funding availability.

Response: The MSAP NIA, published on February 22, 2022, includes a competitive priority 

for applicants that seek to establish, expand, or strengthen inter-district and 

regional magnet programs. It also includes invitational priorities for projects that 

propose to implement whole-school magnet school programs and for projects 

that coordinate efforts with relevant governmental agencies, such as housing or 

transportation authorities or community organizations to promote student 

diversity and achievement in magnet schools, including coordination with public 

housing redevelopment efforts, such as those funded through the HUD Choice 

Neighborhoods Initiative or the HUD Rental Assistance Demonstration program. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Significant Items in FY 2022 Appropriations Reports—continued

13

Statewide Family Engagement Centers

Senate: The Committee requests the Department report in the fiscal year 2023 CJ on 

how it has and will monitor and support implementation of parent and family 

engagement activities of SEAs and LEAs, including through its broader network 

of elementary and secondary education technical assistance centers not limited 

to those authorized under Title II of the Educational Technical Assistance Act.

Response: The Department continues to support the activities of centers funded under this 

program and promote parent and community engagement more broadly in its 

technical assistance offerings. Among other things, program officers for the 

Department’s technical assistance centers meet regularly to coordinate activities 

and host quarterly calls with center staff on cross-cutting topics, including parent 

engagement. In addition, the Department will continue to highlight effective 

engagement practices on its website, including at https://www.ed.gov/family-andcommunity-engagement?src=rn. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

14

Summary of Request

Programs in the Innovation and Improvement account support the goal of improving student 

achievement in three key ways: providing incentives to test, evaluate, and expand innovative 

educational strategies and practices; increasing the supply of effective teachers and principals; 

and increasing racial and socioeconomic diversity in schools. The Administration requests a 

total of $1.6 billion for these programs, an increase of $457.8 million, or 41 percent, more than a

fiscal year 2022 annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation.

Promoting Innovation

The Administration requests funding to support efforts to drive State and local innovation. 

Specifically, the request includes:

• $514.0 million for Education Innovation and Research to continue the program’s 

demonstrated success in identifying and scaling models that improve recruitment and 

retention of staff in education, including models that would expand resources and support 

for educators, provide teacher access to leadership opportunities that increase teacher 

retention, and expand the impact of great teachers within and beyond their classrooms.

• $440.0 million for Charter Schools Grants to support the start-up, replication, and 

expansion of charter schools that can deliver promising and innovative solutions to meet 

student social, emotional, and academic needs, and to improve charter schools’ access to 

facilities. 

• $29.5 million for the Ready to Learn Programming program to support the development 

and distribution of educational video programming for preschool and elementary school 

children and their parents, caregivers, and teachers to facilitate student academic 

achievement.

• $15.0 million for Statewide Family Engagement Centers to promote parent and family 

engagement in education and provide comprehensive training and technical assistance to 

States, local educational agencies (LEAs), schools, and organizations that support 

partnerships between families and schools.

• $13.5 million for the Javits Gifted and Talented Education program to support a 

coordinated program of research, demonstration projects, innovative strategies, and other 

activities to build and enhance the capacity of elementary and secondary schools to identify 

gifted and talented students and meet their educational needs, particularly students 

traditionally underrepresented in gifted and talented education programs.

Supporting Educators

The Administration requests funding for programs that would provide competitive awards to help 

States and LEAs increase the effectiveness of teachers and principals.

• $150.0 million for Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants to develop, implement, 

improve, or expand human capital management systems, especially in high-need schools.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Summary of Request—continued

15

• $80.0 million for Supporting Effective Educator Development to provide competitive 

grants to provide educators with evidence-based professional development and to support 

pathways that allow educators with nontraditional preparation and certification to obtain 

employment in traditionally underserved LEAs.

• $40.0 million in first-time funding for the reauthorized School Leader Recruitment and 

Support program for grants to improve the recruitment, preparation, placement, support, 

and retention of effective principals and other school leaders in high-need schools. 

• $30.5 million for the Arts in Education program to support State and local efforts to improve 

arts education, including in high-poverty schools, through the development and 

implementation of high-quality, cohesive, and innovative strategies for arts instruction; 

development and dissemination of instructional materials and programming; and 

professional development for arts educators.

• $10.5 million for the American History and Civics Education program for competitive 

grants to institutions of higher education and other entities with demonstrated expertise to 

improve the quality of teaching and learning in American history, civics, and government.

Increasing Diversity in Schools

The Administration requests funding to promote racial and socioeconomic diversity in schools.

• $149.0 million for Magnet Schools Assistance to help LEAs establish and operate magnet 

schools that are part of an approved desegregation plan and designed to attract students 

from racially and socioeconomically diverse backgrounds.

• $100.0 million for the proposed Fostering Diverse Schools program, which would provide

competitive grants to LEAs to develop and implement comprehensive plans for improving 

school-level racial and socioeconomic integration in preschool through grade 12. Funds 

would support grants for planning and for implementation. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

16

Education innovation and research

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended, Title IV, Part F, Subpart 1)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change 

$194,000 $514,000 +$320,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Education Innovation and Research program supports the creation, development, 

implementation, replication, and scaling up of evidence-based, field-initiated innovations 

designed to improve student achievement and attainment for underserved students. The overall 

goal is to demonstrate innovative and proven approaches that address persistent education 

challenges while also building knowledge of what works in education. 

Education Innovation and Research incorporates a tiered-evidence framework that ties the size 

of the Federal investment to the evidence base for funded interventions. For example, the 

program may provide $3 million in start-up funding to test promising innovations that will 

undergo rigorous evaluation, while investing $15 million for large-scale replications of proven 

interventions to assess their effectiveness in multiple settings with diverse student populations. 

Types of awards include: (1) early-phase grants for the development, implementation, and 

feasibility testing of an intervention or innovation which prior research suggests has promise, in 

order to determine whether the intervention can improve student academic outcomes; 

(2) mid-phase grants for implementation and rigorous evaluation of interventions that have been 

successfully implemented under early-phase grants or have met similar criteria for documenting 

program effectiveness; and (3) expansion and replication of interventions or innovations that 

have been found to produce a sizable impact under a mid-phase grant or have met similar 

criteria for documenting program effectiveness. All grantees must carry out rigorous, 

independent evaluations of the effectiveness of their projects.

Eligible applicants include: (1) local educational agencies (LEAs); (2) State educational 

agencies (SEAs); (3) the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE); (4) consortia of LEAs or SEAs; 

(5) nonprofit organizations; or (6) SEAs, LEAs, or the BIE in partnership with a nonprofit 

organization, a business, an educational service agency, or an institution of higher education. 

Length of awards varies from 3 to 5 years. At least 25 percent of the funds appropriated for the 

program must be used for awards to serve rural areas, contingent on receipt of enough 

applications of sufficient quality. Grantees must provide matching contributions equal to 

10 percent of their grant award (in cash or in-kind) from Federal, State, local, or private sources; 

the Department may waive this requirement for individual grantees under certain circumstances.

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

17

The Department may reserve up to 5 percent of program funds to provide technical assistance 

and disseminate best practices.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) 

2018 $120,000

2019 130,000

2020 190,000

2021 194,000

2022 Estimate 194,000

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $514 million for Education Innovation and 

Research, $320 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 

2021 appropriation. The request would build on the Department’s success in using program 

funds to develop an evidence base for strategies and practices that are effective in improving 

educational outcomes for students. To date, innovative projects have been funded in a wide 

range of areas including social and emotional learning and science, technology, engineering, 

and mathematics (STEM) education.

The request would continue recent efforts under this program to combat the effects of the 

COVID-19 pandemic through the development and use of evidence-based practices to improve 

student achievement. In particular, the requested $320 million increase would be focused on 

identifying and scaling effective practices for improving educator recruitment and retention. 

While as of February 2022 there were 282,800 more people working in local public education 

than when the President took office, there are still 341,500 fewer people in these jobs than prepandemic (a 4.2 percent decline).1 Shortages of educators, including teachers, 

paraprofessionals and substitutes, have undermined learning for all students, particularly 

impacting students with disabilities, and increased the strain on teachers. While the shortages 

were exacerbated by the pandemic, schools also faced staffing shortages before the pandemic, 

when schools across the nation needed an estimated additional 100,000 certified teachers, 

resulting in key positions going unfilled. Shortages of certified teachers disproportionately 

impact schools with higher percentages of students of color, which have a higher proportion of 

teachers who are uncertified and in their first or second year, worsening educational disparities. 

Further investments are needed not only to stabilize the profession, but also to address these 

fundamental challenges to ensuring our students have access to qualified educators. While 

other investments in the President’s Budget address expanding the pipeline into education by 

strengthening teacher preparation, the request for this program focuses on improving the ability 

of schools to effectively recruit and retain educators, including by addressing the additional 

responsibilities, burdens, and challenges educators have faced throughout the pandemic. Of the 

$514 million requested, $320 million would support projects that identify and scale up models to 

1 See Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Situation Summary release on March 4, 2022 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

18

elevate and strengthen an education workforce hit hard by the in-school and out-of-school 

impacts of COVID-19. Key priorities would include improving supports for educators that 

enhance the ability of schools to recruit and retain staff (e.g., structuring staffing and time to 

ensure educators and students are appropriately supported) and increasing access to 

leadership opportunities that can lead to increased pay and improved retention for fully certified, 

experienced, and effective educators, while expanding the impact of great teachers within and 

beyond their classrooms.

Consistent with the authorizing statute, the Department would reserve up to $25.7 million in 

fiscal year 2023 for technical assistance, including technical assistance to help grantees 

develop and implement rigorous evaluations, and dissemination. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Amount for new awards $182,017 $119,408 $483,160

Number of new awards 30 12-20 48-80

Amount for continuation awards $1,214 $67,652 0

Number of continuation awards 1 41 0

Amount for supplemental awards $4,934 0 0

Number of supplemental awards 1 0 0

Peer review of new award applications $530 $1,287 $5,140

National activities $5,305 $5,653 $25,700

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

The measures reported in this section include data for grants under both the predecessor 

Investing in Innovation (i3) program and EIR. Thus, the measures for Expansion grants include 

data for i3 Scale-up grants that were still active in the reporting year; the measures for Midphase grants include data for i3 Validation grants; and the measures for Early-phase grants 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

19

include data for i3 Development grants. However, in the text below only the current terminology 

is used. 

Data for these measures for fiscal year 2021 are generally expected to be available in fall 2022.

Goal: To improve educational outcomes for students by developing, identifying, and 

scaling up effective practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on student 

achievement and other student outcomes.

Objective: To validate and scale effective solutions for persistent educational challenges across 

the country to serve a substantially larger numbers of students.

Measure: The percentage of Expansion grantees that reached their annual targets of 

students served.

Year Target Actual

2018 66% 100%

2019 66 90

2020 66 67

2021 66

2022 66

2023 66

Measure: The percentage of Expansion grantees that reached the targeted number of 

students specified in their applications by the end of the project.

Year Target Actual

2018 66% N/A

2019 66 N/A

2020 66 N/A

2021 66

2022 66

2023 66

Measure: The percentage of Mid-phase grantees that reached their annual targets of 

students served.

Year Target Actual

2018 66% 64%

2019 66 50

2020 66 47

2021 66

2022 66

2023 66
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

20

Measure: The percentage of Mid-phase grantees that reached the targeted number of 

students specified in their applications by the end of the project.

Year Target Actual

2018 65% 71%

2019 65 50

2020 65

2021 65

2022 65

2023 65

Additional information: The source of the data for these measures is annual grantee 

performance reports and final performance reports. One of the goals of Mid-phase and 

Expansion grants is to expand the implementation of each intervention for which there is 

evidence of effectiveness while continuing to evaluate it to ensure that it is implemented well 

and continues to be effective on a larger scale. Therefore, reaching the targeted number of 

students is an important measure of success for these projects. 

No Expansion grantees ended their grants in the reporting periods for 2018 through 2020, so 

there is no cumulative data on students served to report for Expansion grants. Four Mid-phase 

grantees ended their grants in the reporting period for 2020; however, final performance reports 

for these grantees are still under review, with cumulative data on students served expected to 

be available in spring 2022. 

A number of grantees reporting data for 2020 cited the COVID-19 pandemic as a factor in not 

meeting their targets for students served. The Department is examining other factors that may 

have contributed to the decline in performance with respect to these measures in recent years. 

In addition, the Department will continue to develop and refine strategies for providing timely 

and useful technical assistance to grantees in order to improve the quality, completeness, and 

consistency of the data, including the accurate setting of yearly targets for students served. 

Objective: To promote rigorous evaluation of projects that will generate significant new 

information about the effectiveness of diverse strategies, practices, and products that address 

persistent educational challenges.

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by an Expansion 

grant with ongoing, well-designed, and independent evaluations that will provide evidence of 

their effectiveness at improving student outcomes at scale and would meet the What Works 

Clearinghouse (WWC) Evidence Standards with or without reservations.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 100

2020 100 83

2021 100

2022 100
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

21

Year Target Actual

2023 100

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Mid-phase 

grant with ongoing, well-designed, and independent evaluations that will provide evidence of 

their effectiveness at improving student outcomes and would meet the WWC Evidence 

Standards with or without reservations.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 95

2020 100 74

2021 100

2022 100

2023 100

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by an Early-phase 

grant with ongoing evaluations that provide evidence of promise for improving student 

outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 93

2020 100 66

2021 100

2022 100

2023 100

Additional information: The source of the data for these measures is grantee evaluation 

plans. During the 2020 reporting period, one Expansion grantee was implementing an 

evaluation plan that is at risk of not meeting WWC standards because of the rigor of the 

evaluation plan as introduced. In addition, 7 Mid-phase grantee and 28 Early-phase grantees 

were implementing evaluation plans that are at risk of not meeting WWC standards because 

they might not produce reliable, credible evidence; the evaluation plans for the majority of these 

grantees were adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The Department will continue to provide technical assistance on appropriate evaluation design 

and implementation to the grantees to improve the likelihood that their evaluations meet WWC 

standards by the end of the projects.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

22

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by an Expansion 

grant with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-quality implementation data and 

performance feedback that allow for periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended 

outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 100

2020 100 100

2021 100

2022 100

2023 100

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Mid-phase grant 

with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-quality implementation data and performance 

feedback that allow for periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 100

2020 100 96

2021 100

2022 100

2023 100

Measure: The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by an Early-phase 

grant with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-quality implementation data and 

performance feedback that allow for periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended 

outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 100%

2019 100 100

2020 100 87

2021 100

2022 100

2023 100

Additional information: The source of the data is grantee evaluation plans. The Department 

will continue to develop and refine strategies for providing timely and useful technical assistance 

to grantees in order to improve the quality, completeness, and consistency of the data. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Education innovation and research

23

Efficiency measures

The Department established cost per student as the efficiency measure for the program. Data 

for this measure are based on total project costs minus evaluation costs divided by the number 

of students served by all grantees. Separating the evaluation costs is critical because of the 

significant evaluation costs for projects under this program. 

Measure: The annual cost per student served by grant type.

Year Cost per student, 

Expansion grants

Cost per student, 

Mid-phase grants

Cost per student, Earlyphase grants

2018 $222 $1,812 $776

2019 416 1,467 1,572

2020 1,408 785

Additional information: Data for this measure for 2020 for Expansion grants are expected to 

be available in spring 2022. 

Measure: The cumulative cost per student by grant type for programs, practices, or strategies 

that were proven to be effective at improving educational outcomes for students. 

Year Cost per student, 

Expansion grants

Cost per student, 

Mid-phase grants

Cost per student, Earlyphase grants

2018 N/A 618 3,446

2019 N/A 2,087 1,904

2020 N/A

Additional information: No Expansion grantees ended their grants in the reporting periods for 

2018 through 2020, so there is no cumulative data on cost per student to report for Expansion 

grants. Data for this measure for 2020 for Mid-phase and Early-phase grants are expected to 

be available in spring 2022.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

24

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, Title II, Part B, Subpart 1)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority: 

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change 

$200,000 $150,000 -$50,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants program makes competitive grants to help 

eligible entities develop, implement, improve, or expand human capital management systems or 

performance-based compensation systems in schools served by those entities.

Eligible entities include local educational agencies (LEAs); State educational agencies or other 

designated State agencies; the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE); and partnerships of LEAs, 

State agencies, and the BIE with nonprofit or for-profit entities. The grant period is 3 years, and 

the Department has discretion to provide up to an additional 2 years of funding if the grantee 

demonstrates success. In making grants, the Department is required to give priority to 

applicants that support teachers, principals, and other school leaders in high-need schools and 

to ensure an equitable geographic distribution of grants, including the distribution of grants 

between rural and urban areas. An LEA is permitted to receive (whether individually or as part 

of a consortium) a grant under this program only twice.

The statute defines high-need schools as public elementary or secondary schools located in an 

area in which at least 30 percent of students are from low-income backgrounds. Human capital 

management systems (HCMSs) are defined as systems that enable the LEA to make and 

implement human capital decisions (such as decisions related to hiring, professional 

development, dismissal, tenure, and promotion) and that include a performance-based 

compensation system. Performance-based compensation systems (PBCSs) are systems of 

compensation for teachers, principals, or other school leaders that differentiate levels of 

compensation based in part on measurable increases in student academic achievement. The 

systems also may include differentiated levels of compensation for positions in hard-to-staff 

schools and subject areas, as well as for recognition of skills and knowledge of teachers, 

principals, and other school leaders demonstrated through additional responsibilities and 

evidence of professional achievement.

Grantees may use funds for a wide variety of activities to develop, implement, improve, or 

expand an HCMS or PBCS, including:

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

25

• Conducting outreach to gain information on how to construct evaluation and support 

systems;

• Providing principals with the tools necessary to make school-level decisions, including 

staffing decisions, in order to build high-performing instructional leadership teams for highneed schools;

• Improving LEA processes for recruiting, selecting, placing, supporting, and retaining 

effective teachers, principals, and other school leaders in high-need schools;

• Developing or improving evaluation and support systems that are based in part on 

demonstrated improvement in student achievement;

• Instituting career advancement opportunities that reward effective teachers, principals, or 

other school leaders in high-need schools; and

• Implementing a differentiated salary structure for teachers who teach in high-needs schools 

or teach high-need subjects, raise student academic achievement, or take on additional 

leadership responsibilities, or for principals or other school leaders to serve in high-need 

schools and raise student academic achievement.

Grantees must provide matching contributions, in cash or in kind, from non-Federal sources 

equal to 50 percent of the amount of their grants. Grant funds must be used to supplement, not 

supplant, other Federal or State funds available to carry out activities.

The Department is required to submit an annual report to Congress that provides information on 

grant award amounts and grantee activities, as well as student academic achievement 

information for participating schools. In addition, the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) must 

evaluate the effectiveness of the program; the Department may reserve up to 1 percent of each 

year’s appropriation for this purpose as well as to provide technical assistance to grantees.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) 

2018 $200,000

2019 200,000

2020 200,000

2021 200,000

2022 Estimate 200,000

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $150 million for Teacher and School Leader 

Incentive Grants, $50 million less than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal 

year 2021 appropriation. The request would support a limited number of new awards as well as 

continuation and renewal awards for current grantees and technical assistance. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

26

New awards under this program beginning in fiscal year 2022 are likely to be focused on 

providing opportunities for educators to take on leadership roles in their schools and districts 

and be compensated for those additional responsibilities, and to promote greater diversity in the 

educator workforce. On July 9, 2021, the Department published two final priorities that may be 

used in competitions in fiscal year 2022 and later years. The first priority is designed to promote 

the continued development and growth of educators, including through leadership opportunities. 

The second is intended to improve educator diversity—including racial, cultural, and linguistic 

diversity—so that students may learn to high standards and be prepared to live and work in a 

diverse society. 

The Department also issued another final priority and definition for this program on July 9, 2021, 

to clarify the extent to which grant-funded activities are concentrated in high-need schools and 

to refine the definition of a high-need school. Specifically, the priority requires applicants to 

demonstrate that at least the majority of schools participating in a project are high-need schools, 

which are defined as schools enrolling 50 percent or more of students from low-income 

backgrounds, based on free- or reduced-price lunch data, comparable data from another 

source, or, for middle and high schools, poverty data from feeder schools.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

27

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Project Funding:

New awards funding $96,055 0 $30,200

Continuation awards funding 74,767 $187,858 88,000

Renewal awards 27,116 10,142 30,200

Peer review of new award applications 62 0 100

Evaluation 900 717 0

Technical assistance funding 1,100 1,283 1,500

Total funding 200,000 200,000 150,000

Grant Awards:

Number of new awards 23 0 5−8

Range of new awards $855−$8,497 − $500−$8,000

Number of continuation awards 14 35 22

Range of continuation awards $1,551−$10,142 $500−$10,735 $500−$8,500

Number of renewal awards 5 1 3−6

Range of renewal awards $3,116−$7,668 $10,000 $1,500−$10,000

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA 

program. The Department did not reserve funds for this purpose from this program in fiscal year 2021 but may do so 

in fiscal year 2022 or 2023. Any amount pooled under section 8601 would not exceed the 1 percent evaluation and 

technical assistance reservation authorized for the program.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Current performance measures for this program include the following:

• The percentage of educators in all schools who earned performance-based compensation.

• The percentage of educators in all high-need schools who earned performance-based 

compensation.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

28

• The gap between the retention rate of educators receiving performance-based 

compensation and the average retention rate of educators in each high-need school whose 

educators participate in the project.

• The number of school districts participating in a grant that use educator evaluation systems 

to inform recruitment, hiring, placement, retention, dismissal, professional development, 

tenure, and promotion.

• The number of high-need schools within districts participating in a TSL grant that use 

educator evaluation and support systems to inform recruitment, hiring, placement, retention, 

dismissal, professional development, tenure, and promotion.

• The percentage of performance-based compensation paid to educators with State, local, or 

other non-TSL Federal resources.

• The percentage of teachers and principals who receive the highest effectiveness rating.

• The percentage of teachers and principals in high-needs schools who receive the highest 

effectiveness rating.

Grantee reporting has been problematic. Department staff are reviewing grantee performance 

reports, but data are not yet available.

Other performance information 

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) conducted two recent studies that provide information 

on effective practices relevant to the TSL program:

The Impact Evaluation of Teacher and Leader Performance Evaluation Systems1 examined 

districts’ and educators’ experiences with performance evaluation systems and their impact on 

classroom practice and student achievement in eight districts. The study provided resources 

and support to implement three performance measures: a classroom practice measure that 

provided feedback sessions four times per year, a student growth measure of teacher 

contributions to student achievement (i.e., “value-added” scores), and a principal leadership 

measure with feedback sessions twice a year. No formal stakes were attached to the measures; 

instead, they were used to provide educators and their supervisors with information on 

performance. Both treatment and control schools continued to implement existing district 

performance evaluations and measures, with the treatment schools additionally implementing 

the study’s performance measures and feedback. The study, which cost $21.5 million over 

6 years, was completed in December 2017. The key findings were:

• Performance evaluations were implemented generally as planned. For instance, in both 

study years, teachers and principals received multiple rounds of ratings and feedback on 

their practices. 

1 See https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/tq_performance.asp.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

29

• On average, teachers received nearly the four intended feedback sessions per year. Most 

teachers had classroom observation overall scores in the top two performance levels, 

limiting the potential of the information to signal a need for teachers to improve. A majority of 

the teachers said the study’s feedback on classroom practice was more useful and specific 

than their district’s existing feedback.

• Principals’ scores tended to be lower than teachers’: many received scores indicating a 

need for improvement. Even so, nearly three-quarters of principals in the treatment group 

said the study’s feedback on their leadership was more objective and actionable than 

feedback received in the past. The goal of the principal feedback was to improve leadership 

skills, and the study measured two aspects of leadership: instructional leadership and 

teacher-principal trust. The intervention had a positive impact on teacher-principal trust in 

year 1 and on both instructional leadership and trust in year 2.

• While educator evaluation systems provided some information to identify educators who 

needed support, they provided limited information to indicate the areas of practice most 

needing improvement.

• The study’s performance evaluation system had a positive impact on teachers’ classroom 

practice on one of the two observation measures, and it also had a positive impact on both 

of the principal leadership measures. There was no impact on reading/English language arts 

achievement in either study year, but the mathematics impact in year 1 was the equivalent 

of about 4 weeks of learning. In year 2, the mathematics impact was similar, but not 

statistically significant.

In September 2018, IES began a new Impact Evaluation to Inform the Teacher and School

Leader Incentive Program1 that is designed to answer the following questions:

• What are the implementation experiences of the 2017 TSL grantees? What are their 

educator satisfaction, recruitment, and retention experiences with TSL, particularly among 

those grantees funding teacher leader roles?

• What is the effect on student achievement, educator satisfaction, recruitment, and retention 

of a teacher leader role strategy? Is the teacher leader strategy cost effective?

The evaluation will provide implementation information from all 2017 grantees, including 

information about strategies supported by grant funds. For those grantees supporting a teacher 

leader role, information will include teacher leader responsibilities and their teaching load, the 

stipend amount, how grantees select and train their teacher leader, the types of teachers 

targeted for support, and district and school contexts that facilitate or hinder the teacher leader 

role implementation. In addition, the evaluation will recruit approximately 100 schools to 

participate in an impact evaluation of funding teacher leaders to support their peers using 

activities similar to that funded within the TSL grantees.

1 See https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/tq_leader.asp.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Teacher and school leader incentive grants

30

Data collection will include a TSL grantee survey of all 14 TSL grantees receiving awards in 

2017 to gather information about their TSL program; teacher and principal surveys to collect 

program implementation information as well as educator satisfaction and teacher recruitment 

activities and outcomes; teacher leader activity forms to provide information about teacher 

leader roles and activities; teacher and principal school assignment records to look at mobility 

and retention; and student administrative records to look at student outcomes. The study has 

been delayed due to the pandemic, which required IES to recruit study schools over two school 

years instead of one to get a sufficiently large sample for a portion of the evaluation. The first 

report from the study now is expected in 2022, and the study is scheduled for completion in 

August 2024, one year later than originally planned.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

31

American history and civics education

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, Title II, Part B, Subpart 3)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$5,250 $10,500 +$5,250

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

American History and Civics Education is designed to improve the quality of teaching and 

learning in American history, civics, and government. Funds support Presidential Academies for 

teachers, Congressional Academies for students, and National Activities to promote innovative 

instruction and professional development for teachers and school leaders.

American History and Civics Academies

Presidential Academies for the Teaching of American History and Civics offer intensive 

workshops of at least 2 weeks to elementary and secondary school teachers to strengthen their 

knowledge and skills through instruction and interaction with primary scholars and accomplished 

teachers in these fields. Congressional Academies for Students of American History and Civics 

offer similar workshops to secondary school students to enrich their understanding of American 

history and civics.

The Department makes competitive awards for up to 5 years to institutions of higher education 

and nonprofit educational organizations, museums, libraries, and research centers with 

demonstrated expertise in historical methodology or the teaching of American history and civics. 

The Department may make no more than 12 grants in a fiscal year and must give priority for 

Presidential Academies grants to applicants that propose to use the resources of the National 

Parks and coordinate or align their projects with the National Park Service National Centennial 

Parks initiative. Grantees must provide matching funds from non-Federal sources in an amount 

equal to 100 percent of the grant amount.

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

American history and civics education

32

National Activities

National Activities grants promote evidence-based instructional methods and professional 

development programs in American history, civics and government, and geography, particularly 

those methods and programs that benefit students from low-income backgrounds and 

underserved students. Grants support the development, implementation, expansion, evaluation, 

and dissemination of methods and programs that show potential to improve teaching and 

learning and demonstrate innovation, scalability, accountability, and a focus on underserved 

students. Grant projects may include civic engagement activities and educational programs on 

the history and principles of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Department makes 

competitive grants to institutions of higher education and other nonprofit or for-profit 

organizations with demonstrated expertise for an initial period of up to 3 years, and may renew 

grants for an additional 2 years.

Funding levels for the program for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $3,515

2019 4,815

2020 4,815

2021 5,250

2022 5,250

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $10.5 million for the American History and 

Civics Education programs, $5.3 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on 

the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. The Department would use fiscal year 2023 funds to fund 

both continuation awards and new awards. 

According to the Annenberg Civics Knowledge Survey, in 2021, only 56 percent of American 

adults were able to name the three branches of government.1 It is not only Americans’ 

knowledge of how government works that is lacking; there is also a growing lack of confidence 

in our form of democratic government. In 2021, a Pew Research Center survey found that only 

about one in four Americans said they could trust the Federal government to do what is right just 

about always or most of the time.2 In fact, the United States ranked 19 of 41 countries in a 

Trust in Government survey conducted in 2019 and 2020 by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.3 History and civics education plays an important role in providing 

individuals with the knowledge and skills required to fully participate in civic life, from voting to 

civic engagement to volunteerism, and can thus help ensure an informed citizenry and rebuild 

trust in and respect for the institutions and activities central to a vibrant democracy. 

1 https://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/political-communication/civics-knowledge-survey/ 2 https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/05/17/public-trust-in-government-1958-2021/ 3 https://data.oecd.org/gga/trust-in-government.htm
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

American history and civics education

33

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

American History and Civics Academies 

grants

American History and Civics Academies grants Amount for new awards $1,6701 $958 $3,014

American History and Civics Academies grants Number of new awards 1 2 8

American History and Civics Academies grants Amount for continuation awards $316 $1,028 $958

American History and Civics Academies grants Number of continuation awards 1 2 2

National Activities grants

National Activities grants Amount for new awards $2,29824 $1,384 $3,211

American National Activities grants Number of new awards 2 3 8

National Activities grants Amount for continuation awards $913 $1,827 $3,212

American National Activities grants Number of continuation awards 2 4 5

Peer review of new award applications $53 $53 $105

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including American History and Civics Education, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. 

The Department did not reserve funds from the program for this purpose in fiscal year 2021, but may do so in fiscal 

years 2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

Goal: To improve the quality of teaching and learning in American history, civics and 

government, and geography in elementary and secondary schools.

Objective: Participants will demonstrate through pre- and post-assessments an increased 

understanding of American history and civics that can be directly linked to their participation in 

the Presidential or Congressional academy.

1 Includes frontloading of future years’ non-competing continuation awards.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

American history and civics education

34

Measure: The average percentage gain on a teacher assessment after participation in a 

Presidential Academy.

Year Target Actual

2018 10% 15%

2019 10 14

2020 10 12

2021 10 21

2022 10

2023 12

Measure: The average percentage gain on a student assessment after participation in a 

Congressional Academy.

Year Target Actual

2018 10% 15%

2019 10 11

2020 10 18

2021 10 16

2022 10

2023 12

Additional information: Data are from assessments created by the grantees’ evaluators 

drawing on questions from nationally validated U.S. History tests. The table excludes data from 

a 2017 grantee that were deemed not comparable to performance data from other grantees due 

to the assessment instruments used. The 2017 grantee, which did not use traditional testing 

instruments but rather conducted pre- and post-assessments of teacher lesson plans (in the 

case of the Presidential Academy) and student research papers (for the Congressional 

Academy) using a rubric developed by an external evaluator, reported average content 

knowledge gains of 28 percent for Presidential Academy teachers and 24 percent for 

Congressional Academy students in 2020. Data for 2021 will be available in spring 2022. 

Objective: Participants will demonstrate through pre- and post-assessments an increased 

understanding of American history, civics and government, and geography that can be directly 

linked to their participation in National Activities grant activities.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

American history and civics education

35

Measure: The average percentage gain on an assessment after participation in National 

Activities grant activities.

Year Target Actual

2018 10% 28%

2019 10 21

2020 10 12

2021 10 19

2022 10

2023 12

Additional information: Data are from assessments of participating teachers created by the 

grantees’ evaluators drawing on questions from nationally validated U.S. History tests. Data for 

2021 will be available in spring 2022.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

36

Supporting effective educator development

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title II, Part B, Subpart 4, Section 2242)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority: 

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$80,000 $80,000 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 

The Supporting Effective Educator Development program provides competitive grants to 

institutions of higher education (IHEs), national nonprofit entities, and the Bureau of Indian 

Education, or to partnerships of one or more IHEs or national nonprofit organizations with a forprofit entity, for the purposes of:

• Providing teachers, principals, or other school leaders with evidence-based professional 

enhancement activities, which may include activities that lead to an advanced credential or 

additional credential, such as a special education, bilingual education, or career and 

technical education credential.

• Providing professional development to improve instruction in dual enrollment programs or 

early college high school settings;

• Providing support to teachers, principals, or other school leaders from nontraditional 

preparation and certification routes or pathways, such as high-quality mentoring and 

induction programs, who serve in traditionally underserved local educational agencies 

(LEAs);

• Providing evidence-based professional development that addresses literacy, numeracy, 

academic support, or other needs of LEAs and the students they serve; or

• Making professional development and related learning opportunities freely available to 

LEAs, including through publicly accessible electronic means.

Grants may be awarded for up to 3 years; the Department has the discretion to renew awards 

for an additional 2-year period if grantees demonstrate success. The Department must give 

priority for grants to eligible entities that will implement evidence-based activities and ensure 

that grants are distributed among eligible entities that will serve geographically diverse areas to 

the extent practicable. The statute requires grantees to use non-Federal sources, in cash or in 

kind, to cover at least 25 percent of project costs each year. The Department may waive or 

modify this cost-sharing requirement in cases of demonstrated financial hardship.

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Supporting effective educator development

37

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) 

2018 $75,000

2019 75,000

2020 80,000

2021 80,000

2022 Estimate 80,000

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $80.0 million for Supporting Effective Educator 

Development, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation. At the request level, the Department would use approximately $60 million to 

continue grant awards initiated in fiscal year 2022 and $20 million for renewal awards 

(extending 3-year grants for an additional 2 years) for grantees in prior grant cohorts.

Supporting Effective Educator Development is an effective vehicle for supporting evidencebased efforts to prepare and develop a diverse and effective educator workforce. The 

Administration intends to focus new awards in fiscal year 2022 on evidence-based projects that 

promote educator diversity in classrooms; prepare teachers to create inclusive, supportive, 

equitable, unbiased, and identity-safe learning environments; and develop students’ social and 

emotional skills. The Department also is undergoing rulemaking in fiscal year 2022 to specify 

that national nonprofit entities must demonstrate a record of serving or benefitting teachers, 

principals, or other school leaders in 3 or more States.

Examples of funded grants from the fiscal year 2020 competition include:

• Vorhees College, an HBCU located in South Carolina, plans to help raise student 

achievement in rural and urban high-need schools throughout the State by increasing the 

number of STEM (including computer science) teachers, by both establishing pathways for 

current teachers in other content areas to move into these fields (e.g., by competency-based 

teaching endorsements and micro-credentials) and by attracting STEM and other mid-career 

professionals to the teaching profession through non-traditional licensure pathways.

• The University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa, which will help elementary educators incorporate 

social and emotional learning in instruction to students in grades K-3, including those who 

are struggling socially, emotionally, and academically. The project expects to develop a 

digitally delivered curriculum as well as to craft digital and in-person professional learning to 

train teachers and provide ongoing support as they implement the program.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Supporting effective educator development

38

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Project Funding:

New awards 0 $59,890 0

Continuation awards $62,944 7,861 $60,012

Supplemental awards 0 122 0

Renewal awards 17,043 11,952 19,998

Peer review of new award applications 13 175 0

Total 80,000 80,000 80,000

Grant Awards:

Number of new awards 0 15−20 0

Range of new awards − $1,000−$5,000 −

Number of continuation awards 13 12 15−20

Range of continuation awards $925−$5,764 $739−$5,771 $1,000−$5,000

Number of supplemental awards 0 1 0

Number of renewal awards 10 6 4−8

Range of renewal awards $424−$2,806 $1,050−$2,837 $1,000−$3,000

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Supporting Effective Educator Development, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA 

program. The Department did not pool evaluation funds from this program in fiscal year 2021 but may do so in fiscal 

year 2022 or 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

The Department established the following five performance measures for Supporting Effective 

Educator Development. Targets have not been set for these measures because obtaining 

baseline data from grantees has proved problematic.

• The percentage of teacher and principal participants who serve concentrations of 

underserved students;

• The percentage of teacher and principal participants who serve concentrations of 

underserved students and are highly effective; 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Supporting effective educator development

39

• The percentage of teacher and principal participants who serve concentrations of 

underserved students, are highly effective, and serve for at least 2 years;

• The cost per participant who was highly effective and who taught in high need schools for 

2 years; and

• The number of grantees with evaluations that meet the What Works Clearinghouse 

standards with reservations.

Data for the FY 2017 and 2018 cohorts funded after the reauthorization of ESEA are available 

for three of these measures; the most recent data was received in the fall of 2020. 

• Based on data from 22 of the 25 grantees who were expected to report, 92 percent of 

program participants (9,745 out of 10,644 participants) served concentrations of 

underserved students.

• Based on data from these 22 grantees, 3,875 of these participants, or 36 percent, served 

underserved students and were rated as highly effective.

• Based on data from 7 of the 25 grantees, 55 percent (766 out of 1,398 participants) served 

concentrations of high-need students, were highly effective, and served for at least two 

years. (Data for this measure are available later in the grant period, so fewer grantees 

reported on the measure.)

Data on the cost per participant will be available for the 2017 cohort in the spring of 2022; data 

for the 2018 and 2020 cohorts will be available in the spring of 2023 and the spring of 2025, 

respectively.

All 25 grantees from the 2017 and 2018 cohorts reported that they have evaluations that they 

believe will meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards with reservations; these 

grantees are conducting a total of 36 such evaluations. Determination of whether the 

evaluations do meet WWC standards will be made after the studies are completed.

During the last year, program staff have intensified efforts to improve the quality of performance 

information for this program. Activities have included development and dissemination of a 

revised guidance document that provides detailed information on what data are to be reported 

and how the data are to be analyzed, technical assistance webinars for project directors and 

their evaluators, and emphasizing to grantees the importance of submitting timely and accurate 

data.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

40

Charter schools grants

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, Title IV, Part C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change 

$440,000 $440,000 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Charter Schools Grants support the startup of new charter schools and the replication and 

expansion of high-quality charter schools serving students in prekindergarten through grade 12. 

Funds also support grants to improve charter schools’ access to facilities and information 

dissemination, grantee technical assistance, and evaluation activities.

Grants for the Opening of New Charter Schools and the Replication and Expansion of 

High-Quality Charter Schools

State Entity Grants

Section 4303 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) authorizes the 

Department to make competitive grants to State educational agencies (SEAs), State charter 

school boards, State governors, and statewide charter school support organizations. Recipients 

of State Entity grants must use not less than 90 percent of grant funds to make subgrants to 

charter school developers to enable them to open new charter schools or to replicate or expand 

high-quality charter schools; not less than 7 percent to provide technical assistance to subgrant 

applicants and to charter school authorizers and carry out other activities to improve authorizer 

quality, including developing capacity for, and conducting, fiscal oversight and auditing of 

charter schools; and not more than 3 percent for administrative costs. 

Developers—individuals and public and private nonprofit entities, which may include charter 

management organizations (CMOs)—may apply for subgrants. In an application for a subgrant, 

a developer must describe, among other things, the quality controls agreed to between it and its 

school’s authorizer, such as a contract or performance agreement; how its school’s 

performance in the State’s accountability system and impact on student academic achievement 

or growth will be one of the most important factors for renewal or revocation of the school’s 

charter; how its school’s authorizer will reserve the right to revoke or not renew its school’s 

charter based on financial, structural, or operational factors involving the management of the 

school; how it will ensure that its school meets the educational needs of its students, including 

children with disabilities and English learners; how it will solicit and consider input from parents 

and other community members and support the use of effective parent, family, and community 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is proposed through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

41

engagement strategies in the operation of its school. Subgrants are for a period of up to 

5 years, of which developers may use not more than 18 months for planning and program 

design, including hiring and compensating school leaders and instructional staff. Developers 

may also use funds for activities such as providing professional development, making necessary 

renovations to school buildings, acquiring equipment and supplies, engaging the community, 

and developing student transportation systems. 

In making awards, the Department must give priority to State entities that support charter 

schools for at-risk students and that ensure all charter school authorizers implement recognized 

school approval and monitoring standards and procedures. In addition, priority must be given to 

State entities in States that: (1) have charter school authorizers that are not local educational 

agencies (LEAs) or, if only LEAs are authorizers, have an appeals process for prospective 

charter schools that initially fail to gain approval from the LEA; (2) ensure equitable funding for 

charter and other public schools; (3) provide funding or other support for charter school facilities; 

and (4) use best practices from charter schools to support traditional school and LEA 

improvement.

Developer Grants

If no State entity in a State receives a grant, charter school developers in the State may apply 

directly to the Department for Developer grants, which are awarded under the same terms and 

conditions as for State Entity subgrants to start up new charter schools or replicate or expand 

high-quality charter schools.

CMO Grants

Under section 4305(b), the Department makes competitive grants to nonprofit CMOs to replicate 

and expand high-quality charter schools. Priority for these awards must be given to CMOs that: 

(1) plan to operate schools with racially and socioeconomically diverse student bodies; 

(2) demonstrate success in working with schools identified by the State for comprehensive 

support and improvement under Title I, Part A of the amended ESEA; (3) propose to replicate or 

expand schools serving high school students; or (4) propose to operate schools that focus on 

dropout recovery and academic reentry. As with Developer grants, CMO grants are awarded 

under the same terms and conditions as for State Entity subgrants, including requirements that 

the schools to be replicated or expanded have demonstrated success in increasing student 

achievement and (where applicable) graduation rates, for all students and for each student 

subgroup, and have no significant compliance issues in the areas of student safety or school 

financial or operational management.

Since fiscal year 2018, funds for CMO grants have been available for obligation by the 

Department for an 18-month period, or until March 31 of the fiscal year following the year in 

which they are appropriated.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

42

Facilities Grants

Section 4304 authorizes two programs through which the Department makes grants to improve 

charter schools’ access to high-quality facilities: Credit Enhancement for Charter School 

Facilities (Credit Enhancement) and State Facilities Incentive grants. 

Credit Enhancement Grants

The Department makes annual competitive Credit Enhancement grants to public and private 

nonprofit entities (such as finance authorities and community development financial institutions) 

that assist charter schools in acquiring, constructing, and renovating facilities by enhancing the 

availability of loan or bond financing. Grantees must deposit grant funds into a reserve account 

that is used to, among other things, guarantee and insure debt to finance charter school 

facilities and guarantee and insure leases of personal and real property. These credit 

enhancements are intended to reduce risk to lenders, thereby creating access to credit or 

lowering interest rates and borrowing costs for charter schools.

Grantees must invest reserve account funds in low-risk securities, and any earnings on such 

investments must be re-invested. Grantees continue to implement their projects until funds 

have been fully expended for grant purposes (such as to cover debt obligations of charter 

school borrowers in the event of default) or until financing facilitated by the grant has been 

retired.

State Facilities Incentive Grants

Authorized under section 4304(k) of the ESEA, the competitive State Facilities Incentive Grants

help States establish or enhance programs that provide dedicated State per-pupil funding for 

charter school facilities. The Department makes State Facilities Incentive awards for a period of 

up to 5 years, over which States pay an increasing share of program costs. States may partner 

with other organizations to provide up to 50 percent of the State share of costs. 

National Activities

Under section 4305(a)(3), the Department uses funds to provide technical assistance to State 

entities in awarding subgrants and to recipients of facilities grants; disseminate best practices 

regarding charter schools; and evaluate the impact of Charter Schools Grants, including on 

student achievement. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

43

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $400,000

2019 427,8591

2020 440,000

2021 440,000

2022 Estimate 440,000

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $440 million for Charter Schools Grants, level 

with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. Consistent 

with the program statute, the request would provide start-up and facility support for charter 

schools that can deliver promising and innovative solutions to meet student social, emotional, 

and academic needs.

The request would provide the Department greater flexibility to respond to demand across the 

program components, including by eliminating earmarked funding for CMO grants. Specifically, 

the request includes appropriations language providing that not less than 75 percent, or 

$330 million, is for State Entity, Developer, and CMO grants combined. The remaining $110 

million of the request could be used for any authorized program purpose, including for facilities 

grants and national activities. While overall demand for charter school funding has generally 

remained strong, demand for program component funds can fluctuate from year to year. The 

requested flexibility would enable the Department to allocate funds more efficiently in response

to varying demand for component program funding and avoid circumstances such as occurred 

in fiscal year 2019, when limited demand for funds that were available for State Entity and 

Developer grants (and that could not be used for other program purposes) resulted in the 

Department needing to reprogram funds to other programs in the Innovation and Improvement 

account to avoid a lapse.

In addition, the request includes appropriations language to ensure, consistent with statutory 

intent, that program funds are not provided to schools that are fully or substantially operated or 

managed by a for-profit education management organization or other similar for-profit entity, 

including through a contract with such an organization or entity. This language would not limit 

the ability of a charter school to contract with a for-profit entity for discrete purposes other than 

managing or operating the school, such as providing food services or payroll services.

The fiscal year 2023 request would continue and build on efforts to improve Charter Schools 

Grants that the Administration is initiating in fiscal year 2022, which may include rulemaking and 

other administrative actions to ensure program funds support schools that: are student-, 

educator-, and community-centered; have demonstrated family and community support, 

1 The program received an appropriation of $440 million in fiscal year 2019. The amount in the table reflects a 

reprogramming of $12,141 thousand from Charter Schools Grants to other programs in the Innovation and 

Improvement account, including $6,700 thousand to Magnet Schools Assistance and $5,440 thousand to Statewide

Family Engagement Centers.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

44

address locally identified needs, maintain racially and socioeconomically diverse student and 

staff populations, and do not contribute to racial segregation in schools, as reflected by 

community impact analyses; and are subject to strong accountability, transparency (including 

fiscal and operational transparency), and oversight. The Department is also considering how 

best to mitigate the risk of providing program funds to schools that ultimately do not receive 

approval to operate from their authorizer, and to promote collaborative activities between funded 

schools and traditional public schools and school districts that benefit underserved students and 

families.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

State Entity grants

State Entity grants:Amount for new awards 0 $73,271 $20,000–$40,000

State Entity grants: Number of new awards 0 5–10 2–4

State Entity grants:Amount for continuation awards $220,842 $141,856 $171,000

State Entity grants:Number of continuation awards 27 19 15–20

Developer grants

Developer grants:Amount for new awards 0 $4,000 $4,500

Developer grantsNumber of new awards 0 10–15 10–15

Developer grantsAmount for continuation awards $5,884 $5,673 $6,000

Developer grantsNumber of continuation awards 31 30 21–26

CMO grants

CMO grants:Amount for new awards 0 $68,083 $20,000–$35,000

CMO grantsNumber of new awards 0 15–20 5–10

CMO grantsAmount for continuation awards $140,000 $71,602 $108,000

CMO grants:Number of continuation awards 30 26 27–32

Peer review of new State Entity, 

Developer, and CMO award applications 0 $515 $500

Credit Enhancement grants

Credit Enhancement grants: Amount for new awards $42,000 $49,900 $49,900–$74,900

Credit Enhancement grantsNumber of new awards 4 5 5–7

Credit Enhancement grants: Amount for supplemental awards $13,229 0 0

Credit Enhancement grantsNumber of supplemental awards 1 0 0

State Facilities Incentive grants

State Facilities Incentive grants :Amount for new awards 0 7,735 $10,000–$20,000

State Facilities Incentive grantsNumber of new awards 0 1 1–2

State Facilities Incentive grants :Amount for continuation awards $4,735 $2,265 $10,000

State Facilities Incentive grantsNumber of continuation awards 1 1 2
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

45

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Peer review of new Credit Enhancement 

and State Facilities Incentive award 

applications $36 $100 $100

National activities $13,274 $15,000 $15,000

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Charter Schools Grants, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. The Department 

did not reserve funds for this purpose from Charter Schools Grants in fiscal year 2021 but may do so in fiscal years 

2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Goal: To support the creation of a large number of high-quality charter schools.

Objective: Encourage the development of a large number of high-quality charter schools that 

are free from State or local rules that inhibit flexible operation, are held accountable for enabling 

students to reach challenging State performance standards, and are open to all students.

Measure: The number of charter schools in operation around the Nation.

Year Target Actual

2018 8,950 7,196

2019 9,420 7,434

2020 9,890 7,555

2021 10,360

2022 10,830

2023 11,300

Additional information: Data on the total number of charter schools in operation, including 

those funded by Charter Schools Grants, are provided annually by SEAs and are verified by the 

Department. The Department is considering revising the targets for this measure due to slowerthan-anticipated growth in the number of schools in operation in recent years. Data for this 

measure for 2021 are expected to be available in late fall 2022.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

46

Measure: The percentage of fourth-grade charter school students who are achieving at or 

above the proficient level on State assessments in reading.

Year Target Actual

2018 89.2% 48.6%

2019 94.2 48.2

2020 99.2 N/A

2021 100.0

2022 100.0

2023 100.0

Measure: The percentage of fourth-grade charter school students who are achieving at or 

above the proficient level on State assessments in mathematics.

Year Target Actual

2018 86.4% 45.0%

2019 91.4 44.7

2020 96.4 N/A

2021 100.0

2022 100.0

2023 100.0

Measure: The percentage of eighth-grade charter school students who are achieving at or 

above the proficient level on State assessments in reading.

Year Target Actual

2018 91.6% 48.7%

2019 96.6 49.9

2020 100.0 N/A

2021 100.0

2022 100.0

2023 100.0

Measure: The percentage of eighth-grade charter school students who are achieving at or 

above the proficient level on State assessments in mathematics. 

Year Target Actual

2018 78.7% 40.2%

2019 83.7 40.8

2020 88.7 N/A

2021 93.7

2022 98.7

2023 100.0
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

47

Additional information: Analysis of the data has found notable variation in performance 

among funded schools. Data for these measures for 2020 are unavailable because the 

Department waived for all States the requirements in ESEA section 1112(b)(2) to administer 

State assessments in school year 2019-2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data for these 

measures for 2021 are expected to be available in late fall 2022.

Efficiency Measures

Measure: The ratio of funds leveraged by States for charter facilities to funds awarded by the 

Department under the State Charter School Facilities Incentive Grant Program.

Year 2014 Cohort Actual 2019 Cohort Actual

2018 6.12 : 1

2019 6.51 : 1

2020 2.25 : 1

2021 2.50 : 1

2022

2023

Additional information: The leveraging ratio is the total funds available (the Federal grant 

and the State match) compared to the Federal grant for a given year. The State match amount 

excludes State and local funds that would otherwise be used to provide charter school per-pupil 

facilities aid in absence of participation in the program.

The Department also tracks the amount of funds leveraged and the number of schools served 

under Credit Enhancement grants. In 2020, Credit Enhancement grants leveraged $431 million 

in facilities financing for 44 schools. Between program inception and 2020, Credit Enhancement 

funds have helped enable approximately $6.9 billion in financing for facilities of 881 charter 

schools, for an approximate ratio of 17 dollars leveraged to date for each dollar awarded under 

the program.

The Department also developed a measure to assess the cost efficiency, across States, of the 

Federal investment in supporting charter school start-ups. The measure is defined as the 

Federal cost per student of launching a successful school (defined as a school in operation for 

3 or more years). Data for 2018 show an average cost of $1,078, for 2019 an average cost of 

$1,060, and for 2020 an average cost of $1,056. Data for this measure, collected through 

grantee annual performance reports, assist the Department in understanding the different costs 

per student for different types of charter schools.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Charter schools grants

48

Other Performance Information

2019 Charter Schools Grants Data Analysis

In July 2019, the Department released an analysis of data on grantees and subgrantees under 

the State Entity, Developer, and CMO competitions.1 Using data from grantee annual 

performance reports, the Department’s Common Core of Data, and the Civil Rights Data 

Collection, the analysis found, among other things, that:

• Of the 7,014 charter schools in operation in the 2016-2017 school year, 3,138 (or 

45 percent) had received funding under the competitions between the 2006-2007 and 

2016-2017 school years;

• Of the 5,712 charter schools that opened between the 2006-2007 and 2016-2017 school 

years, 3,351 (or nearly 60 percent) had received funding; and

• Compared to traditional public schools, schools that received funding served higher 

percentages of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, Black students, and 

Hispanic students. 

1 See https://oese.ed.gov/files/2019/12/CSP-Data-Overview-WestEd-7.22.2019.pdf. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

49

Magnet schools assistance

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part D)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change 

$109,000 $149,000 +$40,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Magnet Schools Assistance program provides Federal resources to assist eligible local 

educational agencies (LEAs) in the desegregation of schools by supporting the elimination, 

reduction, and prevention of racial isolation in elementary and secondary schools with 

substantial proportions of students of color.2

Grantees establish and operate magnet schools that are part of court-ordered, agency-ordered, 

or federally approved voluntary desegregation plans. The ultimate goal is to eliminate, reduce, 

or prevent isolation of groups of students of color in elementary and secondary schools while 

strengthening students’ academic knowledge and increasing opportunities to develop collegeand career-ready skills. The program accomplishes this goal by supporting the creation and 

expansion of magnet schools that offer special curricula or instructional programs that appeal to 

students from diverse backgrounds.

Grantees are for a period of up to 5 years, and grantees may not receive more than $15 million 

over the course of their projects. Funds must be used for activities that will improve academic 

achievement and may be used for, among other things, planning and promotional activities; 

acquiring books, materials, and equipment; and paying the salaries of effective teachers and 

other instructional personnel. Grantees may spend up to 50 percent of project costs in the first 

year and 15 percent in the second and third years on planning activities. Additionally, the ESEA 

authorizes grantees to use funds to establish or strengthen inter-district or regional magnet 

programs and to transport students enrolled in magnet schools, provided the transportation 

costs do not consume a significant portion of the grant award and the transportation strategy is 

sustainable at the end of the grant period.

By statute, the Department gives priority to applicants that: (1) demonstrate the greatest need 

for assistance; (2) propose to carry out new, evidence-based magnet school programs, 

significantly revise existing programs using evidence-based methods and practices, or replicate 

an existing magnet school program with a demonstrated record of success of increasing student 

achievement and reducing racial isolation; (3) use methods other than academic examinations 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is proposed through appropriations 

action.

2 In this justification, we generally use “students of color” in place of the term “minority students” used in the program 

statute.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Magnet schools assistance

50

(such as a lottery) to admit students; and (4) increase racial integration by designing and 

implementing magnet school programs that increase socioeconomic diversity. Applicants that 

did not receive a grant the previous year receive priority for any funds appropriated above 

$75 million. 

The Department may use up to 1 percent of funds to provide technical assistance and 

disseminate best practices.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $105,000

2019 113,700 1

2020 107,000

2021 109,000

2022 Estimate 109,000

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $149 million for Magnet Schools Assistance, 

$40 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation. The request would support continuation awards as well as a cohort of new 

awards to create or expand high-quality magnet schools that can attract students from racially 

and socioeconomically diverse backgrounds.

In making new awards in fiscal year 2023, the Administration would continue and build on 

efforts to strengthen the Magnet Schools Assistance program that it is initiating in fiscal year 

2022. For example, in addition to the statutorily required priorities, the Department intends to 

give priority for projects that establish or expand inter-district or regional magnet school 

programs, which is an allowable use of funds under the program statute, and that seek to 

improve instruction by promoting diverse educator workforces. The Department may also 

continue to encourage whole-school magnet programs and coordination of project activities with 

those of local housing and transportation authorities, among other entities, and may pursue 

other administrative actions to ensure that funded schools are part of well-designed school 

desegregation plans. 

Consistent with President Biden’s Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, the Administration is committed to 

renewing and expanding efforts to reverse the well-documented, persistent negative educational 

effects of isolation of groups of students of color and concentrated poverty. Magnet Schools 

Assistance plays an important role in these efforts and would complement the proposed 

Fostering Diverse Schools program, which would provide grants to LEAs to develop and 

implement comprehensive plans to improve student outcomes by increasing school racial and 

socioeconomic diversity in preschool through grade 12.

1 Reflects a reprogramming of $6,700 thousand to Magnet Schools Assistance from Charter Schools Grants.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Magnet schools assistance

51

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Amount for new awards $54,877 $95,732 $34,505

Number of new awards 9 30–40 10–15

Amount for continuation awards $53,033 $11,775 $112,605

Number of continuation awards 33 14 39–49

National activities $1,090 $1,090 $1,490

Peer review of new award 

applications 0 $403 $400

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Magnet Schools Assistance, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. The 

Department did not reserve funds for this purpose from Magnet Schools Assistance in fiscal year 2021 but may do so 

in fiscal years 2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

The Department does not set aggregate performance targets for this program; rather, each 

grantee sets project-level performance targets. Data are from annual performance reports.

Goal: Students have access to high-quality education in desegregated magnet schools.

Objective: Federally funded magnet schools will eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group 

isolation in targeted elementary and secondary schools with substantial proportions of 

minority students.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Magnet schools assistance

52

Measure: Percentage of magnet schools receiving assistance reporting enrollment data 

demonstrating success in reducing, eliminating, or preventing minority-group isolation (MGI).

Year 2016 Cohort 2017 Cohort 2018 Cohort

2017 39.0%

2018 21.1 45.2%

2019 10.5 36.3 52.4%

2020 27.0 23.8

2021 25.4 23.8

Additional information: In 2021, 31 of 122 schools in the 2017 cohort fully met their annual 

MGI performance targets. Of the 91 schools that did not meet their annual MGI performance 

targets, one school partially met its targets. For the 2018 cohort, five of 21 schools met their 

annual MGI targets in 2021. No schools in this cohort had more than one racially isolated 

group, so none partially met their targets.

The Department continues to examine factors that may be associated with the decreases over 

time in the percentage of schools meeting MGI targets in the respective cohorts. In 2021, 80 

percent of 2017 cohort schools and 100 percent of 2018 cohort schools that did not meet MGI 

targets cited the COVID-19 pandemic as the primary factor.

Objective: Magnet school students meet their State's academic achievement standards.

The following measures apply to the fiscal year 2016 cohort, whose grants were for a period of 

up to 3 years.

Measure: Percentage of students in magnet schools receiving assistance who score at the 

proficient level or above on State assessments in reading/language arts.

Year 2016 Cohort

2018 39.3%

2019 41.2

Measure: Percentage of students in magnet schools receiving assistance who score at the 

proficient level or above on State assessments in mathematics.

Year 2016 Cohort

2018 35.9%

2019 38.8

Based on lessons learned in measuring grantee performance, the Department revised these 

measures beginning with the 2017 cohort to focus on the percentage increase of students 

scoring at or above the proficient level on State assessments as compared to the previous year.

Data for these measures for 2020 and 2021 are unavailable because the Department waived for 

all States the requirements in ESEA section 1112(b)(2) to administer State assessments in 

school year 2019-2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Magnet schools assistance

53

Measure: Percentage increase of students who scored proficient or above on State 

assessments in reading/language arts.

Year 2017 Cohort 2018 Cohort

2018 5.7%

2019 9.3 4.9%

2020 N/A N/A

2021 N/A N/A

Additional information: Grantees reported that 42 percent of students in 2017 cohort schools, 

and 48 percent in 2018 cohort schools, scored proficient or above on State assessments in 

reading/language arts in 2021.

Measure: Percentage increase of students who scored proficient or above on State 

assessments in mathematics.

Year 2017 Cohort 2018 Cohort

2018 9.4%

2019 9.6 11.5%

2020 N/A N/A

2021 N/A N/A

Additional information: Grantees reported that 30 percent of students in 2017 cohort schools, 

and 41 percent in 2018 cohort schools, scored proficient or above on State assessments in 

mathematics in 2021.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

54

Ready to learn programming

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part F, Subpart 4)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined 1

Budget Authority: 

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$29,500 $29,500 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Ready to Learn (RTL) Programming is designed to facilitate student academic achievement by 

supporting the development and distribution of educational video programming for preschool 

and elementary school children and their parents, caregivers, and teachers. At least 60 percent 

of the funding must be used to:

• Develop educational television programming for preschool and elementary school children 

and the accompanying support materials and services that can be used to promote the 

effective use of such programming;

• Develop television programming (and digital content, such as applications and online 

educational games, containing RTL-based children’s programming) that is specifically 

designed for nationwide distribution over public television stations’ digital broadcasting 

channels and the Internet, along with accompanying resources for parents and 

caregivers; and

• Support contracts with public telecommunications and related entities to ensure that 

programs are widely distributed.

Remaining funds may be used to develop and disseminate education and training materials, 

including interactive programs that are designed to promote school readiness through the 

effective use of educational video programs.

Funds are awarded competitively, and only public telecommunications entities are eligible to 

receive awards. Applicants must have the capacity to: develop and distribute high-quality 

educational and instructional television programming that is accessible to underserved 

preschool and elementary school children; contract with the producers of children’s television 

programming; negotiate these contracts in a manner that returns to the grantee an appropriate 

share of income from sales of program-related products; and target programming and materials 

to meet specific State and local needs, while providing educational outreach at the local level.

Grantees are required to consult with the Departments of Education and Health and Human 

Services on strategies for maximizing the use of quality educational programming for preschool 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Ready to learn programming

55

and elementary school children. Grantees must also coordinate activities with other Federal 

programs that have major training components related to early childhood development. 

The fiscal year 2020 competition included two invitational priorities: (1) projects that focus on 

literacy content in ways that go beyond vocabulary and basic reading skills to include functional 

literacy, use of language in contexts, and other areas reflective of current literacy frameworks 

and research; and (2) projects that focus on content that meets young children's developmental 

needs and exposes them to future career and workforce options. The Department awarded two 

5-year grants in 2020:

• Twin Cities Public Television is using RTL funds to produce Mashopolis, which will 

employ research-based strategies around executive functions to increase workforce 

and career readiness for children ages 5-8. Mashopolis will use the power of narrative 

storytelling, interactive media, intergenerational learning and equity to engage children 

in building the critical skills they need to join—and lead—the 21st century workforce.

• The Corporation for Public Broadcasting will create new transmedia experiences 

(including television and learning games) for children ages 2 to 8 that expose young 

learners to a range of career and workforce opportunities in ways that inspire them 

to explore the world of work, and introduce, model, and promote the development 

of key skills; innovate on new media platforms that hold promise for extending the 

reach and impact of quality learning content, and open up new avenues of 

accessibility; and build new engagement models and resources that empower 

adults and communities to support early learning, with an emphasis on 

intergenerational learning.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) 

2018 $27,741

2019 27,741

2020 29,000

2021 29,500

2022 Estimate 29,500

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $29.5 million for Ready to Learn Programming, 

level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 appropriation. With 

these funds, the Department expects to continue supporting awards made in fiscal year 2020. 

Children, including children in communities with high rates of poverty, may spend considerable 

time watching television and using digital media. Researchers in many fields have looked 

carefully at whether and how television viewing might contribute to the “literacy gap,” and, 

conversely, whether and how television and digital media can be used as a tool to promote 

literacy development. Recent research suggests that television and transmedia can have a 

positive impact on children’s literacy and learning, provided certain conditions are in place. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Ready to learn programming

56

Producers and developers must understand how children learn, and how programming content 

can facilitate such learning. Individual episodes should reflect what research tells us about 

effective educational programming. For example, programs that succeed in helping children 

learn tend to help children understand how to watch and make sense of what they see. Such 

programs also develop familiarity by using recurring characters and situations, repeat key tasks 

and information, link knowledge to what children already know, and are carefully paced to keep 

children cognitively engaged throughout each episode. 

Early childhood, preschool, and elementary school curricula typically emphasize foundational 

skills in math and reading. RTL content is specifically designed to reinforce young children’s 

literacy skills, emphasizing letter recognition, vocabulary, fluency, rhyming, and comprehension. 

Through targeted outreach and marketing campaigns, grantees actively reach out to parents 

and caregivers, particularly in rural and urban communities with high rates of poverty, to 

encourage the use of RTL programming to support the skills that children need to succeed in 

school.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Number of new awards 0 0 0

New award funding 0 0 0

Number of continuation awards 2 2 2

Continuation award funding $29,500 $29,300 $29,500

Evaluation (review of grant products) 0 $20 0

Peer review of new award applications 0 0 0

Total $29,500 $29,500 $29,500

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including the RTL program, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. While the Department 

did not reserve funds from RTL for this purpose in fiscal year 2021, it may do so in fiscal years 2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

program 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 for the program, as well as the resources and 

efforts invested by those served by this program.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Ready to learn programming

57

The Department uses the following performance measures to assess RTL’s effectiveness in 

improving what children learn, the quality of RTL-funded transmedia products, and the number 

of children RTL is reaching: 

(1) the percentage of summative experimental or quasi-experimental research studies that 

demonstrate positive and statistically significant gains in math or literacy skills when RTL 

transmedia properties, such as applications and online educational games, are compared 

to similar non-RTL-funded digital properties or to other more traditional educational 

materials; 

(2) the percentage of educational transmedia products, along with necessary supporting 

materials, that are deemed to be of high-quality in promoting learning of math or literacy by 

an independent panel of expert reviewers; and 

(3) the number of children who use RTL-produced educational media products, 

disaggregated by individual product, as determined by appropriate industry standard 

metrics or, when available, by tracking tools.

The two 2015 grantees planned a total of four experimental or quasi-experimental research 

studies, to be conducted beginning in year 4 of the grant, that will provide data on the first 

performance measure. However, both grantees experienced delays in production. The 

Department received the first two of the studies in 2020, but neither of them demonstrated 

positive and statistically significant gains that met What Works Clearinghouse standards with 

reservations. The Department received the final two studies in 2021. The results of the first 

study were not statistically significant. The second study is pending What Works Clearinghouse 

review. The 2020 grantees have not yet submitted experimental or quasi-experimental research 

studies for review.

For the second performance measure, the Department asks expert panel members to review a 

random sample of current RTL transmedia products and provide a quality rating using criteria 

developed by the Department. The panel members rate products on a 5-point scale. In order for 

any particular product to achieve a rating of “high quality,” a product has to secure an average 

score of 3.8 across the panel members. In 2017, the Department received two transmedia 

product suites from one grantee to review. One of the transmedia product suites reviewed was 

of high quality, with a score of 4.41, while the other received a score of 3.74, just under the 

cutoff for high quality. In 2018, the Department received one transmedia product suite from one 

grantee to review, which received a high-quality score of 4.02. In 2019, the Department received 

one transmedia suite from each grantee to review, which received high-quality scores of 4.52 

and 3.85, respectively. In 2020, the Department received one transmedia suite to review that 

received a high-quality score of 3.9. The Department will conduct a product review in years 

three and five for the 2020 grantees.

For the third performance measure, grantees reported on the number of children who used 

RTL-produced products, by type of product. In 2018, 22.0 million users accessed RTL-produced 

educational media products. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) reported 

22.0 million users, of which 14.0 million watched CPB television shows and 8.0 million used 

Web-based games. Twin Cities Public Television (TPT) did not report any users for 2018. In 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Ready to learn programming

58

2019, 19.0 million users accessed RTL-produced products, 19.0 million for CPB and 

1.2 thousand for TPT. In 2020, CPB reported 33.1 million users and TPT reported 9.5 million 

users for a total of 42.6 million RTL users. In 2021, 8.71 million users accessed RTL-produced 

educational media products developed by CPB. This includes TV viewers and media users for 

properties created as part of the 2015 grant that are also part of the 2020 grant.

Efficiency Measure

The Department uses a single efficiency measure for the RTL program: dollars leveraged from 

non-Federal sources over 5 years (the length of each grant award) per Federal dollar dedicated 

to core non-outreach program activities. In the second year of the 2015 grants, the two grantees 

leveraged $6.9 million of non-Federal support compared to $19.9 million in Federal dollars spent 

on production, or $0.35 of non-Federal dollars for every Federal dollar spent. In the third year of 

the 2015 grants, the two grantees leveraged $8.8 million of non-Federal support compared to 

$12.0 million in Federal dollars spent on production, or $0.73 of non-Federal dollars for every 

Federal dollar spent. In the fourth year of the 2015 grants, the two grantees leveraged 

$11.8 million of non-Federal support compared to $11.6 million in Federal dollars spent on 

production, or $1.02 of non-Federal dollars for every Federal dollar spent. In the fifth year of the 

2015 grants, the two grantees leveraged $17.9 million of non-Federal support compared to 

$16.7 million in Federal dollars spent on production, or $1.07 of non-Federal dollars for every 

Federal dollar spent. In 2021, the two grantees leveraged $2.3 million of non-Federal support 

compared to $1.6 million in Federal dollars spent on production, or $1.43 of non-Federal dollars 

for every Federal dollar spent. 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

59

Arts in education

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part F, Subpart 4)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined 1

Budget Authority:

Period of fund availability: 2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$30,500 $30,500 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Arts in Education program supports national demonstration and Federal leadership 

activities to promote arts education for students, including underserved students and students 

who are children with disabilities. The program includes the following allowable activities: 

(1) professional development for arts educators, teachers, and principals; (2) development and 

dissemination of accessible instructional materials and arts-based educational programming, 

including online resources, in multiple arts disciplines; and (3) national and community outreach 

activities that strengthen and expand partnerships among schools, local educational agencies 

(LEAs), communities, or centers for the arts, including national centers for the arts. 

The program supports a number of arts education activities through 4-year grants to LEAs in 

which 20 percent or more of the students are from low-income backgrounds; State educational 

agencies (SEAs); national nonprofit organizations; institutions of higher education; organizations 

with expertise in the arts; museums or cultural institutions; the Bureau of Indian Education; and 

partnerships of these entities. Prior to 2021, the Arts in Education program supported three 

separate grant competitions: Arts Development and Dissemination, Professional Development 

for Arts Educators, and Arts in Education National Program. The Department reviewed the 

implementation of the three programs offered and found a large overlap in the applicant and 

grantee pool, and in the services provided across the various programs. In addition, the three 

separate competitions required applicants to design narrower projects to fit each program's 

specific requirements and to submit separate applications to each of the three grant 

competitions. Beginning in 2021, in an effort to recognize and encourage different, creative, and 

innovative applications, the Department offers the Arts in Education program as one, single 

competition.

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

60

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) 

2018 $29,000

2019 29,000

2020 30,000

2021 30,500

2022 Estimate 30,500

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $30.5 million for the Arts in Education 

program, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation.

Instruction and involvement in the arts, including the visual arts, music, dance, theater, and the 

media arts, are widely recognized as vital to a well-rounded education and may contribute to 

improved student achievement and success. Federal and State education policies have 

recognized the value of the arts. At the Federal level, the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act (ESEA) includes the arts as one of the components of a well-rounded education. Similarly, 

at the State level, 45 States have arts instructional requirements for elementary school, 50 have 

arts education standards, and 42 have arts requirements for high school graduation. However, 

only 27 States have defined arts as a core academic subject. Results from the 2016 National 

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) arts assessment show that in 2016, 63 percent of 

8th-graders reported taking a music class in school and 42 percent reported taking a visual arts 

course in school, which is not significantly different than the results from the 2008 NAEP arts 

assessment. However, in both music and visual arts in 2016, there are significant score gaps 

between certain student groups. Female students scored higher on average than their male 

peers (15 point gap for music and 14 point gap for visual arts); students from higher income 

backgrounds (as measured by eligibility for the National School Lunch Program) scored higher 

on average than students from lower income backgrounds (26 point gap for music and 22 point 

gap for visual arts); and students in suburban schools scored higher on average than those in 

city schools (13 point gap for music and 8 point gap for visual arts).. 

The Administration’s request would support State and local efforts to improve and expand arts 

education, including arts programming for underserved students, through the development and 

implementation of high-quality, cohesive, and innovative strategies for art instruction.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

61

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Assistance for Arts Education

 emination:Total funds available $17,927 $29,959 $29,965

Amount for new awards $17,176 $8,463 0

Number of new awards 27 2 0

 emination:Amount for continuation awards 0 $20,666 $29,440

 emination:Number of continuation awards 0 27 40

Peer review of new award applications $206 $305 0

 emination: Interagency transfer to support the Arts 

Education Partnership $545 $525 $525

Arts Development and Dissemination

 emination:Total funds available $11,908 0 0

 emination:Amount for continuation awards $11,908 0 0

 emination:Number of continuation awards 23 0 0

Professional Development for Arts 

Educators (PDAE)

 ucators:Total funds available $133 0 0

 ucators:Amount for continuation awards $133 0 0

 ucators:Number of continuation awards 1 0 0

Evaluation $532 $541 $535 _________________________

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Arts in Education, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. While the Department 

did not reserve funds from the Arts in Education program for this purpose in fiscal year 2021, it may do so in fiscal 

years 2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

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

program 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 for the program, as well as the resources and 

efforts invested by those served by this program.

Performance Measures

Goal: To help ensure that all program participants meet challenging State academic 

content standards in the arts.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

62

Objective: Activities supported with Federal funds will improve the quality of standards-based 

arts education for all participants.

Measure: The percentage of teachers participating in the Professional Development for Arts 

Educators (PDAE) program who receive professional development that is sustained and 

intensive.

Year Target Actual

2018 65% 81%

2019 70 60

2020 65 62

2021 65 56

2022 70

2023 70

Additional Information: Sustained and intensive professional development for the PDAE 

program is defined as completion of 40 or more of the professional development hours offered 

by the PDAE-funded project during the reporting period; completion of 75 percent of the total 

number of professional development hours offered by the PDAE-funded project during the 

reporting period; and completion of these professional development hours over at least a 

6-month period during the reporting period.

The fiscal year 2018 cohort grantees reported on the progress made in the first year of their 

award, which focused on planning activities rather than provision of professional development, 

and that may explain the lower actual reported for the 2019 data.

For 2020, sixteen out of seventeen performance reports submitted by grantees had data for this 

measure. Some grantees had issues completing the professional development planned for the 

year due to COVID-19 pandemic-related issues causing schools to close and grantees to 

rethink how they were able to provide professional development to teachers. Given challenges 

in 2020, grantees were still able to exceed last year’s results and come close to meeting the 

target.

Measure: The percentage of PDAE projects in which teachers show a statistically significant 

increase in content knowledge in the arts.

Year Target Actual

2018 100% 90%

2019 100 74

2020 75 76

2021 75 78

2022 80

2023 80

Additional Information: Grantees administer a pre-test and a post-test of teacher content 

knowledge in the arts and include those data in their annual performance reports. The fiscal 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

63

year 2018 cohort grantees reported on the progress made in the first year of their award, which

focused on planning activities rather than provision of professional development, and that may 

explain the lower actual reported for the 2019 data.

For 2020, fourteen out of seventeen performance reports submitted by grantees had data for 

this measure. Some grantees had issues completing the professional development planned for 

the year due to issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic causing schools to close and 

grantees to rethink how they were able to provide professional development to teachers. Given 

challenges in 2020, grantees were still able to exceed last year’s results as well as the target.

Measure: The percentage of students participating in Arts Development and Dissemination 

programs who demonstrate proficiency in mathematics compared to those in control or 

comparison groups.

Year Treatment Control

2018 37% 32%

2019 40 39

2020 21 18

2021 21 10

2022 23

2023 25

Additional information: For 2020, only one of 21 grantees was able to provide data on this 

measure due to issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including waiver of State 

assessment requirements.

Measure: The percentage of students participating in Arts Development and Dissemination 

programs who demonstrate proficiency in reading compared to those in control or comparison 

groups.

Year Treatment Control

2018 39% 35%

2019 45 49

2020 17 15

2021 17 28

2022 20

2023 25
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

64

Additional information: For 2020, only one of 21 grantees was able to provide data on this 

measure due to issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including waiver of State 

assessment requirements.

Measure: The number of accessible, arts-based instructional materials that are developed.

Year Target Actual

2019 84 84

2020 100 371

2021 200 745

2022 250

2023 300

Additional Information: This measure was added to the Arts Development and Dissemination

program for the fiscal year 2018 cohort in response to statutory changes to the program 

authorization. Data for 2019 represents a baseline set by the fiscal year 2018 cohort.

The Department also developed the following four measures for the Arts in Education National 

Program (AENP). Targets for these measures are set annually by the AENP grantee.

Measure: The total number of students who participate in arts education sponsored by the 

grantee.

Year Target Actual

2018 1,911,000 2,151,664

2019 1,130,000 1,527,535

2020 1,240,000 1,596,693

2021 1,350,000 2,189,294

2022

2023

Measure: The total number of low-income students who participate in arts education 

sponsored by the grantee.

Year Target Actual

2018 693,500 693,065

2019 490,227 490,227

2020 468,012 549,839

2021 864,184 875,125

2022

2023
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Arts in education

65

Measure: The total number of children with disabilities who participate in arts education 

sponsored by the grantee.

Year Target Actual

2018 168,000 173,195

2019 135,000 135,074

2020 100,623 117,003

2021 185,800 260,292

2022

2023

Measure: The number of teachers participating in the grantee's program who receive 

professional development.

Year Target Actual

2018 57% 85%

2019 20,000 28,598

2020 25,000 32,621

2021 30,000 32,755

2022

2023

Additional Information: Prior to 2019, the grantee reported on the percent of teachers 

participating in the grantee’s program who receive professional development that is sustained 

and intensive.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

66

Javits gifted and talented education

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part F, Subpart 4, Section 4644)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change 

$13,500 $13,500 0

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Javits Gifted and Talented Education supports a coordinated program of research, 

demonstration projects, innovative strategies, and other activities to build and enhance the 

capacity of elementary and secondary schools to identify gifted and talented students and meet 

their special educational needs. The Department makes grant or contract awards, typically for 

5 years, to State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs), the Bureau 

of Indian Education of the Department of the Interior, institutions of higher education (IHEs), and 

other public and private agencies and organizations to carry out projects to fulfill this purpose, 

including an award to one or more IHEs or SEAs to establish a National Research Center for 

the Education of Gifted and Talented Children.

Award recipients may use funds to: conduct research on methods and techniques for identifying 

and teaching gifted and talented students and on applying gifted and talented educational 

methods to all students, particularly students from low-income backgrounds and students who 

are struggling; establish and operate gifted and talented education programs, which may include 

innovative methods and strategies for identifying and teaching underserved students in such 

programs; and provide technical assistance and disseminate information. Funds also may be 

used for professional development and support for educators in such programs.

By statute, the Department gives priority in making awards to projects that include evidencebased activities or that develop new information to improve the capacity of schools to operate 

gifted and talented education programs or to assist schools in identifying and serving 

underserved students. 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is expected through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Javits gifted and talented education

67

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $12,000

2019 12,000

2020 13,000

2021 13,500

2022 Estimate 13,500

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

For fiscal year 2023, the Administration requests $13.5 million for Javits Gifted and Talented 

Education, level with a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 2021 

appropriation. The request would support continuation awards designed to help schools identify 

and meet the needs of gifted and talented students. 

Consistent with the Administration’s commitment to promote equity in access to educational 

opportunities, in fiscal year 2022, the Department will continue to place special emphasis in 

making new awards on serving underserved students, including students of color, multilingual 

learners, and students with disabilities, for whom data from the Department’s Civil Rights Data 

Collection1 show persistent underrepresentation in gifted and talented education programs. For 

example, in the 2017–2018 school year, Black students made up 15.2 percent of public 

elementary and secondary students, whereas they only made up 8.2 percent of students 

enrolled in gifted and talented programs.2,3 Serving underserved students also is consistent with 

the statutory priority on projects that assist schools in the “identification of, and provision of 

services to, gifted and talented students (including economically disadvantaged individuals, 

individuals who are English learners, and children with disabilities) who may not be identified 

and served through traditional assessment methods.”

1 See https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/CRDC-College-and-Career-Readiness-Snapshot.pdf. 2 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_203.50.asp?current=yes; 3 https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/2017-2018/School-Programs/Gifted-and-Talented/Gifted-TalentedEnrollment.xlsx.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Javits gifted and talented education

68

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Amount for new awards $531 $6,603 0

Number of new awards 1 12 0

Amount for continuation awards $11,969 $5,762 $12,500

Number of continuation awards 27 15 26

National Research Center for the Education of 

Gifted and Talented Children and Youth

$1,000 $1,000 $1,000

Peer review of new award applications 0 $135 0

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including Javits Gifted and Talented Education, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. The 

Department did not reserve funds from the program for this purpose in fiscal year 2021, but may do so in fiscal years 

2022 and 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program.

The Department has established the following new measures to assess program performance. 

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, grantees had limited ability to carry out project activities in 

2020 and 2021. In addition, the Department waived for all States the requirements in ESEA 

section 1112(b)(2) to administer State assessments in school year 2019-2020. As a result, data 

responsive to the performance measures for 2020 and 2021 are generally unavailable. The 

Department will provide available data for these measures in future budget justifications.

Measure 1: The number of students newly identified as gifted and talented under the program.

Measure 2: The number of underserved students newly identified as gifted and talented under 

the program.

Measure 3: The percentage of students newly identified as gifted and talented under the 

program who were served under the program.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Javits gifted and talented education

69

Measure 4: The percentage of underserved students newly identified as gifted and talented 

under the program who were served under the program.

Measure 5: Of the students served under the program who were in tested grades, the 

percentage who made gains on State assessments in mathematics.

Measure 6: Of the students served under the program who were in tested grades, the 

percentage who made gains on State assessments in science.

Measure 7: Of the students served under the program who were in tested grades, the 

percentage who made gains on State assessments in reading.

Measure 8: The number of teachers and other educators who received services that enable 

them to better identify and improve instruction for gifted and talented students.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

70

Statewide family engagement centers

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part E)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority:

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

$12,500 $15,000 +$2,500

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Statewide Family Engagement Centers program provides grants to statewide 

organizations, or consortia of such organizations, to establish statewide centers that carry out 

programs that promote parent and family engagement in education or provide comprehensive 

training and technical assistance to State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational 

agencies (LEAs), schools, and organizations that support partnerships between families and 

schools. 

Grantees must use funds to: assist parents (including legal guardians) in effectively participating 

in their children’s education; partner with SEAs to develop and implement systemic family 

engagement initiatives; and develop and implement parental involvement policies. Grantees 

must use at least 65 percent of their funds to serve LEAs, schools, and community-based 

organizations that serve high concentrations of underserved students. In addition, grantees 

must use at least 30 percent of their funds to establish or expand technical assistance for 

evidence-based parent education programs. By statute, the Department gives priority to 

applicants that propose to use evidence-based strategies for improving family engagement in 

schools in general. 

The Department may not award less than $500,000 to an individual project. To help ensure that 

projects are supported in local communities and financially sustainable, grantees must secure 

matching funds from non-Federal sources after the first year of their projects. 

The Department may use up to 2 percent of program funds to provide technical assistance on 

the establishment, development, and coordination of statewide family engagement centers. 

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is proposed through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Statewide family engagement centers

71

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2018 $10,000

2019 15,4401

2020 10,000

2021 12,500

2022 Estimate 12,500

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $15 million for Statewide Family Engagement Centers for fiscal 

year 2023, $2.5 million more than a fiscal year 2022 annualized CR based on the fiscal year 

2021 appropriation. The request would support approximately 16 new or continuation awards 

(including continuation awards for approximately five new grants in fiscal year 2022) in total, or 

roughly the same number of awards that would be supported in fiscal year 2022 under an 

annualized CR.

Statewide Family Engagement Centers is designed to promote strong parent and community 

engagement and relationships, which is critical to efforts to improve our Nation’s schools and is 

a priority for the Administration. By communicating with and educating parents and fostering 

trusting relationships between families and schools, particularly schools with concentrations of 

underserved students, SFEC grants can help lay the groundwork for sustained school and 

family partnerships and school improvement efforts.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2021 2022 2023

Amount for new awards 0 $4,875 $9,550

Number of new awards 0 5 11

Amount for continuation awards $12,300 $7,259 $5,000

Number of continuation awards 12 12 5

Peer review 0 $116 $150

Technical assistance $200 $250 $300

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs,

including Statewide Family Engagement Centers, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. 

The Department did not reserve funds from Statewide Family Engagement Centers for this purpose in fiscal year 

2021 but may do so in fiscal years 2022 and 2023.

1 Reflects a reprogramming of $5,440 thousand to Statewide Family Engagement Centers from Charter Schools 

Grants.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Statewide family engagement centers

72

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Measure: The number of parents who are participating in program activities designed to provide 

them with the information necessary to understand their annual school report cards and other 

opportunities for engagement under section 1116 and other related ESEA provisions.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline year 49,746

2020 50,000 60,046

2021 60,000 95,439

2022 60,000

2023 60,000

Additional information: Grantees largely pivoted to online programming for parents beginning 

in 2020 and have therefore been able to reach more parents than anticipated. Grantees 

generally intend to continue offering online programming in future years and anticipate that 

performance against this measure will be sustained. 

Measure: The number of high-impact activities or services provided to build a statewide 

infrastructure for systemic family engagement that includes support for State and local 

educational agency level leadership and capacity-building.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline year 311

2020 350 816

2021 500 1,249

2022 500

2023 500

Additional information: In 2020, grantees saw increased focus at the State and local levels on 

improving family engagement capacity. As States and districts improve supports for leaders 

and build capacity at the staff level, the Department expects that performance for this measure 

will begin to level out. The grantees have worked with a technical assistance contractor to 

define “high-impact” as consistently as possible across all projects. 

Measure: The number of high-impact activities or services implemented to ensure that parents 

are trained and can effectively engage in activities that will improve student academic 

achievement, to include an understanding of how they can support learning in the classroom 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Statewide family engagement centers

73

with activities at home or outside the school generally, as well as how they can participate in 

State and local decision-making processes.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline year 99

2020 100 935

2021 800 1,526

2022 800

2023 850

Additional information: Grantees largely pivoted to online programming for parents beginning 

in 2020 and have therefore been able to reach more parents than anticipated. Grantees 

generally intend to continue offering online programming in future years and anticipate that 

performance against this measure will be sustained

Measure: The percentage of parents and families receiving services who report having 

enhanced capacity to work with schools and service providers effectively in meeting the 

academic and developmental needs of their children.

Year Target Actual

2019 Baseline year 91.9%

2020 80% 87.3

2021 80 88.7

2022 80

2023 80

Additional information: The percentage of parents and families who reported enhanced 

capacity ranged from 62 to 100 percent in 20.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

74

School leader recruitment and support

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Title II, Part B, Subpart 4, Section 2243)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined1

Budget Authority: 

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

0 $40,000 +$40,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 

The School Leader Recruitment and Support program (previously authorized as the School 

Leadership program) provides competitive grants to improve the recruitment, preparation, 

placement, support, and retention of effective principals or other school leaders in high-need 

schools. Allowable activities include:

• developing or implementing leadership training programs designed to prepare and support 

principals or other school leaders in high-need schools, including through new or alternative 

pathways or school leader residency programs;

• developing or implementing programs or activities for recruiting, selecting, and developing 

aspiring or current principals or other school leaders to serve in high-need schools;

• developing or implementing programs for recruiting, developing, and placing school leaders 

to improve schools implementing comprehensive support and improvement activities and 

targeted support and improvement activities under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act (ESEA);

• providing continuous professional development for principals or other school leaders in highneed schools;

• developing and disseminating information on best practices and strategies for effective 

school leadership in high-need schools; and

• supporting other evidence-based programs or activities focused on principals or other 

school leaders in high-need schools.

Eligible entities include local educational agencies (LEAs) or consortia of LEAs that serve at 

least one high-need school, State educational agencies (SEAs) or consortia of SEAs, an SEA in 

partnership with one or more LEAs that serve a high-need school, the Bureau of Indian 

Education, or one of those entities in partnership with one or more nonprofit organizations or 

institutions of higher education. The statutory definition of “high-need” schools references the 

1 The GEPA extension expires September 30, 2021; reauthorization for FY 2023 is proposed through appropriations 

action.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

School leader recruitment and support

75

percentage of students from families with incomes below the poverty line, with a minimum 

threshold of 50 percent for elementary schools and 40 percent for secondary schools. 

Implementing this requirement may require rulemaking as census poverty data are not available 

at the school level.

Grants may be awarded for up to 5 years; the Department has the discretion to renew awards 

for an additional 2-year period if grantees demonstrate success. To the extent practicable, the 

Department must ensure that grants are distributed among eligible entities that will serve 

geographically diverse areas. The statute requires grantees to use non-Federal sources, in cash 

or in kind, to cover at least 25 percent of project costs each year. The Department may waive or 

modify this cost-sharing requirement in cases of demonstrated financial hardship. 

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $40 million for fiscal year 2023 for the first competition under the 

reauthorized School Leader Recruitment and Support program. Funds would support grants for 

high-quality professional development for principals, other school leaders, and aspiring 

principals and school leaders.

School leaders are second only to classroom teachers among school factors that affect student 

learning.1 They play a critically important role in students’ academic success, especially in 

underserved schools, by creating cultures of high expectations for all students and positive 

working conditions for teachers and other staff, as well as by recruiting and retaining highly 

effective teachers.

Projects would help ensure that the nation’s most underserved schools have resources to 

improve school leadership. Funded projects would help develop high-quality principal and 

school leader recruitment and preparation programs and help ensure that current principals and 

school leadership teams strengthen essential school leadership skills such as creating a safe, 

positive, and inclusive school climate, developing school leadership teams and professional 

learning communities, providing feedback to teachers to support their practice, and analyzing 

and responding to student data. In addition, the program would fund projects that support 

teachers serving in leadership roles.

1 Grissom, Jason A., Egalite, Anna J., and Lindsay, Constance A. “How Principals Affect Students and Schools: A 

Systematic Synthesis of Two Decades of Research”, February 2021. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/pages/how-principals-affect-students-and-schools-a-systematic-synthesis-of-two-decades-of-research.aspx
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

School leader recruitment and support

76

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2023

Project Funding:

New grant awards $39,600

Peer review of new award applications 400

Total 40,000

Grant Awards:

Number of new awards 20−40 

Range of new awards $500−2,500

NOTE: The Department is authorized to reserve up to 0.5 percent of funds appropriated for most ESEA programs, 

including School Leader Recruitment and Support, and to pool such funds for use in evaluating any ESEA program. 

The Department may reserve School Leader Recruitment and Support funds for this purpose in fiscal year 2023.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

The Department would develop performance measures for the program and publish them in the 

notice inviting applications. Measures could focus on the number of participants who meet 

certification requirements to become a principal or assistant principal, the number of such 

participants who obtain positions in high-need schools, and the cost per participant who 

becomes certified and obtains employment in a high-need school.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

77

Fostering diverse schools 

(Proposed legislation)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2023 Authorization: To be determined.

Budget Authority: 

2022 Estimate 2023 Request Change

0 $100,000 +$100,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Fostering Diverse Schools program would help address the well-documented, persistent 

negative effects of racial isolation and concentrated poverty by supporting voluntary efforts to 

increase school racial and socioeconomic diversity in preschool through grade 12. The program 

would make competitive awards to local educational agencies (LEAs)—alone, in consortia, or in 

partnership with State educational agencies—that have significant opportunity and achievement 

gaps and racial or socioeconomic segregation within or across districts. Educational service 

agencies or other regional educational authorities serving such LEAs may also apply for grants. 

Fostering Diverse Schools grants would require applicants to demonstrate strong student, 

family, educator, and community involvement in their plans and would provide resources for 

communities to implement locally tailored school integration and improvement strategies. 

Applicants would have flexibility to develop and implement school diversity plans that reflect 

their individual needs and circumstances, and the program would promote the use of evidencebased strategies. 

Program funds would support two types of grants: (1) planning grants for activities, for up to 

18 months, that culminate in a strategic plan for increasing school racial and socioeconomic 

diversity and creating inclusive learning environments within schools and classrooms; and (2), 

for applicants with well-designed plans that were developed as a result of strong family, 

community, and educator engagement, implementation grants for a period of up to 5 years to 

carry out activities in those plans. The Department would give special consideration in making 

awards to applicants that partner with or leverage resources of other agencies (for example, 

local housing authorities), and grantees would be encouraged to partner with other entities, 

such as community-based organizations, social service agencies, institutions of higher 

education, and early learning providers to support implementation. Priority would also be given 

to projects that are inter-district or regional in approach, as well as to applicants for 

implementation grants that successfully complete planning grant projects.

Applicants for either type of grant could pursue a variety of school enrollment policies to 

promote school racial and socioeconomic diversity. For example, applicants could allow 

students to enroll in public schools within or across districts through public school choice 

programs that promote racial and socioeconomic diversity in schools or other student-
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Fostering diverse schools

78

assignment policies that consider the socioeconomic status or neighborhood of residence of 

students.

Planning Grants

Planning grants would support a rigorous process that includes research and analysis, 

extensive community engagement, and the development of an implementation plan. Required 

activities for planning grantees would include: (1) completing a comprehensive assessment of 

the geographic area to be served, including using established survey or data collection methods 

to identify areas of concentrated poverty, racial and socioeconomic stratification, student 

educational opportunities and outcomes, and related barriers to socioeconomic and racial 

diversity at the classroom, school, and district levels; (2) developing and implementing a robust 

student, family, teacher, and community engagement plan, including, where feasible, public 

hearings or other open forums to inform the development of a formal strategy to improve racial 

and socioeconomic diversity; and (3) producing a strategic plan that includes specific 

performance metrics, activities, timelines, and cost estimates for improving diversity and student 

outcomes in covered schools. To these ends, planning grantees could use funds for activities 

such as:

• Assessing the impact on school diversity of current school and district boundaries and 

feeder patterns, and identifying enrollment strategies that promote diversity while taking 

into account geographic proximity;

• Analyzing the location and capacity of existing school facilities and the adequacy of local 

or regional transportation infrastructure to support more diverse student bodies;

• Developing new school construction or siting proposals that promote racial and 

socioeconomic diversity;

• Prototyping activities designed to improve diversity and student educational 

opportunities and outcomes in covered schools; 

• Identifying or developing strategies to evaluate and address segregation within schools 

with diverse student populations, including disparate participation in academic programs 

and other school activities that result in social segregation within schools and disparate 

access to educational opportunities;

• Ensuring that an implementation plan complies with any court- or agency-ordered school 

desegregation plan; and

• Coordinating with other relevant government entities, including housing authorities. 

Implementation Grants

To be eligible to receive an award, an applicant for an implementation grant must submit a 

high-quality plan that includes: (1) a comprehensive set of activities that is based on the 

assessment required of planning grantees and designed to improve academic outcomes for all 

students, particularly students of color and students from low-income backgrounds, and 

increase racial and socioeconomic integration in schools; (2) evidence of extensive stakeholder 

support for these strategies, including that the applicant has engaged in meaningful student, 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Fostering diverse schools

79

family, educator, and community outreach activities; (3) ambitious but achievable goals to 

increase racial and socioeconomic diversity over the course of the grant period; and (4) regular 

collection and analysis of performance data to provide transparency and support continuous 

improvement.

Grantees would use funds to carry out one or more activities in their plans, which could include: 

• Creating or improving systems or partnerships that make information on public school 

options easily accessible to students and families, with a focus on removing barriers to 

information access;

• Providing new or expanded access to specialized academic programs or facilities 

designed to attract students from diverse backgrounds;

• Recruiting, hiring, and supporting diverse educators in new, expanded, or restructured 

schools, including professional development activities on implementing culturally and 

linguistically responsive practices and creating safe and inclusive learning environments;

• Other innovative or promising activities designed to increase racial and socioeconomic 

diversity and close opportunity and achievement gaps within and across schools.

National Activities

The Department would reserve up to 10 percent of appropriations for the new program to 

support a wide range of national activities, including research, development, technical 

assistance, evaluation, and dissemination. In particular, these funds would support intensive, 

customized technical assistance to planning grantees and a rigorous evaluation of 

implementation grants. Funds could also be used to develop and maintain a community of 

practice for information sharing among grantees and experts in the field.

FY 2023 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $100 million in fiscal year 2023 for a new Fostering Diverse 

Schools program, which would be authorized through appropriations language. The 

Department would use initial funds under this program for a varied cohort of planning grants and 

a robust, coordinated set of national activities while also making a limited number of 

implementation awards.

Fostering Diverse Schools is an integral part of the Administration’s efforts to remove the 

barriers to success that children living in racially isolated communities or communities of 

concentrated poverty too often face. In particular, the proposed increase would demonstrate 

the Administration’s commitment to focusing national attention on—and significantly increasing 

the number of communities engaging in a robust and informed discussion of—the critical role 

schools that are diverse by design can play in improving outcomes for all students, including, as 
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

Fostering diverse schools

80

research shows, academic outcomes as well as social and emotional, civic, and economic 

outcomes.1 

Fostering Diverse Schools would support comprehensive school diversity plans and be 

complemented by the request for Magnet Schools Assistance, which supports efforts to 

desegregate schools by creating special instructional programs that appeal to diverse students.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2023

Amount for grants $89,500

Number of new planning grants 20

Average planning grant award $1,500

Number of new implementation grants 3

Average implementation grant award $20,000

Peer review of new award applications $500

National activities $10,000

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

program 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 Federal resources provided for the program as well as the 

resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

The Department will establish performance measures to assess the impact of the activities that 

receive support under this program, based in part on the goals established by grantees. The 

development of these measures would build on our experience in creating performance 

measures for other programs, and the Department would also seek to align program measures 

for Fostering Diverse Schools with measures for related programs, including Magnet Schools 

Assistance.

11 See https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-benefits-of-socioeconomically-and-racially-integrated-schools-andclassrooms/#:~:text=On%20average%2C%20students%20in%20socioeconomically,have%20higher%20average%20

test%20scores.
INNOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

81

Account Summary Table

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FISCAL YEAR 2023 PRESIDENT'S BUDGET

(in thousands of dollars)

Cat

Code

2021

Appropriation

2022

Estimate

2023

Request

2023 Request Compared to

2022 Estimate

Amount Percent

Innovation and Improvement

1. Education innovation and research (ESEA IV-F-1) D 194,000 194,000 514,000 320,000 164.95%

2. Teacher and school leader incentive grants (ESEA II-B-1) D 200,000 200,000 150,000 (50,000) -25.00%

3. American history and civics education (ESEA II-B-3) D 5,250 5,250 10,500 5,250 100.00%

4. Supporting effective educator development (SEED) (ESEA II-B-4, section 2242) D 80,000 80,000 80,000 0 0.00%

5. Charter schools grants (ESEA IV-C) D 440,000 440,000 440,000 0 0.00%

6. Magnet schools assistance (ESEA IV-D) D 109,000 109,000 149,000 40,000 36.70%

7. Ready to learn programming (ESEA IV-F-4, section 4643) D 29,500 29,500 29,500 0 0.00%

8. Arts in education (ESEA IV-F-4, section 4642) D 30,500 30,500 30,500 0 0.00%

9. Javits gifted and talented education (ESEA IV-F-4, section 4644) D 13,500 13,500 13,500 0 0.00%

10. Statewide family engagement centers (ESEA IV-E) D 12,500 12,500 15,000 2,500 20.00%

11. School Leader Recruitment and Support (ESEA II-B-4, section 2243) D 0 0 40,000 40,000 ---

12. Fostering Diverse Schools (proposed legislation) D 0 0 100,000 100,000 ---

Total D 1,114,250 1,114,250 1,572,000 457,750 41.08%

NOTES:

1) D = discretionary program; M = mandatory programs

2) Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

Click here for accessible version