V-1

Department of Education

INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request

CONTENTS

Page

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

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

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

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

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

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

Significant Items in FY 2017 Appropriations Reports...............................................................V-7

Summary of Request ..............................................................................................................V-9

Activities:

Research, development, and dissemination .....................................................................V-12

Statistics...........................................................................................................................V-25

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

Assessment......................................................................................................................V-47

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

Statewide longitudinal data systems .................................................................................V-68

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

Account
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-1

V-1

Appropriations Language

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

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

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

Act, $616,839,000, which shall remain available through September 30, 2019: 1 Provided, That 

funds available to carry out section 208 of the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 2002 

may be used to link Statewide elementary and secondary data systems with early childhood, 

postsecondary, and workforce data systems, or to further develop such systems: 2 Provided 

further, That up to $6,000,000 of the funds available to carry out section 208 of the Educational 

Technical Assistance Act of 2002 may be used for awards to public or private organizations or 

agencies to support activities to improve data coordination, quality, and use at the local, State, 

and national levels.

3

NOTES

A full-year 2017 appropriation was not enacted at the time the 2018 budget was prepared; therefore, the budget 

assumes this account is operating under the Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 114-254). The

amounts included for 2017 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 appropriation language.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-2

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1 ...$616,839,000, which shall remain available 

through September 30, 2019:

This language provides 2-year availability of 

funds for the account. This language is 

needed to facilitate the planning of long-term 

programs of research and to accommodate 

cyclical surveys and assessments.

2 Provided, That funds available to carry out 

section 208 of the Educational Technical 

Assistance Act of 2002 may be used to link 

Statewide elementary and secondary data 

systems with early childhood, postsecondary, 

and workforce data systems, or to further 

develop such systems:

This language provides the authority to use 

funds to expand Statewide longitudinal data 

systems to include postsecondary and 

workforce information and information on early 

childhood.

3 Provided further, That up to $6,000,000 of 

the funds available to carry out section 208 of 

the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 

2002 may be used for awards to public or 

private organizations or agencies to support 

activities to improve data coordination, quality, 

and use at the local, State, and national levels.

This language provides the authority to make 

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards to 

agencies and organizations, in addition to 

State educational agencies, in order to further 

the purposes of the program.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-3

Appropriation, Adjustments, and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2016

2017 

Annualized CR 2018

Discretionary:

Appropriation................................................... $618,015 $616,839 $616,839
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-4

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2017 Annualized CR...................................................................................... $616,839

2018 .............................................................................................................. $616,839

Net change............................................................................ 0
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-5

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2017

Authorized

2017

Annualized CR

2018

Authorized

2018

Request

Research and Statistics

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

except section 174)

0

1, 2

$194,629 0

2

$194,629

Statistics (ESRA, part C) 0

1, 2

111,787 0

2

111,787

Regional educational laboratories (ESRA, section 174) 0

2

54,320 0

2

54,320

Assessment

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

2

148,717 0

2

148,717

National Assessment Governing Board (NAEPAA, section 302) 0

2

8,219 0

2

8,219

Research in special education (ESRA, part E) 0

3

53,897 0

3

53,897

Statewide longitudinal data systems (ETAA, section 208) 0

2

34,473 0

2

34,473

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

3

 10,797 0

3

 10,797

Total appropriation 616,839 616,839

Portion of request not authorized 616,839 616,839

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

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

Sciences and that the National Center for Education Statistics shall be provided not less than its fiscal year 2002 amount ($85,000 thousand). 2 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2009. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in FY 2018 under appropriations 

language. 3 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011. The Administration proposes to continue funding this program in FY 2018 under appropriations 

language.

V-5
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-6

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Footnote

Senate 

Allowance Footnote AppropriationFootnote

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

Recovery Act Supplemental

 (P.L. 111-5)  250,000  250,000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2017 693,818 536,04910 612,52510 605,26710

2018 616,839

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

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

2011 (P.L. 112-10). 5 The level for the House allowance reflects an introduced bill. 6 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2013 appropriations bill, 

which proceeded in the 112th Congress only through the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee. 7 The House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action. 8 The level for the Senate allowance reflects Senate Subcommittee action only. 9 The levels for House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2016 appropriations bill, which 

proceeded in the 114th Congress only through the House Committee and Senate Committee. 10 The levels for House and Senate allowances reflect Committee action on the regular annual 2017 

appropriations bill; the Appropriation reflects the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-7

Significant Items in FY 2017 Appropriations Reports

National Teacher and Principal Survey

Explanatory

Statement: The Explanatory Statement includes a directive that the National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES) explores ways to collect aggregate teacher-level 

data on student characteristics when it administers the National Teacher and 

Principal Survey (NTPS) so that in the future NCES is able to provide better data 

about the characteristics of students taught by teachers with different 

certifications. 

Response: NCES will explore technical feasibility of using data from NTPS and other 

collections to generate the requested information.

IES Operating Plan

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

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

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

authorized under law. 

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

information. 

Protecting Personally Identifiable Information (PII)

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

and grantees, including States that receive funds from Statewide longitudinal 

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

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

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

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

comply with this directive. 

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

information. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-8

Needs of Rural Schools

Senate: The Committee is interested in research that addresses the specific needs of 

diverse rural schools so directs the Department to brief the Committees on 

Appropriations of the Senate and the House on how IES is contributing to 

research in this area. 

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

information. 

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

Senate: The Committee directs the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) to 

continue administering the assessments in U.S. History, Civics, and Geography 

at least every 4 years, in accordance with the current NAEP schedule. 

Response: NCES and NAGB will continue to implement the NAEP schedule of 

assessments, in accordance with current law and resources. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-9

V-9

Click here for accessible version

Summary of Request
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-10

Summary of Request

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

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

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

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

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

$616.8 million for this account for fiscal year 2018, level with the fiscal year 2017 annualized 

continuing resolution (CR) amount. 

A full-year 2017 appropriation was not enacted at the time the fiscal year 2018 Budget was

prepared; therefore, the Budget assumes the Department is operating under the Further 

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L 114–254). The amounts included for 2017 reflect the 

annualized level provided by the CR. The Department of Education Appropriations Act, 2017, 

provided $605.3 million, a decrease of $12.7 million, or 2 percent, less than the 2016 level for 

programs in this account.

The Administration requests $194.6 million for research, development, and dissemination, level 

with the fiscal year 2017 annualized CR amount. This investment in research is critical because 

high-quality information about effective practices is essential for improving education, providing 

valuable insight into how public dollars could be better used to improve student outcomes. The 

funding will provide support for building a high-quality evidence base for what works in 

education, as well as provide support for IES dissemination efforts to ensure that the evidence 

base informs practice both in the field and also in the Department. 

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

related to education at all levels, the Administration requests $111.8 million, level with the fiscal 

year 2017 annualized CR amount. The request would allow the National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) to support the collection, analysis, and dissemination of education-related 

statistics in response to both legislative requirements and to the particular needs of data 

providers, data users, and education researchers. 

The Administration requests $54.3 million for the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

program, level with the fiscal year 2017 annualized CR amount. The RELs serve as a 

necessary bridge between education research and practice, with an emphasis on providing 

technical assistance on performing data analysis functions, evaluating programs, and using data 

from State longitudinal data systems for research and evaluation that address important issues 

of policy and practice.

A total of $156.9 million is requested for Assessment in 2018. Of this amount, $148.7 million 

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

$8.2 million would support the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). The requested 

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

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

and scoring, analysis, and reporting of NAEP assessments.

The Administration requests $53.9 million for Research in Special Education, level with the 

fiscal year 2017 annualized CR amount. The requested funds would support programs of 

research, including research intended to improve the developmental outcomes and school 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Summary of Request (continued)

V-11

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

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

assist adolescents with disabilities to be college- and career-ready.

The Administration requests $34.5 million for the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems 

program, level with the fiscal year 2017 annualized CR amount. The request would allow the 

Department to support grants to improve data systems and ensure that data are available to 

answer key policy questions in such core areas as financial and resource equity and teacher 

preparation, compensation, and advancement.

The request includes $10.8 million for Special Education Studies and Evaluations, level with the 

fiscal year 2017 annualized CR amount. IES supports a range of evaluations that are designed 

to provide information about which programs and practices are effective and ineffective and

thereby provide concrete guidance for educators and parents. At the request level, four of these 

studies would receive funding from the 2018 appropriation: an evaluation of preschool special 

education practices; Phase 2 of the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012; and the Middle 

Grades Longitudinal Study.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-12

Research, development, and dissemination

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

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01 2 3

Budget Authority:

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018 

Change from

Annualized CR

$194,629 $187,500 $194,629 0

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language. 2 The authorizing law provides that not more than the lesser of 2 percent of the amount appropriated to carry out 

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

$1.0 million shall be made available for the National Board for Education Sciences (NBES).

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

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

provided not less than its FY 2002 amount ($85,000 thousand).

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

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

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

the redesign of its website (https://ies.ed.gov/) to make navigation easier and by creating online 

tools and resources to make information more easily understood and applied to classroom 

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

districts, schools, and institutions of higher education access available evidence to make more 

informed decisions based on high-quality evaluations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

priorities and peer review procedures, as well as providing guidance to IES. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-13

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

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

Educational Laboratories (RELs) and Special Education Studies and Evaluation programs within 

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

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

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

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

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

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

awarded nearly 1,300 grants and contracts to build a diverse NCER research portfolio that 

includes national research and development centers, field-initiated research projects, education 

research training projects, field-initiated evaluations of State and local programs and policies, 

and advancements in statistical and research methodology. 

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

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

critical education decisions at the State and local levels, and are leading to better education 

practices across the country. For example:

• NCER supported the evaluation of Building Blocks, a mathematics curriculum for preschool

and early elementary school students. The study found that the curriculum had significant, 

positive effects on mathematics achievement and helped close achievement gaps between 

children from different economic backgrounds. Building Blocks has been adopted by 

262 school districts, including the nation’s largest (New York City). The software, which can 

be purchased separately for use in preschool and early grades, is being used in 444 school 

districts, representing 1,147 schools and approximately 5,600 classrooms across the 

country.

• NCER supported the development and evaluation of ASSISTments

(https://www.assistments.org/), an online platform that supports math and science teachers 

to improve instruction and student learning. Through the platform, students receive timely 

feedback as they do homework and teachers obtain timely, organized information about 

students’ work. Teachers can write their own homework questions or use a library of 

25,000 questions in mathematics, physics, and chemistry. A randomized control trial with 

43 middle schools in Maine showed that ASSISTments significantly improved student 

learning of mathematics, especially for students with lower prior achievement in 

mathematics. The platform is available online at no charge and has been used by 

50,000 students across all States.

• In 2010, NCER funded an evaluation of the California Early Assessment Program to 

determine whether individualized feedback to 11th grade students about their college 

readiness would lead to improved postsecondary outcomes. The evaluation showed that 

the program reduced the number of students in need of remediation at minimal 

cost. California expanded the program and made it mandatory for nearly 2 million public 

high school students across the State. In 2015, NCER funded a second evaluation to help 

the California State Department of Education learn if the Early Assessment Program is 

continuing to work as planned and to help make research-based improvements. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-14

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

dedicated to finding solutions to problems in education. The pre-doctoral training program has 

trained nearly 900 students and the post-doctoral program has trained 180 fellows since they 

were launched. Nearly all of the fellows who completed their training are leading or contributing 

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

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

develop their skills and learn new methods. Recent training areas include topics such as using 

and understanding information from randomized control trials, evaluations using quasiexperimental designs, and applying cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

their work. Funding for the WWC, ERIC, and NLE is part of the RDD request, while funding for 

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

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

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

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

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

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

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

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $194.6 million in fiscal year 2018 for the RDD program, level with 

the fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department of 

Education Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $187.5 million for this program. The RDD 

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

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

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

NCER and NCEE as well as the NBES, which advises and consults with IES on the policies of 

the Institute. RDD funded activities include:

• NCER Education Research Grants;

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

• NCER Research Training;
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-15

• NCER Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR);

• NCEE What Works Clearinghouse (WWC);

• NCEE Education Resources Information Center (ERIC);

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

• National Board for Education Sciences (NBES).

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

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

approximately $34.9 million in new research awards and enhance dissemination activities.

National Center for Education Research (NCER) Programs of Research

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

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

postsecondary and adult education, would receive approximately $170.9 million in 2018. To 

determine funding priorities for NCER research competitions, IES staff hold Technical Working 

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

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

with officials within the Department. Competitions for new 2017 grants were announced in the 

Federal Register on March 8, 2016; awards will be made by July 1, 2017. 

New education research investments in fiscal year 2018 will build the capacity of States and 

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

school performance. For fiscal year 2018 awards, IES anticipates publishing the Requests for 

Applications (RFA) on its website in May 2017. 

NCER research activities include the following programs:

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

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

proposals on the following 12 topics:

o Cognition and student learning;

o Early learning programs and policies;

o Education leadership;

o Education technology;

o Effective teachers and effective teaching;

o English learners;

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

o Mathematics and science education;

o Postsecondary and adult education;

o Reading and writing;

o Social and behavioral context for academic learning; and

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

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

children in military families).
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-16

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

their goals for the research:

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

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

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

that can improve student outcomes.

o Development and innovation projects create interventions to address continuing 

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

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

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

o Efficacy and replication projects examine whether fully developed interventions produce 

a beneficial impact on student outcomes when implemented in authentic education 

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

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

are implemented with fidelity.

o Effectiveness studies determine whether fully developed interventions with prior 

evidence of efficacy produce beneficial education outcomes when implemented under 

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

special support from the developer or research team).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

$2 million per year for up to 5 years. The fiscal year 2018 request will support four new R&D 

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

instruction for students in early elementary school grades. 

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

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

and researchers. These programs prepare students and professionals to conduct research 

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

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

Research, development, and dissemination

V-17

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

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

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

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

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

study or careers in education research. The maximum allowable award for Pathways is 

$1,200,000 over 5 years.

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

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

The Statistical and Research Methodology in Education program supports the development 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

collaboration with practitioners and policymakers, including State education agencies 

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

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

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

Programs and Policies. For the 2017 competition, IES accepted applications under the RPP 

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

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

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

The maximum funding for the 2017 competition is $200,000 per year for up to 2 years. 

Recent projects include a project to increase the capacity of early childhood education 

providers in North Carolina to use data to improve implementation and evaluation; a study to 

improve human resource management in Minneapolis Public Schools; and a study of career 

pathways programs for low-skilled adults in Pennsylvania. The Evaluation of State and 

Local Programs and Policies topic is designed to support rigorous evaluations of fullydeveloped interventions that States and school districts have already implemented. The 

maximum funding for the 2017 competition is $1,000,000 per year over 5 years. Recent 

projects include an evaluation of an accelerated remedial education program for students 

enrolling in Texas community colleges, and an evaluation of the use of teacher evaluation 

data to drive instructional improvement in Tennessee public schools.

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

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

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

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

dissemination capacity. In 2016, IES invited proposals for two networks: (1) supporting 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-18

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

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

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

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

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

5 years.

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

announced on September 28, 2015, supports rigorous evaluations of education 

interventions that SEAs or LEAs believe will produce meaningful improvements in student 

outcomes within a short period of time; for example, within a single semester or academic 

year. The evaluations are low cost—up to $250,000 over 2 years—because they focus on 

outcomes that can be easily measured using administrative records. The grants are carried 

out by partnerships of research institutions and SEAs or LEAs. 

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

contracts to qualified small businesses to conduct innovative research and development 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

awards that combine Phase I and Phase II activities.

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

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

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

NCEE Dissemination Activities

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

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

$19.9 million in 2018. These activities provide tools to help practitioners and policymakers

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

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

evaluation. Examples of such tools include the WWC thematic information campaigns 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

publication. Since 2013, IES and ERIC staff have negotiated agreements with over 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-19

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

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

added cross-linking to information on the IES website to direct users to the NCER and 

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

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

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

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

reviewed education research publications.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

data on State programs and policies. In 2017, the NLE plans to continue to provide 

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

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

access to Federal education data.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

least one statistically significant finding. Funds in 2018 will be used to enhance the WWC in 

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

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

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

Research, development, and dissemination

V-20

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures

2016

Funds

2017

Annualized 

CR Funds

2018

Funds

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

Research activities:

Education research grants

ducation r esearch: New grant awards $27,566 $41,509 TBD 57 86 TBD

ducation r esearch: Grant award continuations 83,758 84,322 $96,033 156 155 191

Education r esearch: Total 111,324 125,831 TBD 213 241 TBD

National research and development 

centers

 nd development centers: New grant awards 1,710 0 TBD 1 0 TBD

 nd development centers: Grant award continuations 9,532 8,010 8,586 6 5 5

 nd development centers: Total 11,242 8,010 TBD 7 5 TBD

Research training

esearch tr aini ng: New grant awards 431 $1,199 TBD 4 8 TBD

esearch tr aini ng: Grant award continuations 11,648 12,145 $11,940 22 18 23

esearch tr aini ng: Total 12,079 13,344 TBD 26 26 TBD

Statistical and research methodology 

in education

 odol og y in education: New grant awards 297 413 TBD 3 4 TBD

 odol og y in education: Grant award continuations 4,086 2,978 1,278 16 13 7

 h methodol og y in education: Total 4,383 3,391 TBD 19 17 TBD

Evaluation of State and local 

education programs

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

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Grant award continuations 1,255 0 0 6 0 0

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Total 1,255 0 TBD 6 0 TBD

Research collaborations grants

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: New grant awards 998 3,197 TBD 5 12 TBD

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Grant award continuations 11,175 7,155 9,120 19 15 21

Partnershi ps and collaborati ons: Total 12,173 10,352 TBD 24 27 TBD
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-21

Output Measures

2016

Funds

2017

Annualized 

CR Funds

2018

Funds

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

Research networks focused on critical 

problems of education practice: wor ks focused on critical pr obl ems of education practice: cal pr obl ems of education practice: New grant awards $2,009 $1,184 TBD 9 2 TBD

 cal pr obl ems of education practice: Grant award continuations1 0 6,965 $8,441 0 9 11

 or ks focused on critical pr obl ems of education practice: Total 2,009 8,149 TBD 9 11 TBD

Low-Cost Evaluation of Education 

Interventions

 ati on of Education Inter ventions: New grant awards 361 480 TBD 3 4 TBD

 ati on of Education Inter ventions: Grant award continuations 0 389 490 0 3 4

Low-C ost Evaluati on of Education Inter ventions: Total 361 869 TBD 3 7 TBD

Unsolicited awards

Unsolicited awar ds: New grant awards 183 0 TBD 2 0 TBD

Unsolicited awar ds: Grant award continuations 0 823 61 2 3 1

Unsolicited awar ds: Total 183 823 TBD 4 4 TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 33,555 47,982 34,927 84 116 TBD

Subtotal, grant award continuations 121,454 122,787 135,949 227 221 263

Subtotal, grants 155,009 170,769 170,876 311 337 TBD

Small Business Innovation 

Research Contracts 7,505 7,950 7,950 14 19 TBD

Dissemination Activities

Educational Resources Information 

Center 3,184 3,590 3,590

What Works Clearinghouse 9,483 8,379 8,505

National Library of Education 2,385 2,676 2,452

Dissemination/Logistical/Technical 

Support 2,451 _3,272 5,315

Disseminati on Acti vities: Total 17,503 17,917 19,862

Peer review 1,752 3,650 3,650
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-22

Output Measures

2016

Funds

2017

Annualized 

CR Funds

2018

Funds

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

National Board for Education 

Sciences

 

$156 $300 $300

Carryover from Previous Fiscal Year (886) (13,962) (8,008)

Carryover to Next Fiscal Year 13,961 8,008 0

Total 195,000 194,629 194,629

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2017 and 2018 are 

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

Continuation costs for 2018 reflect estimates of new awards in 2017. 1 In 2016, funds from the Preschool Development Grants program within the Innovation and Improvement 

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

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

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Goal: Transform education into an evidence-based field.

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

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

Year Target Actual

2013 Baseline 69%

2014 72% 73

2015 75 75

2016 78 82

2017 85

2018 87
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-23

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

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

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

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

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

to result in peer-reviewed publication, such as research training grants, summer training grants, 

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

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

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

through the annual grantee reports and records the publications in the IES Catalog of Education 

Research (ICER) database. Reporting on this measure is cumulative.

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

improving student outcomes.

Year Target Actual

2012 53 56

2013 67 67

2014 75 73

2015 82 84

2016 94 105

2017 124

2018 135

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

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

behavioral competencies. Student academic outcomes include learning and achievement in 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

supported.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

effects on student outcomes as determined by the WWC reviewers.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research, development, and dissemination

V-24

Efficiency Measures

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

employed in the National Center for Education Research.

Year Target Actual

2012 40 34

2013 41 31

2014 41 31

2015 40 35

2016 40 38

2017 40

2018 40

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

V-25

Statistics

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01 2

Budget Authority:

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language. 2 The statute authorizes such sums as may be necessary for all of Title I, of which not less than the amount 

provided to the National Center for Education Statistics for FY 2002 shall be available for Part C, which is 

$85,000 thousand.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

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

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

NCES is authorized to:

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

progress of education in the U.S.; 

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

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

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

proficiency, mobility, disability, and urbanicity; 

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

systems;

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

compared with foreign nations; 

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from

Annualized CR

$111,787 $109,500 $111,787 0
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-26

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

progress of education; and

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

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

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

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

temporary fellows at NCES.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

competitively awarded contracts.

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

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

committee to advise the Center.

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

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

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

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

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

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

policymakers with information to improve the quality of education.

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

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

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

plays in ensuring economic growth.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-27

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

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

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

technical assistance.

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

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

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

safeguard privacy and confidentiality.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

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

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

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

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

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

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $111.8 million in fiscal year 2018 for the Statistics program, level 

with the fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department of 

Education Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $109.5 million for this program. The 

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

request includes funds for a broad range of surveys and activities that provide information on 

education at all levels, including:

Cross Sectional Studies

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

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

approximately $18.6 million of the 2018 request for the following surveys and activities:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

collection is scheduled for 2019. 

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

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

taught in public schools, and demographics of the teacher and principal labor force. In 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-28

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

with other Department data collections. Data collections for NTPS are scheduled every 

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

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

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

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

collects data from State educational agencies and national samples of other educational 

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

elementary and secondary schools, elementary and secondary school teachers and 

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

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

are relatively small. The most recently completed FRSS provided nationally representative 

information on programs and services for high school English learners (ELs), including 

instructional approaches, newcomer programs, online or computer-based programs, and 

other services (e.g., tutoring) designed specifically for high school ELs. Data were collected

from the 2015-16 school year and were released in October 2016.

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

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

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

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

collection will be completed in 2018. 

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

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

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

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

school safety programs and policies from a nationally representative sample of 

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

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

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

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

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

• The Survey of Earned Doctorates in the United States

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

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

and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), while 

being supported by NCES, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the U.S. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-29

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

and Space Administration.

Longitudinal Studies

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

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

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

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

improve the quality of education. Under the 2018 request, $38.5 million would support the

following longitudinal studies:

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

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

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

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

nationally representative sample selected from both public and private schools attending 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

subsequent behaviors and outcomes, from coursetaking to postsecondary choices, and how 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

is currently underway, with national data collection planned to begin in 2020. 

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

longitudinal study to provide information on children’s development in grades 6 through 8 on 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-30

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• The National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) 

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

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

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

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

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

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

2017-2018 that will be based solely on administrative data and that will follow the traditional 

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

administrative data collections will result in more frequent data collection and analysis, 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

second follow-up is scheduled for 2018.

• The Beginning Postsecondary Student Longitudinal Survey (BPS) 

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

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

and into the labor force. The third BPS cohort was based on the 2004 NPSAS, which 

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

fourth BPS is using the 2012 NPSAS as a base, with follow-ups in 2014 and 2017. These 

follow-ups include revised strata for institution sampling to reflect the recent growth in 

enrollment in for-profit 4-year institutions.

International Studies

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

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

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

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

component of the Department's strategy for providing information to support education reform. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-31

Funding for the International Studies program is estimated at $19.7 million in 2018 and supports 

the following activities: 

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

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

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

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

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

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

of indicators includes measures of student enrollment and achievement, labor force 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ICILS. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

analysis and reporting occurring in 2020. 

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

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

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

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

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

Specifically, PIAAC measures relationships between individuals’ educational backgrounds, 

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

literacy, numeracy, and problem solving. The PIAAC assessment was conducted again in 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-32

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

as well as from a separate sample of adults in State, Federal, and private prisons. In 2017, 

an additional sample will be assessed in the U.S. to support adult literacy estimates at the 

county level; and in 2021, the next full cycle of PIAAC will be conducted. 

• The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 

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

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

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

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

territory may elect to participate in PISA–as Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Puerto Rico 

did in 2015–and in that case a sample is drawn that is representative of that State or 

territory. While some elements covered by PISA are likely to be part of the school 

curriculum, PISA goes beyond mastery of school-based learning to include the knowledge 

and skills acquired outside of school. The survey had a special focus on reading literacy in 

2000, on mathematics literacy in 2003, and on scientific literacy in 2006 and 2015. In 2015, 

PISA also assessed collaborative problem solving and financial literacy abilities in more than 

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

education systems (Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong-China, Ireland, Japan, 

Macao-China, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Slovenia) and

Massachusetts had higher average scores than the U.S. in all three subject areas assessed. 

An online International Data Explorer (IDE) is available that allows users to create their own 

tables and charts from available data (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/international/ide/). 

• The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 

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

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

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

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

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

with an expected data release in December 2017. An IDE is also available for this survey 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

school mathematics and science learning and achievement. The TIMSS IDE allows users to 

create their own tables and charts using TIMSS data 

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

Administrative Data Collections and Support

The Administrative Data Collections and Support category includes basic descriptive data 

collections from public schools at the elementary and secondary levels and from public and 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-33

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

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

sample surveys. Under the 2018 request, funding for administrative data collections would be 

an estimated $24.4 million. Key activities include:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

custom tables using the Elementary/Secondary Information System 

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

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

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

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

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

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

sectors.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

collected every year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Schools. The program also includes two National Postsecondary Education Cooperatives 

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

Statistics

V-34

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

representatives from the postsecondary community who work with NCES to improve the 

quality and utility of postsecondary data.

• The Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) program 

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

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

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

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

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

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

and program administration.

• Technical assistance to Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems

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

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

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

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

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

Assistance Program (EDTAP).

Cross-cutting Activities

The Cross-cutting Activities would receive approximately $10.6 million in 2018. Activities 

receiving funding include:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

education-related topics such as language proficiency, disabilities, computer use and 

access, student mobility, and private school tuition.

• Funding for Data Development and Statistical Standards provides methodological and 

statistical support to NCES, as well as to Federal and non-Federal organizations that 

engage in statistical work in support of NCES’s mission. Activities include developing 

standards that ensure the quality of statistical surveys, analyses, and products; coordinating 

the review of NCES products; coordinating revisions to the NCES Statistical Standards; 

funding the National Forum on Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/forum/); and 

improving the ED Data Inventory (http://datainventory.ed.gov/). 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-35

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

activities, such as NCES Logistics Support, NCES web Support, and EDUCATE.

• Other activities include special studies to improve the quality and utility of assessments, 

including enhancements of survey methodology, assessment development, data analysis, 

and dissemination, as well as quality control procedures for NCES products. In addition, 

funding supports protection of confidential data; online technical training for researchers who 

use NCES data along with non-technical information sessions for other users; obtaining 

expert assistance; interagency activities to improve statistical quality and data use, including 

the Joint Program in Survey Methodology and FedStats; and printing and publications.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2016

2017

Annualized CR 2018

Cross-Sectional Studies $18,480 $17,301 $18,551

Longitudinal Studies 38,900 36,701 38,490

International Studies 18,014 22,760 19,707

Administrative Data Collections and Support 24,306 24,386 24,400

Cross-Cutting Activities 12,300 10,639 10,639

Total 112,000 111,787 111,787

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

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

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

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

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

program.

Goal: To collect, analyze, and disseminate information on the condition of education in 

the United States and to provide comparative international statistics.

Objective: Provide timely and useful data that are relevant to policy and educational 

improvement.

Measure: The extent to which customers would recommend NCES to others and would rely on 

NCES in the future as measured by the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-36

Year Target Actual

2010 74% 76%

2014 74 74

2016 74 72

2018 74

Additional information: NCES collects customer satisfaction information through the ACSI 

(http://www.theacsi.org/), which provides satisfaction scores based on samples of customers. 

The baseline for this measure, 74 percent, was established using 2008 data. NCES did not

meet the performance target in 2016.

Measure: The number of data collections in which the response rate was below 85 percent 

Year

Number of 

Reports

Number of 

Survey 

Components

Number of Survey 

Components with 

Response Rates 

Below 85%

Percent of Survey 

Components with 

Response Rates 

Below 85%

2012 9 18 2 11%

2013 14 31 16 52

2014 13 45 12 27

2015 10 37 6 16

2016 10 22 3 14

2017 19 44 13 30

2018

Additional information: One way in which NCES attempts to ensure the quality of its work is 

by maintaining high survey response rates. High response rates help ensure that survey data 

are representative of the target populations, and NCES has set specific benchmarks for different 

types of studies (e.g., universe surveys, cross-sectional surveys, and longitudinal studies). 

When a survey response rate is lower than 85 percent, the NCES statistical standards require 

that NCES conduct bias analyses to help determine the effect of the low rate on the survey 

results. All NCES surveys in 2009 through 2016 either had an 85 percent response rate or 

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

In 2016, NCES released 10 reports that included 22 survey components. The response rates 

for 73 percent of survey components were 86 percent or above and the remaining components

had nonresponse bias analyses conducted because their response rates were below 

85 percent. Actual data may fluctuate depending on the surveys being collected, but the 

percentage of surveys with response rates below 85 percent declined in 2014, 2015, and 2016. 

The nonresponse bias analyses, which were conducted for all surveys with a response rate of 

less than 85 percent, informed the nonresponse weight adjustments to help ensure published 

results accurately reflected the target population. The data for 2017 are projections based on 

data collections for which reports are scheduled to be released in 2017. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statistics

V-37

Efficiency Measures

NCES adopted two new efficiency measures for 2016. One of the measures looks at 

timeliness; the other examines the association between extending the length of data collections 

and response rates. The first NCES efficiency measure tracks survey data release timeliness

by measuring if the reports for certain periodic data collections are released by a predetermined 

date set during a given reporting year. The efficiency measure addresses customers’ concerns 

about the data timeliness and helps assess whether NCES completes work in a timely manner. 

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

biennial release dates 

Data Collection

Number of 

Reports in 2016 Frequency

Percentage of 

Reports Meeting 

Annual or 

Biennial Release 

Date

Target

Percentage of 

Reports Meeting 

Annual or 

Biennial Release 

Date

Actual

IPEDS 3 Annual 100% 33%

CCD 3 Annual 100 0

PSS 1 Biennial Baseline N/A

Condition of 

Education

1 Annual 100 100

Additional information: NCES’ goal is to release reports for certain periodic data collections to 

the public by a predetermined release date, ensuring that the public can expect NCES reports 

for annual, biennial, or quadrennial data collections at an anticipated date during a reporting 

year. Specifically, the data collections that are tracked for this measure are IPEDS, CCD, PSS, 

and the Condition of Education. In 2016, 33 percent of IPEDS reports met the annual release 

date, no CCD reports met the annual release date; and all Condition of Education reports met 

the annual release date. NCES has made several changes to its internal processes which are 

expected to deliver higher efficiencies in future years.

The second NCES efficiency measure is still being developed by NCES and will track the 

association between extending the length of data collections and response rates. Due to an 

increased reluctance to participate in government surveys, an increased level of effort and 

resources is needed to sustain acceptable response rates. One way to address declining 

response rates is to extend the planned length of data collection to allow for more follow-up with 

nonrespondents, with the goal of boosting the response rate to an acceptable level. In 2017, 

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

and evaluate whether extensions to data collection periods are associated with changes in 

response rates. 

Percentage of Reports 

Meeting Annual or 

Biennial Release Date
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-38

Regional educational laboratories

(Education Sciences Reform Act, section 174)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from

Annualized CR

$54,320 $54,423 $54,320 0

1

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) 

program (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/) supports a network of 10 laboratories that work in 

partnership with State education agencies (SEAs), school districts, and other entities to use 

data and research to improve academic outcomes for students. Each of the RELs serves a 

specific region of the country, with the fundamental mission of providing support for a more 

evidence-based education system. A map displaying the regions served by each REL is 

displayed on the following page.

RELs support a wide range of activities to support State and local use of research and the 

building of evidence, including: conducting applied research and evaluations; developing and 

disseminating products and processes based on the best available research findings; and 

providing training, coaching, and technical support to SEAs, local educational agencies (LEAs), 

school boards, and State boards of education. Through these activities, the RELs build local 

and State capacity to use data and evidence, ultimately working with SEAs and LEAs to

understand the nature and scope of specific educational challenges; access high-quality

research to inform decisions; identify opportunities to conduct original research; and track

progress over time using high-quality data and methods.

The RELs are part of the Department’s wide-ranging technical assistance and dissemination

network that includes the Comprehensive Centers, What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), Equity 

Assistance Centers, and Technical Assistance Centers supported under Part D of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This network is organized by the Department to 

provide accessible, comprehensive, and relevant support to SEAs, LEAs, and schools as these 

entities rise to the challenge of ensuring a high-quality education for all students.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-39

Allocation of resources among the RELs is based on several variables, including the number of 

LEAs, the number of school-age children, and the cost of providing services within the 

geographic area encompassed by the region. RELs are funded through 5-year contracts with 

research organizations and institutions of higher education.

REL training, coaching, and technical support take a variety of forms, but the focus is always on 

using data and research to systematically understand and address real-world problems, and 

tailoring technical support to the level of experience of State and local partners. For example, 

RELs provide assistance to build capacity among State and district personnel to access their

data; identify opportunities to use data to improve student achievement; conduct a wide range of

research studies; and present research findings in clear, understandable formats.

The current REL contracts were awarded in fiscal year 2017 and include an explicit focus on 

supporting sustained, ongoing partnerships with stakeholders at the State and district levels. 

Under the direction of their regional governing boards, RELs identify priority topic areas on which 

to focus their activities. Much of proposed work is conducted through REL research-practitioner 

partnerships in which a group of education stakeholders who share a specific concern work 

together to apply their knowledge to investigate a problem and generate solutions for improving 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-40

student outcomes. Each partnership focuses on a particular challenge that has an actionable

component, such as college access and readiness, so that the research and technical support

are closely linked to a clear goal. There are currently 76 research partnerships operating across 

the RELs. Of these partnerships, 47 include State and district representatives from a single 

State and 29 include members from multiple States.

Although the research partners in the regions are the primary stakeholders of each REL, the 

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

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

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

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

RELs’ work. 

Examples of research funded under the current contracts include:

• Identifying Schools that are Beating the Odds: REL Southeast released two studies 

identifying schools that are performing better than expected based on student demographic 

and socioeconomic characteristics. One study identified South Carolina charter schools that 

beat the odds in math and English language arts, finding that of the 33 charter schools 

serving grades 3-5 students, 13 were performing better than expected in both subject areas 

(https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=418). The study will assist 

the South Carolina Department of Education in determining the future growth of charter 

schools in the State. Another study identified schools in Mississippi that beat the odds in 

math and English language arts and included four profiles of demographically similar 

schools to determine whether schools with similar characteristics perform better than 

expected more frequently

(https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=4465). The results of this 

study will help inform decisions related to the improvement of low-performing schools in 

Mississippi. 

• Using Publicly Available Data to Increase Efficiency in School Districts: To support school 

districts that are seeking ways to increase efficiency by maintaining or improving education 

outcomes while using fewer resources, REL Northeast and Islands released a guide to help 

States and districts use publicly available data about district expenditures and student 

academic performance to calculate six expenditure-to-performance ratios. The guide also 

includes implications for practitioners and policymakers when using the different ratios, 

including how a district’s perceived efficiency varies depending on which ratio is considered 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=4555).

• Examining Postsecondary Education Expectations and Attainment of Rural and Nonrural 

Students: REL Midwest investigated postsecondary education expectations of students who 

were in grade 10 in 2002 and their educational attainment 10 years later. The study found 

that rural students in the REL Midwest region had lower education expectations than did 

nonrural students, but had similar levels of educational attainment. The study also showed 

that participation in rigorous coursework, parent aspirations, and teacher expectations were 

more predictive of postsecondary education expectations and attainment than school locale 

(https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=1465). 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-41

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

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

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

Technical and peer review of REL research reports ensures that research meets high standards 

of scientific quality and that the information is valid and reliable. IES’ guidance materials related 

to REL products can be found at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/relresources/index.asp. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

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

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

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

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

2017......................................................................................54,423

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $54.3 million in fiscal year 2018 for the REL program, level with the 

fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department of Education 

Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $54.4 million for this program. The REL program is a 

comprehensive mechanism to help SEAs and LEAs use up-to-date, credible, and rigorous 

education research to improve student outcomes, which is particularly crucial as SEAs and 

LEAs transition under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA requires that the 

activities, strategies, or interventions of States, LEAs, or schools be evidence-based in many 

programs. Given these new evidence provisions in ESSA, the partnerships between the RELs 

and SEAs and LEAs will continue to be important as evidence-based activities are identified and 

implemented to meet local needs. 

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

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

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

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

concern to education stakeholders. The new REL contracts awarded in 2017 will develop 

research-practitioner partnerships with State and local entities that share the goal of increasing 

the use of evidence in education. 

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

Clearinghouse (WWC) through virtual and in-person events based on practice guides. The 

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

grantees understand and meet evidence requirements in discretionary grant competitions.

By law, each REL has a governing board, which includes the region’s chief State school officers 

or designees. These boards help set direction and prioritize REL projects. To avoid duplication 

and amplify impact, the Department requires RELs to make their work accessible and relevant 

to other regions.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-42

The 2018 request would support the second year of activities for 9 of the 10 RELs under the 

current 5-year contracts (REL Southwest is on a different schedule and will be awarded in fiscal 

year 2018). The new awards support improved services by:

o Developing sustained partnerships with policymakers and practitioners focused on using 

research to address critical problems in education;

o Completing ambitious, coherent, and cumulative agendas of high-quality research, 

technical support, and dissemination;

o Enhancing recognition among State and LEA leaders of the RELs as a key resource for 

credible research and support;

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

conduct research; and

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

The Department is establishing strategies for measuring the performance of the RELs in each of 

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

Each of the RELs will work with its governing board and with regional policymakers and 

practitioners to set its agenda. To the extent possible, the Department will encourage the RELs 

and their regions to address four specific areas of need, as defined in the performance work 

statement: (1) early childhood education and school readiness; (2) college- and 

career-readiness; (3) professional development and teacher preparation; and (4) education 

access and attainment for historically underserved groups.

The funds requested for 2018 would also continue support for an independent peer review of 

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

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

disseminated. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-43

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2016

2017

Annualized CR 2018

Annual support for each REL:1

Northeastern Region $4,884 $5,212 $5,252

Mid-Atlantic Region 4,412 4,942 4,992

Southeastern Region 4,588 5,420 5,564

Appalachian Region 4,155 3,751 4,784

Midwestern Region 7,147 5,876 5,876

Central Region 4,964 4,836 4,836

Southwestern Region 9,160 5,564 5,564

Western Region 5,635 5,718 5,720

Northwestern Region 3,744 4,625 4,680

Pacific Region 3,287 4,619 4,732

Subtotal, Regional educational 

laboratories

51,977 50,563 52,000

Program activities:2

Regional educational laboratory contracts 51,977 50,563 52,000

Independent review of REL plans and 

products

 2,446 3,757 2,320

Total 54,423 54,320 54,320

1

 Funding reflects estimated amounts obligated in the fiscal year, not the annual appropriation, and includes 

prior year carryover. 2

 The amounts show the estimated funding for each activity by year of the appropriation. Funds may be carried 

over into the next year.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

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

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

continue to reflect those standards. In 2014, the Department established two performance 

measures for the RELs. IES will examine whether these measures are appropriate for the new 

RELs as performance surveys are developed.

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

local education agencies.

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

REL research alliances.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-44

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

and research.

Year Target Actual

2014 3.1

2015 3.2 3.0

2016 3.2 3.2

2017 3.2

2018 3.2

The 2012-2017 RELs were required by their contracts to survey research alliance (RA)1

members each spring and report the results to IES, using a common set of customer 

satisfaction survey questions approved by the Office of Management and Budget. This 

measure averages the RA members’ responses to four survey questions to create a single 

score. These items are:

• Participation in this research alliance has:

o increased my ability to use my agency’s or organization’s available data.

o increased my ability to conduct high-quality research and evaluation.

o provided information that informed my agency’s selection of programs and/or strategies 

related to this topic area.

o led my agency to design and conduct an evaluation study.

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

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

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

contracts, as research alliances matured and more research and technical assistance was 

conducted, the score on these items increased. The baseline for this measure was set in 2014 

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

“Strongly Agree.” In 2015, the rating was similar, at 3.0, and missed the target by 0.2. In 2016, 

the RELs met their target of 3.2. 

 

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

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

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

address a particular education concern.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-45

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

for education policy and/or practice.

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

including online events.

Year Target Actual

2014 3.4

2015 3.5 3.4

2016 3.5 3.5

2017 3.5

2018 3.5

The 2012-2017 RELs were also contractually required to survey participants in each 

dissemination activity and report the data to IES. This measure averages participant responses 

to five survey items to create a single score for quality and relevance of dissemination activities; 

these items are:

• The workshop/training was relevant to an issue currently facing my organization.

• The workshop/training provided opportunities to consider how to use research or effectively 

incorporate data into decision making within my agency or organization.

• I expect to apply information from the workshop/training in my work.

• I am satisfied with the overall quality of this workshop/training.

• The benefits of attending this workshop/training were worth the time I invested.

The baseline for this measure was set in 2014 using data collected during calendar year 2013 

and was a rating of 3.4 on a scale where 1 equates to “Strongly Disagree” and 4 equates to 

“Strongly Agree.” The 2015 rating also was 3.4, which missed the target by 0.1. In 2016, the 

rating was 3.5, meeting the target. 

Other Performance Information

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

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

2006 and 2011 and for the REL program as a whole. Due to changes in the REL contracts, 

findings are not necessarily applicable to the current contractors.

The final report was issued in April 2015 and addressed the relevance and usefulness of impact 

study reports and technical assistance products. At the time of the study, seven RELs had 

completed eight impact studies. In order to include all RELs in the study, reviewers also 

collected one initial proposal for each of the three RELs that did not have a completed study but 

that did have one close to completion. All of the studies reviewed used randomized controlled 

trials. The expert panel members rated the reports for the eight completed impact studies as, 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Regional educational laboratories

V-46

on average, between “strong” and “very strong” in quality (4.1 on a 5 point scale). They rated 

the 11 impact study proposals as, on average, between “adequate” in relevance and “relevant”

(3.61 on a 5 point scale.)

State educational agency administrators identified teacher and staff evaluation as the area in 

which they had the most need for education research or technical assistance (53 percent); for 

district administrators, the area of greatest need was content standards, curriculum, or 

instruction in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (37 percent). Only 29 percent 

of the State administrators and 26 percent of district administrators thought their needs were 

met “very well” and both groups were more likely to look to other sources than the RELs for 

assistance. State administrators tended to obtain information from professional associations 

(87 percent, compared to 49 percent for the RELs); district administrators tended to look to 

colleagues in other districts or the State agency (82 percent versus 18 percent).

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

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

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

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

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

at all satisfied.”

Findings from the evaluation have helped shape decisions about the new REL contracts; for 

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

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

REL products and will collect performance measurement data.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-47

Assessment

(National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

Program area

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from

Annualized CR

National Assessment of 

Educational Progress

$148,717 $149,000 $148,717 0

National Assessment 

Governing Board

 8,219 7,745 8,219 0 

Total 156,936 156,745 156,936 0

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as “The Nation’s Report 

Card,” is the largest continuing and nationally representative assessment of what our nation’s 

students know and can do in various subject areas. NAEP has often been cited as the “gold 

standard” of assessments because it is developed using the best thinking from assessment and 

content specialists, education experts, and teachers from around the nation. NAEP is designed 

to measure and provide objective information on the status of and trends in student learning 

over time in a wide range of subject areas. By making this information on student performance 

available to policymakers, educators, parents, and others, NAEP has become an integral part of 

the Nation’s measurement of educational progress.

Assessment frequency is specified in the authorizing statute. The Commissioner for Education 

Statistics must conduct:

• National reading and mathematics assessments in public and private schools at 

grades 4 and 8 at least once every 2 years;

• National grade 12 reading and mathematics assessments in public and private schools on a 

regular schedule; and

• Biennial State assessments of student achievement in reading and mathematics in 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-48

grades 4 and 8.

If time and resources allow, the Commissioner may conduct: additional national and State 

assessments in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades in public and private schools at regularly scheduled 

intervals in additional subjects, including writing, science, U.S. history, geography, civics, 

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

assessments; and long-term trend assessments of academic achievement at ages 9, 13, and 17 

in reading and mathematics. Whenever feasible, information must be collected and reported by 

race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, disability, and limited-English proficiency. The 

NAEP schedule is publicly available at http://www.nagb.org/.

The National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) is responsible for formulating policy for 

NAEP. NAGB is composed of 25 voting members including Governors, State legislators, chief 

State school officers, a superintendent, State and local board of education members, testing 

and measurement experts, a representative of business or industry, curriculum specialists, 

principals, classroom teachers, and parents. The Director of the Institute of Education Sciences

(IES) serves as an ex officio, nonvoting member of the Board. Using a national consensus 

approach, NAGB develops appropriate assessment objectives and achievement levels for each 

grade in each subject area to be assessed. 

The Assessment budget supports the following major program components:

• National NAEP: The main NAEP assessments report results for the Nation and are 

designed to follow the curriculum frameworks developed by NAGB. They periodically 

measure student achievement in reading, mathematics, science, writing, U.S. history, civics, 

geography, and other subjects.

• State NAEP: State assessments address the needs of State-level policymakers for reliable 

data concerning student achievement in their States in reading, mathematics, science, and 

writing.

• The Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA): Begun in 2002, the TUDA provides information 

on 4th and 8th grade student achievement in reading and mathematics in a small number of 

urban school districts. Although participation is voluntary, demand from districts to be 

included in TUDA has significantly increased in recent years, with 27 districts participating in 

2017. 

• Long-term trend NAEP: In its long-term trend program, NAEP administers identical 

instruments from one assessment year to the next, measuring student achievement in 

reading and mathematics. These assessments do not evolve based on changes in 

curricular or educational practices.

• Evaluation and validation studies: Congress mandates that the Secretary provide for 

continuing review of the national and State assessments and student performance levels by 

one or more nationally recognized evaluation organizations. NAEP funds also support 

studies to examine critical validity issues involving NAEP design, interpretation, and 

operations.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-49

In order to inform the American public about the performance of the Nation's students, NAEP 

produces a series of public audience and technical reports. All NAEP reports are available 

online (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/). In addition, a data tool 

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

with national and State data.

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

grades 4 and 8 and reporting of NAEP results, where feasible, by disability status and limitedEnglish proficiency as well as by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender. The 

Federal Government is specifically prohibited from using NAEP to influence standards, 

assessments, curriculum, or instructional practices at the State and local levels, or from using 

NAEP to evaluate individual students or teachers or provide rewards or sanctions for individual 

students, teachers, schools, or school districts. In addition, the use of NAEP data for student 

promotion or graduation purposes is prohibited, and NAEP should not affect home schools. 

Maintenance of a system of records containing personally identifiable information on students is 

also barred, and assessments must not evaluate or assess personal or family beliefs and 

attitudes.

Test integrity is further ensured by the Commissioner for Education Statistics’ ability to decline 

to release cognitive test items that will be used in future assessments for 10 years (and longer if 

important to protect long-term trend data) while continuing to provide for public access to 

assessment materials in secure settings. The NAEP statute requires that the public be notified 

about such access; requires that access be provided within 45 days in a mutually convenient 

setting; establishes procedures for receiving, reviewing, and reporting complaints; and provides 

criminal penalties for unauthorized release of assessment instruments.

Finally, the NAEP law mandates that participation be voluntary for students and schools, as well 

as for local educational agencies. Each participating State must give permission for the release 

of the results of its State assessment. However, under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA), each State participating in the Title I program had to develop a State 

plan (ESEA, Title I, Part A, Section 1111) in which it agreed to participate in the biennial 

grades 4 and 8 reading and mathematics NAEP assessments beginning in the 2002-2003 

school year, provided that the Secretary of Education pays for the costs of participation. Any 

State with an approved plan under section 1111 is deemed to have authorized the release of its 

grades 4 and 8 reading and mathematics NAEP data.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-50

Funding levels for both NAEP and NAGB for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

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

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

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

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

2017....................................................................................156,745

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $156.9 million in fiscal year 2018 for the Assessment program, 

level with the fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department 

of Education Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $156.7 million for this program. Of the request

amount, $148.7 million would provide support for NAEP and $8.2 million would support NAGB. 

As the largest continuing and nationally representative source of data on what the Nation’s 

students know and can do in various subject areas, NAEP plays a critical role in helping to 

benchmark national education progress. Since most States and districts use their own unique 

assessments, such a benchmark is essential and will likely be even more important as States 

work to improve their accountability systems with the increased flexibility granted in the Every 

Student Succeeds Act. 

NAEP State-level assessments are held every other year, meaning that costs are considerably 

higher in some years and lower in others. Due to this cycle, the Department requests that these 

funds remain available for 2 years, as they have been in recent years, in order to provide 

flexibility to administer these assessments and spread out costs over time.

National Assessment Governing Board

NAGB is an independent, bipartisan organization that formulates policy guidelines for NAEP. 

While the NAEP reading and mathematics assessments are mandated in frequency and in 

grade levels assessed by the National Assessment of Education Progress Authorization Act, 

NAGB has discretion in selecting which non-mandatory subject areas will be assessed and how 

often. In addition, NAGB is responsible for: 

• Developing the student achievement levels for each grade and subject area assessed;

• Taking appropriate actions to improve the form, content, use, and reporting of NAEP;

• Developing assessment objectives and specifications for each subject area;

• Developing standards and procedures for regional and national comparisons;

• Planning and executing the initial public release of NAEP reports; 

• Developing a process for review of the assessments; 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-51

• Designing the NAEP methodology, content, frameworks; and

• Developing guidelines for reporting and dissemination. 

Since NAGB began setting standards for NAEP in 1990, the achievement levels (Basic, 

Proficient, and Advanced) are a signature feature of the reporting of NAEP results. Given the 

importance of reporting NAEP results in ways that lead to valid, reliable, and clear 

interpretations, the statute requires independent evaluations of the NAEP achievement levels. 

A recent evaluation of the mathematics and reading achievement levels was conducted by the 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the final report was issued in 

November 2016. The evaluation focused on the extent to which NAEP’s achievement levels for 

mathematics and reading are valid, reliable, and informative to the public. The evaluation report

concluded that the achievement levels are a meaningful and important part of NAEP reporting 

and recommended seven areas for improvement 

(https://www.nap.edu/read/23409/chapter/1#ix). More information on the evaluation and a 

summary of key recommendations are provided in the Program Performance Information 

section. 

The recommendations from the evaluation are consistent with NAGB’s recently approved 

strategic vision for NAEP and will help inform next steps in improving the reporting of NAEP 

results. The strategic vision, approved in November 2016, expands outreach efforts to promote 

the use and awareness of NAEP and related resources; emphasizes innovation to keep pace 

with changes in technology and standards; and outlines next steps that will advance the 

content, design, and reporting of NAEP, such as exploring ways to measure the complex skills 

that students need to transition into postsecondary education and careers. The strategic vision 

will focus the Governing Board’s work through the year 2020 and is available here: 

https://nagb.gov/content/nagb/assets/documents/newsroom/press-releases/2016/nagbstrategic-vision.pdf. 

NAGB’s strategic vision will guide program activities implemented in fiscal year 2018. 

Specifically, the following activities will be supported with the $8.2 million request:

• Salaries, expenses, and operations of NAGB staff; 

• Conducting follow-up work on improving and strengthening the NAEP achievement levels

based on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s 

recommendations and continued validation studies on achievement levels in other NAEP 

subject areas;

• Updating frameworks in NAEP mathematics, reading, U.S. history, civics, and geography to 

ensure that the frameworks reflect accurate and updated content and allow for digital 

deliveries;

• Conducting NAEP linking studies with other assessments, such as the ACT and the Trends 

in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS);
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-52

• Expanding outreach and engagement for initial public release efforts and efforts to enhance 

NAEP data use by continuously providing results to parents, educators and policymakers; 

and

• Conducting technical research to support implementation of activities in NAGB’s strategic 

vision and other legislative mandates. 

National Assessment of Educational Progress

Per authorizing statute, the Commissioner of Education Statistics must conduct the mandatory 

assessments and, to the extent time and resources allow, implement the non-mandatory 

assessments approved by NAGB. The current schedule of assessments 

(https://www.nagb.org/naep/assessment-schedule.html), approved by NAGB in November

2015, includes:

Year Subject

National 

Grades 

Assessed

State Grades 

Assessed

TUDA Grades 

Assessed

2017

Reading

Mathematics

Writing

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2018

U.S. History

Civics

Geography

Technology and Engineering Literacy

8

8

8

8

2019

Reading

Mathematics

Science

High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2021

Reading

Mathematics

Writing

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

8

4, 8

4, 8

2022

U.S. History

Civics

Geography

Economics

Technology and Engineering Literacy

8, 12

8, 12

8, 12

12

8, 12

2023

Reading

Mathematics

Science

High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8, 12

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

4, 8

2024 Arts

Foreign Language

8

12

The costs associated with this approved schedule are complex since they are a function of: the 

combination of assessments in the field; whether the subject areas content can be administered 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-53

together with other subject areas for efficiency; what grade and subject area combinations are 

being assessed; at what scope grades and subject areas are being assessed (e.g., National 

only, or National and State); and a variety of other factors associated with bridge studies (such 

as the program’s bridge study for the transition from paper-and-pencil assessment to digitallybased technology) and changes in design, sampling, and methodology. Any changes in such 

key factors will directly impact the estimated cost of the schedule of assessments. As with all 

NAEP contracts, the cost for any given assessment is spread out over four or more years, 

multiple contracts, and hundreds of tasks. Additionally, since NCES contracts will be renewed 

in 2018, much of the data collection, scoring, analysis, and reporting cost of assessments 

scheduled in 2018 and beyond are based on government cost estimates and not estimates 

obtained through the contracting process. With these caveats in mind, the Department 

anticipates that fiscal year 2018 funds will be used to support the following: 

• Sampling and data collection: 2018 U.S. History, Civics, Geography, and Technology and 

Engineering Literacy assessments.

• Pilot testing: 2019 Reading, Mathematics, and Science assessments.

• Item development: 2022 U.S. History, Civics, Geography, Economics, and Technology and 

Engineering Literacy assessments. 

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

assessments were administered to students through digital-based technology. This 

innovation followed a trend in assessment delivery across the Nation as States transition to 

digital assessments. DBAs have a number of advantages, including providing data on 

students’ test-taking strategies and allowing students to demonstrate important skills in 

problem solving and analytical thinking through an enhanced platform and test items. For 

example, DBAs are capable of including more interactive question types, such as 

simulations and graphing, allowing for the measurement of skills not as easily assessed by 

paper-and-pencil assessments. 

Funding for DBAs support technology costs, as well as bridge studies to compare results 

using paper-and-pencil assessments to results using DBAs. These studies guide NAEP in 

maintaining the NAEP data trend through the transition from paper-and-pencil assessments 

to DBAs. Such continuity is critical to NAEP because it allows policymakers, researchers, 

and practitioners to compare student achievement in key subject areas over time, and is one 

of the NAEP’s most prominent features. Maximum scientific rigor in assessment 

methodology must be implemented if NAEP’s decades-long trend lines for States and 

TUDAs are to be maintained. The technology and bridge studies will also help to ensure 

uniform testing conditions across schools in order to maintain the validity and reliability 

necessary for NAEP data integrity.

• Supporting TUDA: Since 2002, TUDA has explored the use of NAEP to report on the 

performance of public school students at the district level. Demand for TUDA has grown 

among urban districts, largely because the results have proven to be so useful. Specifically, 

TUDA results provide information about how well individual urban districts perform relative to 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-54

other urban districts across the Nation, while simultaneously providing districts with 

high-quality data that may be used to improve instruction. 

Examples of TUDA enabling districts to pursue meaningful innovations include: Atlanta 

Public Schools used TUDA data to redefine its professional development program in 

literacy; Boston Public Schools used TUDA 4th grade reading results to refocus its literacy 

instruction in the 2nd and 3rd grades; Houston Independent School District used NAEP 

4th grade mathematics data to modify its curriculum; and; Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools 

used the NAEP 8th grade mathematics frameworks to create a high school-readiness 

assessment. The eligibility criteria for participation of urban school districts in TUDA are set 

by NAGB and include cities having a population of 250,000 and a student enrollment of a 

minimum of approximately 1,500 students per subject per grade level assessed. Eligible 

districts can submit an application to NAGB prior to the assessment year in which TUDA is 

to be conducted. NAGB staff review applications and recommend new districts for 

participation in TUDA to NAGB for final action. In 2015, 21 urban districts participated, and 

in 2017, the number of urban districts participating increased to 27.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2016

2017

Annualized CR 2018

NAEP $149,000 $148,717 $148,717

NAGB____________ 8,235 8,219 8,219

Total, Assessment 157,235 156,936 156,936

Number of full-time equivalent permanent

 personnel associated with NAGB 14 14 14

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

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

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

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

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

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

this program. 

Measure: The extent to which customers would recommend the Nation’s Report Card to others 

and would rely on the Nation’s Report Card in the future, as measured by the American 

Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-55

Year Target Actual

2010 81% 79%

2014 81 74

2016 81 72

2018 81

Additional information: NCES collects customer satisfaction information through the ACSI 

(http://www.theacsi.org/), which provides satisfaction scores based on samples of customers. 

The baseline for this measure, which showed that 81 percent of respondents would recommend 

the Nation’s Report Card to others and would rely on it in the future, was established using data 

for 2008. ACSI data will be collected approximately every other year. The figures for 2010, 

2014, and 2016 were respectively 79 percent, 74 percent, and 72 percent. 

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

Explorer (an online tool for analyzing NAEP data sets). NCES changed its methodology in the 

way user data are collected and redesigned the NAEP Data Explorer to include higher quality 

data for performance measurement and improvement. Baseline data for this measure was 

collected in fiscal year 2016 and will be reported with 2017 data and 2018 targets at the end of 

fiscal year 2017. 

Efficiency Measures

The following efficiency measures examine the actual time from the end of data collection to 

release of the initial national reading and mathematics assessments to NAGB. The goal is to 

ensure that NAEP results are available within 6 months of each reading and mathematics 

assessment, and the measure is an indication of how efficiently the Department analyzes and 

reports NAEP results. Because any year with new frameworks requires additional work to 

analyze the results (e.g., conducting trend studies and having achievement levels set by NAGB) 

and produce the final reports, NCES believes it is appropriate to exempt assessments with new 

frameworks from the efficiency measure calculations. This provides more comparable 

measurements from year-to-year, since different percentages of assessments may have new 

frameworks each year.

The measures are:

• The timeliness of the release of National NAEP data for Reading and Mathematics 

Assessments.

• The percentage of NAEP reports on State-level reading and mathematics assessments 

ready for release by NAGB within 6 months of the end of data collection.

• The percentage of NAEP initial releases, excluding national and State reading and 

mathematics assessments, ready for release by NAGB within 12 months of the end of data 

collection.

Timeliness of the Release of National NAEP Data for Reading and Mathematics Assessments: 

NCES has committed to releasing National NAEP results for reading and mathematics to NAGB 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-56

within 6 months of the end of data collection in any year in which there are not new frameworks. 

It met this goal for 2009 (4th, 8th, and 12th grade mathematics) and 2011 (4th, 8th, and 12th grade 

reading and mathematics). In 2009, the reading assessment had new frameworks, and the 

results for the 4th, 8th, and 12th grade reading assessments were released to NAGB in 

12 months. NCES met the goal again in 2013 and 2015, when 4th, 8th, and 12th grade 

assessments were conducted in reading and mathematics.

Timeliness of State-level Reading and Mathematics Assessments: NCES also has committed to 

releasing State-level reading and mathematics assessments to NAGB within 6 months, except 

when the assessments have new frameworks. In 2009, the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades 

mathematics results were released in 6 months, and in 2011, both reading (4th and 8th grades) 

and mathematics (4th and 8th grades) were released within 6 months, all of which met the goal. 

(There was no 12th grade assessment in 2011.) The 2009 State reading results, which had new 

frameworks, were released in 12 months. NCES met the goal in 2013 and 2015, when State 

assessments were conducted in reading and mathematics for grades 4, 8, and 12.

Timeliness of Other Assessments: NCES has committed to releasing results of all other 

assessments to NAGB within 12 months, except in years with new frameworks. In 2007, 

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

12-month time frame, and since then NCES has reported that all such assessments have met 

that time schedule.

Other Performance Information

The Department completed an evaluation of NAEP in 2009 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

established a Technical Documentation website (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/) that 

provides access to documentation for the assessment.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine completed an evaluation of 

the NAEP achievement levels (Basic, Proficient, and Advanced) in 2016 

(https://www.nap.edu/read/23409/chapter/1#ix), concluding that the achievement levels are a 

meaningful and important part of NAEP reporting. The evaluation report provided 

recommendations to ensure that the achievement levels represent the knowledge and skills of 

students at each level. Recommendations included:

• Evaluate the alignment of achievement levels for grade 4 and grade 8 mathematics 

assessments and revise them as needed.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Assessment

V-57

• Regularly review the achievement-level descriptors to ensure they reflect both the 

frameworks and the incorporation of those frameworks in NAEP assessments. 

• Research the relationships between the NAEP achievement levels and concurrent or future 

performance on measures external to NAEP, such as being on track for a college-ready 

high school diploma for 8th grade students and readiness for middle school for 4th grade 

students. 

• Provide guidance to NAEP data users to help them determine inferences that are best made 

with achievement levels and those best made with scale score statistics. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-58

Research in special education

(Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Part E)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from 

Annualized CR

$53,897 $54,000 $53,897 0

1

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Research in Special Education (RiSE) program supports research in critical areas of 

special education and early intervention services. The National Center for Special Education 

Research (NCSER), established within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) in 2005, 

conducts sustained programs of scientifically rigorous research that aim to improve a range of 

education outcomes for students with or at-risk for disabilities, including: developmental 

outcomes for infants and toddlers with disabilities; school readiness; achievement in core 

academic content areas (reading, writing, mathematics, science); behaviors that support 

learning in academic contexts for students with disabilities or at risk for disabilities; and 

functional skills that improve education outcomes and transitions to employment, independent 

living, and postsecondary education.

Investments in the special education research grants program have led to a number of 

important advances in knowledge and practice that have improved education outcomes for 

students with disabilities. Previous activities supported with RiSE funds include:

• Improving Mathematics Outcomes for Students with Disabilities: 68 percent of 8th grade 

students with disabilities who participated in the 2015 National Assessment of Educational 

Progress mathematics assessment scored below the basic level compared to 23 percent of 

students without disabilities. To address this achievement gap, NCSER funded a national 

research and development center in mathematics that has expanded research to improve 

mathematics learning. For example, the center has found that fraction knowledge is 

predictive of later algebra knowledge and mathematics achievement in high school 

(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0956797612440101); and that the ability of a 

student to estimate the placement of whole numbers on a number line in 3rd grade is an

important predictor of fractions knowledge (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.02.001). 

The center has also evaluated mathematics interventions, including a computer game in 

which older students practiced and received feedback on placing fractions on a number line 

(http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165243) and an 

intervention for students who struggle to understand fraction magnitudes 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-59

(http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/edu/106/2/499/). Both interventions were shown to have 

large effects for students when compared to students in the business-as-usual condition. 

• Improving the Quality of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs): IEPs are critical to 

ensuring that students with disabilities who receive special education services under the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) have meaningful access to and achieve 

progress in the general curriculum. Research has indicated that IEPs conveying high 

expectations for student achievement and aligning with academic standards are more likely 

to lead to beneficial student outcomes. However, constructing high-quality, standardsbased IEPs is an ongoing challenge for educators. To address this difficulty, a NCSER 

grantee developed the IEP Quality Tutorial, a web-based tutorial and decisionmaking 

support system to assist educators in writing and prioritizing high-quality IEP goals that are 

aligned to students’ needs. Project findings indicate that teachers who used the tutorial 

showed significant improvement in the quality of their IEP goals and that students showed 

greater improvements in reading scores on their State achievement test 

(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022466912453940). The tutorial is being 

used by nearly 4,000 educators in over 100 counties in Illinois and will have continued 

funding from the Illinois State Board of Education.

• Improving Outcomes through the Use of Technology: Through a series of NCSER-funded 

grants, researchers have developed and tested NumberShire, a mobile and desktop gamebased mathematics intervention for early elementary students with or at risk for learning 

disabilities. The intervention incorporates evidence-based instructional practices such as 

providing explicit, systematic, and frequent instruction, differential learning pathways, and 

goal setting and formative assessment-based performance monitoring. NumberShire was 

supported through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and further 

developed with a NCSER grant to evaluate the promise of the intervention for improving 

outcomes for 1st grade students. Findings from this study showed that NumberShire resulted 

in statistically significant positive effects on students’ whole number concepts and skills 

(http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19345747.2015.1119229). With a 

2016 NCSER grant, researchers are rigorously evaluating the efficacy of NumberShire with 

1st grade students at risk for mathematics learning disabilities.

• Assessing Transition Needs and Post-School Goals of Secondary Students: Federal law 

requires the use of use of transition assessments to identify the needs and post-school 

goals of students with disabilities and to support those goals prior to high school 

graduation. However, practitioners have limited access to empirically-based transition 

assessments to help them identify the knowledge and skills that students need to increase 

their likelihood of attaining post-school goals. A 2010 project funded by NCSER resulted in 

the development of the Transition Assessment and Goal Generator (TAGG), a practical, 

easy-to-use instrument with student, parent, and teacher versions to facilitate the 

development of transition plans and post-school goals. Teachers can use TAGG to develop 

transition goals and actions to achieve these goals. This information can then be directly 

inserted into students’ IEPs. Research on TAGG indicates that the tool is a valid and 

reliable assessment of non-academic skills associated with postsecondary education and 

employment (http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2165143417691021). The TAGG 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-60

website and tool (https://tagg.ou.edu/tagg/) are being accessed by each State and around 

the world, with over 2,600 registered users and plans to translate the tool into Spanish. 

• Improving School Team Problem Solving and Student Behavioral Outcomes: School 

personnel frequently use academic and behavioral data to make decisions about systemslevel issues, instructional practices, and student-level intervention and progress. However, 

there is limited research on the procedures that contribute to effective problem-solving 

among school teams and improved outcomes for students. A 2007 grant from NCSER 

resulted in the development of the Team-Initiated Problem Solving (TIPS) training and 

coaching model. TIPS supports school teams in using data to identify academic and 

behavior problems, and build, implement, and evaluate strategies to improve student 

outcomes. A 2012 NCSER-supported study found that TIPS is related to improvements in 

the problem solving process used by school-based intervention teams, the development and 

implementation of solutions, and the behavior of students. The TIPS model has been 

implemented in over 1,200 schools across the Nation; training materials are available at the 

Department’s Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports technical assistance center

website (https://www.pbis.org/training/tips). 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2013.................................................................................. $47,295

2014.................................................................................... 54,000

2015.................................................................................... 54,000 

2016.................................................................................... 54,000 

2017.................................................................................... 54,000

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $53.9 million for RiSE in fiscal year 2018, level with the fiscal 

year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department of Education 

Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $54.0 million for this program. RiSE funding supports a 

comprehensive program of special education research designed to expand the knowledge and 

understanding of infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities and answer questions about 

how children with disabilities develop and learn and how best to support their development 

through improved teaching and special education and related services. Continued investment 

in the long-term programs of research administered by the National Center for Special 

Education Research (NCSER) is necessary to enhance the research base on what works and 

develop evidence-based practices and policies that will result in improved developmental 

outcomes and school readiness, academic achievement, and transition from high school to 

postsecondary education, employment, and independent living for students with disabilities. 

In order to provide the flexibility IES needs to plan and administer a regular cycle of research 

competitions, the Administration requests that funding be available for 2 years, as it has been in 

previous years.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-61

At the 2018 request level, IES would use 2018 funds and funds carried over from 2017 to 

support approximately $42.7 million in continuation costs of grants awarded in prior years and 

$19.9 million in new grant awards; an additional $1.5 million would support peer review, 

logistical support, and other activities. 

IES is holding two competitions for awards in 2017; these competitions were announced in the 

Federal Register on March 8, 2016:

• Special Education Research Competition: The Special Education Research Grants program 

supports research on topics that are relevant to the needs of students with disabilities, their 

families, educators, and policymakers, spanning from the early intervention needs of infants 

and toddlers with disabilities to transition outcomes for students with disabilities leaving 

secondary education. 

Due to limited funding for new awards, NCSER focused the 2017 competition on the critical 

need area for research on issues related to teachers and other instructional personnel within 

the following broad topic areas:

o Autism Spectrum Disorders; 

o Cognition and Student Learning in Special Education; 

o Early Intervention and Early Learning in Special Education; 

o Families of Children with Disabilities; 

o Mathematics and Science Education; 

o Professional Development for Teachers and Related Service Providers; 

o Reading, Writing, and Language Development; 

o Social and Behavioral Outcomes to Support Learning; 

o Special Education Policy, Finance, and Systems; 

o Technology for Special Education; and 

o Transition Outcomes for Secondary Students with Disabilities. 

The goal areas for the grants are:

o Exploration;

o Development and Innovation;

o Efficacy and Replication;

o Effectiveness; and 

o Measurement.

The award sizes and project lengths vary by the type of project; for example, the maximum 

award for an Exploration project solely involving secondary data is $600,000 over 2 years, 

while an Effectiveness project can receive up to $3.8 million over 5 years. Information on 

the competition is available at http://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2017_84324A.pdf.

IES anticipates making approximately $9.3 million in new awards in fiscal year 2017. The 

applications were due on August 4, 2016; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2017.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-62

• Research Training Programs in Special Education Competition: IES funds applications for 

its Research Training Programs in Special Education under three topics: (1) Postdoctoral 

Research Training; (2) Early Career Development and Mentoring; and (3) Methods Training. 

The purpose of the training programs is to prepare individuals to conduct rigorous and 

relevant special education and early intervention research that advances knowledge within 

the field and addresses issues that are critical to education policymakers and practitioners. 

The Postdoctoral Research Training and Early Career Development and Mentoring 

programs seek to build the next generation of special education and early intervention 

researchers. The Methods Training topic supports advanced methodological training used to 

conduct rigorous research in special education and early intervention. In 2017, IES limited 

applications for its Research Training Programs in Special Education to the Early Career 

Development and Mentoring topic. The maximum grant award and duration for this topic is 

$400,000 over 4 years. Additional information on the 2017 competition is available at 

http://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2017_84324B.pdf.

IES anticipates making approximately $0.4 million in new awards in fiscal year 2017. The 

applications were due on August 4, 2016; applicants will be notified by July 1, 2017.

The Research in Special Education program provides support for three additional grant areas: 

Special Education Research and Development Centers, a research initiative named “Accelerate 

the Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities,” and low-cost, short duration 

evaluations of special education interventions. 

• Special Education Research and Development Centers: Special education research and 

development centers (http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/RandD/) are intended to contribute significantly 

to solutions to special education problems in the United States by engaging in research, 

development, evaluation, and national leadership activities. Each research and 

development center conducts research and analyses within a specific topic area and 

provides national leadership in advancing evidence-based practices and policies within its 

topic area. Unlike special education research grants that support a single research study, 

the research and development center grants support a focused program of research that 

may include several researchers working on separate studies that are designed to 

contribute to our understanding of a particular topic. NCSER has funded six centers since 

2008, the most recent of which have an end date in fiscal year 2017. Due to limited funding, 

NCSER has been unable to fund new research and development centers since fiscal year 

2012. 

• Accelerating the Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities Research 

Initiative: In 2012, IES invited applications for a new research initiative on developing and 

evaluating interventions to accelerate the reading and mathematics achievement of 3rd

through 8th grade students with or at risk for learning disabilities who demonstrate the most 

intractable learning problems. IES made one award in 2013.

• Low-Cost, Short Duration Evaluation of Special Education Interventions: This program 

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

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

example, within a single semester or academic year. The evaluations are low cost—up to 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-63

$250,000 over 2 years—because they focus on outcomes that can be easily measured 

using administrative records. The grants will are carried out by partnerships between

research institutions and SEAs or LEAs. IES anticipates making approximately $100,000 in 

new awards in fiscal year 2017. The applications were due on August 4, 2016; applicants 

will be notified by July 1, 2017.

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

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

information is available at http://ies.ed.gov/funding/unsolicited.asp. Program funds also pay for 

peer review of new grant awards and logistical support. The Department has budgeted for peer 

review costs each year; any funds not used for peer review could be used for grants.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures

2016

Funds

2017

Annualized 

CR Funds

2018

Funds

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

Research Activities:

Research Grants

 cation R esearch Gr ants: New grant awards $19,999 $9,291 TBD 36 20 TBD

 ation R esearch Gr ants: Grant award continuations 16,708 38,150 $40,929 29 65 _74

Special Education R esearch Gr ants: Total 36,707 47,441 TBD 65 85 TBD

Research Training

Research Trai ning: New grant awards 814 438 TBD 7 4 TBD

Research Trai ning: Grant award continuations 91 1,040 1,696 1 8 12

Research Trai ning: Total 905 1,478 TBD 8 12 TBD

Research and Development 

Centers

 D evelopment Centers: New grant awards 0 0 TBD 0 0 TBD

 D evelopment Centers: Grant award continuations 4,197 0 0 2 0 0

Special Education R esearch and D evelopment Centers: Total 4,197 0 TBD 2 0 0

Students with Learning 

Disabilities Initiative

 abiliti es R esearch Initi ati ve Grant award continuations $2,000 $2,000 TBD 1 1 TBD

Low-Cost, Short Duration

Evaluation of Special 

Education Interventions

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons New grant awards $117 $126 TBD 1 1 TBD

 n of Educati on Inter venti ons Grant award continuations 0 133 $124 0 1 1

 Low-Cost Eval uation of Educati on Inter venti ons Total 117 259 TBD 1 2 TBD
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-64

Output Measures

2016

Funds

2017

Annualized 

CR Funds

2018

Funds

2016

Awards

2017

Awards

2018

Awards

Unsolicited Awards

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

 ds: Grant award continuations 0 0 0 0 0 0

Unsolicited Awar ds: Total 0 0 TBD 0 0 TBD

Subtotal, new grant awards 20,930 9,855 19,905 44 25 TBD

Subtotal, grant continuations 22,996 41,323 42,749 33 75 87

Subtotal, grants 43,926 51,178 62,654 77 100 TBD

Other activities:

Logistics and Support/Other 250 555 260

Peer review of new award 

applications 600 1,250 1,250

Subtotal, Other 

activities 850 1,805 1,510

Carryover from Previous Fiscal 

Year (129) (9,353) (10,267)

Carryover to Next Fiscal Year 9,353 10,267 0

Total 54,000 53,897 53,897

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” are still be to determined. New grant award amounts in 2017 and 2018 are 

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

Continuation costs for 2018 reflect estimates of new awards in 2017.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

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

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

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

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

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

program. The Department established new measures for NCSER in fiscal year 2014.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-65

Goal: Transform education into an evidence-based field.

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

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

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 78%

2015 80% 81

2016 83 86

2017 88

2018 90

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

projects. NCSER has been funding research projects since 2006. Given the lag from time of 

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

year is the cumulative number of grants that have been funded through the end of the fiscal 

year 3 years prior to the reporting year. Baseline data was established for fiscal year 2014. 

The percentage for fiscal year 2016 reflects all projects funded from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal 

year 2013 (the total of which is 266). The 2017 target was increased from 85 to 88 percent 

since NCSER exceeded the original 2017 target in 2016. Through grantee annual reporting 

requirements, NCSER gathers information about peer-reviewed publications produced with 

grant funding, and records those publications in the IES Catalog of Education Research (ICER). 

Counts are then generated from ICER. 

Measure: The number of NCSER-supported interventions with evidence of efficacy in improving 

education outcomes for students with or at risk for disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 33

2015 35 39

2016 43 43

2017 47

2018 51

Additional information: Since 2006, NCSER has supported efficacy evaluations of fully 

developed interventions to determine whether they produce a beneficial impact on student 

education outcomes. This measure reflects the cumulative number of interventions NCSER has 

funded that have demonstrated efficacy in improving student outcomes. Student education 

outcomes include school readiness for young children, and both academic outcomes and social 

and behavioral competencies for school-age students. School readiness outcomes include 

reading, pre-reading, pre-writing, early mathematics, early science, and social-emotional skills 

that prepare young children for school. Student academic outcomes include achievement in 

core academic content (reading, writing, mathematics, science), and behaviors that support 

learning for students with disabilities or at-risk for disabilities from prekindergarten through high 

school. Additional education outcomes include developmental and functional outcomes that 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-66

improve education results and transitions to employment, independent living, and 

postsecondary education for students with disabilities.

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

period. Through grantees’ final performance reports, NCSER identifies peer-reviewed 

publications and reports produced with grant funding that provide evaluation results describing 

improved student outcomes. In addition, NCSER updates grantee publications annually in the 

ICER database. NCSER also reviews those updates to ensure that all publications of 

completed studies which examine causal impact are considered for review under this measure. 

NCSER submits these peer-reviewed publications and reports to the What Works 

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

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

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

students on at least one relevant education outcome.

Thus, the reported data are the cumulative numbers of interventions since 2006 with evidence 

of meeting WWC standards and having positive effects on student outcomes as determined by 

WWC reviewers. The baseline was established in fiscal year 2014.

Measure: The number of newly developed or modified interventions with evidence of promise 

for improving education outcomes for students with or at risk for disabilities. 

Year Target Actual

2014 Baseline 27

2015 36 38

2016 43 45

2017 51

2018 60

Additional information: Since 2006, NCSER has supported the development of new 

interventions and determined whether these interventions have promise to produce beneficial 

impacts on student education outcomes. This measure reflects the cumulative number of 

interventions NCSER has funded through Development and Innovation projects that show 

promise for improving student outcomes. Student education outcomes include school readiness 

for young children, and both academic outcomes and social and behavioral competencies for 

school-age students. School readiness outcomes include reading, pre-reading, pre-writing, 

early mathematics, early science, or social-emotional skills that prepare young children for 

school. Student academic outcomes include achievement in core academic content (reading, 

writing, mathematics, science), and behaviors that support learning for students with disabilities 

or at risk for disabilities from kindergarten through high school. Additional education outcomes 

include developmental and functional outcomes that improve educational results and transitions 

to employment, independent living, and postsecondary education for students with disabilities.

NCSER reviews grantees’ final reports and peer-reviewed publications for completed research 

grants and determine the number of projects that have generated evidence of promise. 

Evidence of promise must meet the Education Department General Education Regulations 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Research in special education

V-67

(EDGAR) standards for evidence of promise. To meet the standards, grantees must report pilot 

study evidence that the intervention produced a statistically significant or substantively important 

positive association (0.25 standard deviation or larger) for at least one student outcome.

The reported data are the cumulative numbers of newly developed or modified interventions 

since 2006 with evidence of promise meeting EDGAR standards as determined by NCSER 

based on grantee final performance reports and peer-reviewed publications, if available. In 

2014, NCSER established baseline numbers to report for this measure.

Efficiency Measures

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

employed in the National Center for Special Education Research.

Year Target Actual

2012 38 40

2013 40 38

2014 35 33

2015 30 38

2016 37 37

2017 33

2018 30

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

research grants. These data are collected from the official grant files for NCSER. Budget 

constraints led to a limited number of competitions and awards since 2013. The targets have 

been adjusted for each year accordingly. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-68

Statewide longitudinal data systems

(Educational Technical Assistance Act, Section 208)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from

Annualized CR

$34,473 $32,281 $34,473 0

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

in FY 2018 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Section 208 of the Educational Technical Assistance Act (ETAA) authorizes the Secretary to 

make competitive grants to State educational agencies (SEAs) to enable them to design, 

develop, and implement Statewide longitudinal data systems (SLDS) to efficiently and 

accurately manage, analyze, disaggregate, and use individual student data, consistent with the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. The goals of the program are to 

improve data quality, promote data linkages, encourage the accurate and timely generation of 

data for reporting and improving student achievement, and facilitate research to improve student 

achievement and close achievement gaps.

The grants are expected to help SEAs develop, expand, or improve data systems, and may 

support necessary training, technical assistance, and other activities to promote the effective 

use of data. Funds must supplement, not supplant, other State or local funds used for 

developing State data systems and may not be used to support ongoing implementation and 

maintenance of such systems. Administered by the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), SLDS grants are awarded 

competitively, based on the technical quality of the proposals.

IES has conducted six competitions to date. The first round of grants was awarded in 

November 2005 and the last round in 2015. The focus of the competitions has changed over 

time: early competitions focused on developing the necessary infrastructure for SEAs to develop 

their SLDS and to link K-12 data to early childhood, postsecondary, and workforce data, while

the most recent competition focused on States using their SLDS data to address high-priority 

policy issues. To date, 47 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and 

American Samoa have received awards.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-69

The 2015 grants, which ranged in size from $3.5 million to $7.0 million for 4-year projects, 

focused on supporting individual States’ needs to collect and use SLDS data to address specific 

priorities. States could apply for funding to address up to two of the following priority areas:

• Fiscal Equity and Return on Investment;

• Educator Talent Management;

• Early Learning;

• College and Career;

• Evaluation and Research; and

• Instructional Support.

The 2015 awards included 16 grants that, combined, addressed all six data use priority areas. 

The new awards included American Samoa as a first-time grantee, and also Tennessee, which 

had not received funding since fiscal year 2006.

Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the Department of Education Appropriations Act authorized the 

program to use a portion of the appropriation for activities to improve data coordination and use. 

In addition, the fiscal year 2009 Appropriations Act authorized the use of funds for SLDS that 

include postsecondary and workforce information and the fiscal year 2010 Appropriations Act 

added inclusion of information on children of all ages, including early childhood, as an 

authorized activity. Since 2012, the Department has had the authority to use funds to link 

Statewide elementary and secondary data systems with early childhood, postsecondary, and 

workforce data systems, or to further develop such systems.

In every grant competition, the Department expects States to use funds to significantly improve 

the ability of data systems to provide appropriate, high-quality information, consistent with

national and State privacy laws and regulations, needed to improve student outcomes. States 

should use funds to develop the necessary linkages with other agencies and States to provide 

information on early childhood services, high school graduation, college completion, and 

workforce participation. Systems developed with support from the Department must also 

improve States’ ability to report required data to the Department. Finally, funded data systems 

must improve the ability to provide regular feedback to teachers to enable them to use data to 

improve instruction, allow State and local educational agencies to devise methods for identifying 

effective teachers and teaching practices, and provide accurate information about student and 

school progress.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-70

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2013..................................................................................... $36,085

2014....................................................................................... 34,539

2015....................................................................................... 34,539 

2016....................................................................................... 34,539 

2017....................................................................................... 32,281

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Department requests $34.5 million in fiscal year 2018 for the SLDS program, level with the 

fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) amount. The Department of Education 

Appropriations Act, 2017, provided $32.3 million for this program. The 2018 funds for this 

program would provide support for continuation costs of grants awarded in 2015 and national 

activities to improve data coordination, quality, and use.

Longitudinal data systems serve as a vital source of information for educators, parents, 

policymakers, researchers, and the public on the performance of schools and what works in 

education. The Department’s investment in the SLDS program ensures that States can answer 

key questions about education, such as whether students are ready for kindergarten, whether 

students are adequately prepared for college, or whether students can earn a living after 

completing their degrees. As of the 2015 SLDS competition, 47 States, the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa have received awards. 

Through these grants, States are leveraging newly linked data to understand pressing State and 

local educational issues while incorporating SLDS data into data stories, dashboards, feedback 

reports, early warning systems, and research. For instance, many States have been able use 

these data to produce, for the first time, a comprehensive picture on what early childhood 

services are available and which children are participating in them, allowing States to prioritize 

students with the greatest needs. This type of analysis was not feasible before SLDS because 

these data were not collected at the State level.

Additionally, States have used SLDS data to support teachers. Delaware, for example, is 

analyzing SLDS data to understand the impact of State teacher retention incentives on the 

equitable distribution of highly effective educators. Hawaii is also making strides in teacher 

support, creating a new data dashboard for its teachers and focusing teacher training on using 

SLDS data to develop appropriate instructional strategies to support improvement. 

SLDS data are also used to support efforts to increase college access and completion. For 

example, Tennessee is creating an electronic alert system to notify high school students when 

they should be taking the ACT in order to apply for college. The State is planning to test which 

combination of personal and electronic notifications yields the highest number of students 

meeting college application milestones. Kentucky has used its SLDS data to explore the paths 

of GED earners in the State, including whether those earners attend postsecondary education 

institutions and what jobs they eventually acquire; while Washington used its SLDS data to 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-71

explore the role of need-based financial aid for high school graduates who continue on to 

postsecondary education, persist, and eventually earn a degree or credential. 

Supporting the use of longitudinal data is also vital as States transition under the Every 

Students Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA introduces new reporting requirements that will require 

States to collect and provide new data to the public. For example, States’ SLDS are wellpositioned to assist in meeting new postsecondary enrollment, teacher qualification, and perpupil expenditure data requirements outlined in ESSA.

To continue to support the use of longitudinal data, as well as assist States in improving data 

quality, coordination, and use as they transition to the new reporting requirements under ESSA, 

the following activities would be supported at the 2018 request level:

Grant Competitions

• 2015 Grant Competition: Approximately $27.8 million would support continuation costs of 

grants awarded in 2015. This competition focused on increasing the use of newly linked 

data to State policy and program priorities. Grants funded State-identified use cases, 

ranging from the creation of powerful human capital management systems to new tools 

educators can use to improve everyday instruction. States must have identified which one 

to two use cases would be supported by the grant along with any needed data linkages, 

planned reporting tools, and support resources to ensure these tools would be useful to 

stakeholders. Under this competition, 16 4-year grants were awarded in September 2015, 

with States receiving, on average, $6.5 million in total. Allowable use cases included: 

o Fiscal Equity and Return on Investment (ROI). Grantees addressing this data use case 

will use school-level financial data to examine how funds are distributed across schools 

and how school-level investments relate to student outcomes.

o Educator Talent Management. This data use case supports States developing

comprehensive educator human capital data systems to help them understand the 

impact of various educator preparation programs and to provide personalized 

professional development to increase teacher effectiveness. Educator data can include 

preparation, performance, professional development, pay, and placement information 

and could be linked to student data. 

o Early Learning. States needing to better understand the availability and characteristics 

of early learning services provided in the State were funded under the early learning

data use case. States received SLDS funds to link disparate early learning data to 

understand which children and families have access to early learning services and how 

these services impact later student outcomes. 

o College and Career. States under this data use case will use grant funds to link K-12 

data to postsecondary and workforce data, providing information from data linkages to 

students and parents in order to inform their postsecondary decisions and to 

administrators on the success of their graduates in college and careers to better align 

curriculum. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-72

o Evaluation and Research. Grants for the evaluation and research data use case will

build the capacity of States and districts to use SLDS for research and program 

evaluation in order to generate timely and meaningful information for improving 

accountability, assessment, and school support systems. Grants will fund research 

partnerships and/or increase the use of quick-turnaround evaluations to produce 

information in shorter cycles.

o Instructional Support. This data use case will enable States to use data to create realtime instructional improvement systems that give educators the information they need on 

student learning in order to personalize college- and career-aligned instruction and to 

improve outcomes for students, particularly high needs students.

Grants funded by the 2015 competition would continue to support data systems that help States 

meet reporting requirements (including data elements required for the Department’s EDFacts

and the Consolidated State Performance Report); support decisionmaking at the State, district, 

school, and classroom levels; facilitate research needed to eliminate achievement gaps and 

improve student learning and educational productivity; and provide critical information on 

education to parents and the public. The improvements to data systems supported by 

2015 grant awards will also ensure that data are available to answer key policy questions that 

will improve outcomes for all students, particularly those in high need.

National Activities

The SLDS program and its partners offer a wide and growing range of support to help State 

educational agencies design, develop, and use longitudinal data systems. Approximately 

$6.0 million would support ongoing and new activities to improve data quality, coordination, and 

use, including: 

• $3.0 million for the Education Data Technical Assistance Program (EDTAP) 

(http://nces.ed.gov/programs/slds/index.asp), which would continue to provide assistance to 

State educational agencies (SEAs) in the planning, development, expansion, and 

implementation of their longitudinal data systems. This activity provides a broad range of 

support, including a public domain clearinghouse that provides a platform for all States, 

regardless of grantee status, to share non-proprietary products developed for their 

longitudinal data systems; best practice briefs; “collaboration communities,” where staff from 

small groups of States work together to identify challenges, brainstorm solutions, and share 

best practices; webinars; listservs; and State-specific technical assistance. The array of 

technical assistance services provided by EDTAP has helped States improve the 

development and alignment of data systems to local needs. 

• $3.0 million for the Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC), which would continue to 

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

postsecondary community, and other parties engaged in building and using education data 

systems on issues related to the privacy, security, and confidentiality of student records. 

Protecting the privacy of individuals is a key support needed when building data systems 

and using student data to improve education. Additional information on the PTAC and 

resource materials is available on the website (http://www.ed.gov/ptac). 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-73

The Department requests that funding for fiscal year 2018 be available for 2 years, as it has 

been in prior years.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2016

2017

Annualized CR 2018

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ems development awar ds: New 0 0 5,7151

 ems development awar ds: Continuations $28,4892 $28,2733 22,7584

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Subtotal 28,489 28,273 28,473

Awards to improve data coordination,

quality, and use 6,000 6,000 6,000

Peer review 50 200 0

Statewi de longitudi nal data systems development awar ds Total 34,539 34,473 34,473

Number of Grant Awards

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2012 grant competition 3 0 0

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition 16 16 16

Range of Awards (Entire Grant Period) Minimum Maximum

Statewide longitudinal data systems awards

 ystems development awar ds: 2012 grant competition $3,034 $4,997

 ystems development awar ds: 2015 grant competition 3,483 7,000

1

Funds from fiscal year 2018 will be carried over for possible new awards in fiscal year 2019. 2

The fiscal year 2016 continuation awards supports grants awarded in fiscal year 2015. 3

The fiscal year 2017 continuation awards supports grants awarded in fiscal year 2015. 4

The fiscal year 2018 continuation awards supports grants awarded in fiscal year 2015.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

The Department of Education has identified priority performance goals that will help measure 

the success of the Department’s cradle-to-career education strategy, one of which is “make 

informed decisions and improve instruction through the use of data.” One strategy for ensuring 

that data are available to inform educational decisions is supporting States’ development and 

implementation of SLDS, and the Department has established three performance measures to 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-74

assess progress. These measures assess progress of all States, not just the States with grants 

in the measurement years. The Department believes that assessing the progress of all States 

is appropriate, because the goal of the program is to ensure that critical information needed to 

improve student outcomes is available across the Nation. New grant competitions take into 

consideration areas where States are having difficulty making progress and establish 

competition priorities that help direct resources to areas where additional resources are 

necessary.

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 with early childhood data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 8

2013 12 19

2014 23 26

2015 27 32

2016 29 35

2017 31

2018 33

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to track all public pre-K 

students into public kindergarten using the State longitudinal data system and by the inclusion 

of at least one additional source of early childhood data (e.g., Head Start or private pre-K) in the 

State data system. In 2012, 8 States had data systems that met the criteria, and by the end of 

2016, 35 had met the criteria, exceeding the target.

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 with postsecondary data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 9

2013 21 25

2014 28 33

2015 34 39

2016 36 44

2017 37

2018 39

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to link State

K-12 student data to State data from public 2- and 4-year institutions of higher education. As of 

the end of 2016, 44 States had met the target for this measure, exceeding the goal for the year.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Statewide longitudinal data systems

V-75

Measure: Number of States linking K-12 and postsecondary data with workforce data.

Year Target Actual

2012 Baseline 5

2013 10 12

2014 14 20

2015 22 24

2016 25 28

2017 27

2018 28

States are determined to have met this measure if they have the ability to track all public 2- and 

4-year postsecondary students to, at a minimum, State employment records (e.g., State 

unemployment insurance systems.) In 2012, the baseline year, 5 States were able to link their 

K-12 and postsecondary data with workforce data, and in 2016, 28 States were able to do so, 

exceeding the target.

Key barriers and challenges to meeting these measures include States’ and districts’ limited 

resources, State procurement practices, difficulties with cross-agency governance and data 

sharing, privacy issues, and concerns about the long-term sustainability of data systems without 

long-term Federal funding. Linkages to workforce data have presented challenges for States 

due to the lack of a common identifier, the need to comply with multiple privacy laws, and the 

challenges of multi-agency coordination. To help overcome these challenges, the Department

of Education has increased coordination with the Department of Labor and their Workforce Data 

Quality Initiative (WDQI), which provides support to allow States to develop or improve their 

longitudinal workforce data systems and create linkages to education data.

Specific activities undertaken by the Department include providing ongoing technical assistance 

to both grantees and non-grantees as they develop their State data systems; coordinating 

monitoring and technical assistance to States with both SLDS and WDQI grants through crossprogram monitoring calls, joint site visits, technical assistance resource sharing, and conference 

presentations; and providing support for common education data standards to improve the utility 

of data for research and evaluation.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

V-76

Special education studies and evaluations

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 664)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority:

2017

Annualized CR

2017

Appropriation 2018

Change from

Annualized CR

$10,797 $10,818 $10,797 0

1

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

program in FY 2018 through appropriations language.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Special Education Studies and Evaluations program awards competitive grants, contracts, 

and cooperative agreements to assess the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) and the effectiveness of State and local efforts to provide special 

education and early intervention programs and services to infants, toddlers, and children with 

disabilities.

The statute authorizes the Department to support studies, evaluations, and assessments that:

• Analyze the results achieved by State and local educational agencies to improve services 

for children with disabilities;

• Analyze State and local needs for professional development, parent training, and other 

activities that can reduce the need for disciplinary actions involving children with disabilities;

• Measure educational and transitional services and outcomes for children with disabilities, 

including those from minority backgrounds; and

• Identify and report on the placement of children with disabilities by disability category.

In addition, the Department is required to submit an annual report to Congress summarizing the 

studies and evaluations conducted under this authority; the research conducted under part E of 

the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (which authorizes research on special education); 

and the data on children with disabilities required by section 618 of the IDEA.

The IDEA requires the Secretary to delegate responsibility for most studies and evaluations in 

special education to the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-77

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2013....................................................................................$10,818

2014......................................................................................10,818

2015......................................................................................10,818

2016......................................................................................10,818

2017......................................................................................10,818

FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $10.8 million, level with the fiscal year 2017 annualized continuing 

resolution (CR) amount, to support studies, evaluations, and assessments related to the 

implementation of IDEA. The Department of Education Appropriations Act, 2017, provided 

$10.8 million for this program. IES supports a range of evaluations that are designed to provide 

information about which programs and practices are effective for improving outcomes for 

children and youth with disabilities and thereby provide concrete guidance to educators and 

parents. Within IES, the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance 

(NCEE) has primary responsibility for managing the studies and evaluations under Section 664 

of IDEA, although the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has primary responsibility 

for carrying out longitudinal studies with special education components (such as the Early 

Childhood Longitudinal Study and Middle Grades Longitudinal Study). NCEE consults with staff 

from the other IES research centers, the Office of Special Education Programs, and other 

policymakers in the Department to identify needs for new studies and the research questions 

that those studies would address. In some cases, NCEE has funded separate design contracts 

to identify options for new studies in particular areas.

At the request level, three activities would receive funding from the 2018 appropriation:

• $6.8 million for the Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices;

• $2.0 million for the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, Phase 2; and

• $2.0 million for the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study.

Information on these activities, as well as ongoing studies that will not receive funding from the 

2018 appropriation, is provided below. Additional information on completed studies is available 

at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/disabilities.asp.
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-78

Ongoing Study Cost Duration

National Evaluation of the IDEA Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination Program

$3.0 million to date September 2009 to 

June 2017

Study of Early Intervention and Special 

Education Services and Personnel

$1.1 million to date September 2010 to 

June 2017

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, 

Phase 1

$24.2 million to date September 2010 to 

February 2018

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, 

Phase 2

$7.2 million to date September 2015 to 

September 2020

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education 

Practices, Phase 1

$7.4 million to date November 2013 to 

October 2018

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered 

Systems of Support for Behavior

$23.8 million to date November 2013 to 

August 2020

State and Local Implementation of 

IDEA 2019

$4.6 million in 2017 September 2017 to 

March 2021

National Evaluation of the IDEA Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program: The IDEA 

Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) Program is the Department’s primary vehicle 

under IDEA for providing educators, policymakers, other service providers, and parents of 

children with disabilities with information on effective practices for meeting the needs of children 

with disabilities and their families. The national evaluation is designed to describe the products 

and services provided by program grantees, State and local needs for technical assistance, and 

the role the program plays in meeting these needs and supporting implementation of the IDEA. 

An interim report from the evaluation was released in October 2013 

(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20144000/pdf/20144000.pdf). 

Key findings include that TA&D centers most commonly reported providing technical assistance 

on the topics of “parent and family involvement” and “data systems and use of data for 

improvement” and that State staff rated the majority of experiences they had with the TA&D 

centers as “very satisfactory.” In addition, this analysis found some potential duplication of 

services provided by technical assistance providers; however, this analysis was unable to 

establish whether such cases were indicators of inefficiency or coordination of complementary 

services. A final report is expected to be released in June 2017.

Study of Early Intervention and Special Education Services and Personnel: The Study of Early 

Intervention and Special Education Services and Personnel is analyzing extant data on early 

intervention and special education service delivery and personnel providing services. Key 

research questions include:

• How does early intervention service delivery vary across States? 

• How do special education and related services received by children and youth vary over 

time, across States, and by school characteristics? 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-79

• How does the distribution of personnel providing special education services vary over time, 

across States, and by school characteristics? 

A final report on the study is expected to be released by June 2017.

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012): NLTS 2012 is the third longitudinal 

study in a series examining the characteristics, experiences, and post-high school outcomes of 

a nationally representative sample of youth with disabilities. NLTS 2012 focuses on students 

ages 13 to 21 (in December 2011) but also includes a small sample of students without 

disabilities to enable, for the first time, direct comparisons of students with and without 

individualized education programs (IEPs). It is part of the congressionally-mandated National 

Assessment of the IDEA. 

Phase 1 of the study addressed such questions as:

• What are the personal, family, and school characteristics of youth with disabilities in public 

schools across the country? 

• What regular education, special education, transition planning, and other relevant services 

and accommodations do youth with disabilities receive? 

• How do the services and accommodations differ from those of youth not served under IDEA, 

including those identified for services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? 

• How do the services and accommodations for youth with disabilities vary with the 

characteristics of youth? 

• How much have the services and accommodations of youth with disabilities changed over 

time? 

Phase 2 of the study will address such questions as:

• To what extent do youth with disabilities who receive special education services under IDEA 

make progress through high school compared with other youth, including those identified for 

services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? For students with disabilities, has high 

school coursetaking and completion rates changed over the past few decades?

• Are youth with disabilities achieving the post-high school outcomes envisioned by IDEA, and 

how do their college, training, and employment rates compare with those of other youth?

• How do these high school and postsecondary experiences and outcomes vary by student 

characteristics, including their disability category, age, sex, race/ethnicity, English Learner 

status, income status, and type of high school attended (including regular public school, 

charter school, career/technical school, special education school, or other State or federallyoperated institution)?
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-80

Phase 1 of the study collected baseline data in the spring of 2012 through the summer of 2013 

on a nationwide sample of youth. Phase 2 of the study, which was awarded in September 

2015, will continue to follow the sample through high school and beyond and will rely on 

administrative data, including: high school transcripts and records; National Student 

Clearinghouse data on postsecondary enrollment and persistence; financial aid information from 

the Department’s Office of Federal Student Aid; disability program participation, employment, 

and earnings information from the Social Security Administration; and vocational rehabilitative 

services and supports information from the Department’s Rehabilitative Services Administration.

IES has published two volumes (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20174016/index.asp) of a multivolume descriptive report based on the study. The first volume compares the characteristics 

and experiences of youth with an IEP to their non-IEP peers, while the second volume 

compares youth across disability groups. Overall, youth with an IEP feel positive about school 

but are more likely than their peers to struggle academically and to lag behind in taking key 

steps toward postsecondary education and jobs. Among youth with an IEP, those with autism, 

deaf-blindness, intellectual disability, multiple disabilities, and orthopedic impairments are most 

at-risk for not transitioning successfully beyond high school. The third and final volume of the 

Phase 1 report will be published by summer 2017.

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices: IDEA provides funding to States to 

support special education and related services for children and youth with disabilities, including 

young children ages 3- to 5-years old, but limited information is available on the special 

education services and supports that young children are receiving and the preschool practices 

and interventions being used in programs across states. This evaluation will research the 

impact of an intervention that integrates a content-focused curriculum for all children in inclusive 

classrooms with targeted instructional support for children with disabilities. 

Phase 1 of this evaluation is the design and feasibility phase. This phase will: (1) assess the 

feasibility of conducting an impact study of curricula or interventions promoting the literacy, 

language, and/or social-emotional skills of preschool-age children with disabilities; (2) identify 

feasible study design options for an impact study; and (3) prepare for the impact study, if 

deemed feasible to conduct. The feasibility work includes gathering descriptive data on current 

special education programs, services, and practices; these data are needed to identify 

interventions and practices to target in an impact study and to inform sampling. 

If IES identifies feasible options for conducting a study to examine the relationship between 

service receipt and outcomes for children receiving services under the IDEA Grants for Infants 

and Families program (Part C) and/or the IDEA Preschool Grants program (Part B Section 619), 

then Phase 2 will be initiated. Phase 2 of the evaluation is an impact study, which would be 

awarded in fiscal year 2018. 

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered Systems of Support for Behavior: This evaluation, 

which was formerly known as the Evaluation of School-wide Positive Behavior Support, will 

examine the effectiveness of strategies for training school staff to address problematic 

behaviors. Training school staff in supporting student behavior is becoming increasingly 

attractive to districts and schools as a vehicle for school improvement. Implementation of multitiered systems of support for behavior (MTSS-B) is an approach to improving school and 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-81

classroom climate as well as student outcomes. MTSS-B is a multi-tiered, systematic 

framework for teaching and reinforcing behavior for all students as well as for providing 

additional support to those who need it, and over one-third of U.S. districts report implementing 

multi-tiered systems of behavior support at the elementary school level. Although previous

evaluations of the MTSS-B framework have found positive outcomes, such as reductions in the 

number of disciplinary referrals, these evaluations have been conducted on a relatively small 

scale. The study will be a randomized trial evaluation of the impact of training in MTSS-B and 

will address the following questions:

• What is the impact on school climate, school staff practice, and student outcomes of 

providing training in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I)? 

• What is the impact on school climate, school staff practice, and student outcomes of 

providing training in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I) plus targeted 

interventions for at-risk students (Tier II)? 

• What is the impact of additional training in targeted interventions for at-risk students (Tier II) 

for schools already trained in MTSS-B that includes universal supports (Tier I)? 

• What are the impacts for relevant subgroups including students with at-risk behavior, 

students with disabilities, and teachers with less experience? 

• Which strategies are correlated with improvement in student outcomes?

The evaluation will be conducted in approximately 90 elementary schools located in 

9 geographically diverse school districts. The study will randomly assign schools to either 

training in promising MTSS-B strategies or a business-as-usual control group. Data collection 

and analyses scheduled for the 2015−2016 and 2016−2017 school years will include 

information about fidelity of implementation; implementation challenges; and impacts on student 

behavior, achievement, and identification for special education. IES anticipates releasing the 

impact report in 2018.

State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019: The most recent study of State and local 

implementation of IDEA collected data from SEAs and a national representative sample of 

school districts in 2009. In order to provide updated information on the implementation of IDEA 

in a substantially different policy context, the Department plans to award a new implementation 

study contract in 2017 to develop plans to collect descriptive information on the implementation 

of early intervention and special education programs at the State and school district levels. 

Middle Grades Longitudinal Study (MGLS): The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 

modified the MGLS (https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/mgls/) to add an oversample of students with 

IEPs. The MGLS is the first longitudinal study to provide information on children’s development 

in grades 6 through 8 and on factors associated with successful transition from elementary to 

high school. The study includes a nationally representative sample of students in grade 6 

during the 2016−2017 school year. Funds from the Special Education Studies and Evaluation 

program will enable NCES to provide information about students in three IDEA disability 

categories: autism, emotional disturbance, and specific learning disability. 
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES

Special education studies and evaluations

V-82

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

(dollars in thousands)

Output Measures 2016

2017

Annualized CR 2018

Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices $4,260 $2,641 $6,781

Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered Systems 

of Support for Behavior 2,176 512 0

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, Phase 1 0 70 0

National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012, Phase 2 652 1,967 2,016

State and Local Implementation of IDEA 2019 0 4,607 0

NCES: Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey (ECLS:K) 69 0 0

NCES: Middle Grades Longitudinal Study 3,661 0 2,000

What Works Clearinghouse Special Education Reports 0 1,000 0

 Total, Special education studies and evaluations 10,818 10,797 10,797