U.S. Department of Education 

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development 

Policy and Program Studies Service 

Results in Brief: 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 

October 2019 

Indian Education Formula Grants represent the U.S. Department of Education’s largest investment in addressing the 

unique academic and cultural needs of American Indian and Alaska Native students. The program is aimed at supporting 

services that are responsive to the unique cultural, language, and educational needs of these students and help them 

meet academic standards. School districts, tribes, Indian community-based organizations, and Bureau of Indian 

Education (BIE) schools receiving these grants are required to consult with parents and local tribes in the effort to shape 

grant-funded services that supplement and enrich regular school programs. 

This study conducted grantee surveys and case studies to examine the operations of the Title VI grants program across 

the United States and inform the field about the services that Title VI funds support, how grantees work with 

stakeholders to identify program-eligible children, and how they measure progress toward their project objectives. 

STUDY QUESTIONS 

1. What services do Title VI grants support? 

2. How do grantees work with stakeholders to identify 

program-eligible children and plan services to meet the 

needs of those children? 

3. How do grantees measure progress toward their project 

objectives? 

STUDY DESIGN 

The study included surveys of all 2017–18 Title VI grantees, 

case studies of nine purposively selected grantees, and 

analyses of extant documents and data. Data collection was 

conducted in the spring and summer of 2018. 

The online survey was administered to the grant coordinators 

of all 1,304 Title VI grantees (92 percent responded). 

The case studies were designed to capture variation across 

three dimensions: grant award size, grantee type, and 

geographic region. The site visits included semi-structured 

interviews with Title VI grant coordinators, grantee staff 

(e.g., school leaders, teachers), education leaders (e.g., 

superintendent, tribal education leader), and tribal leaders, 

as well as parent focus groups. 

Extant documents and data included grant applications, 

grantees’ annual performance reports, and budget reports. 

Highlights 

• The most common Title VI-funded services were 

academic support, cultural enrichment, and parent 

involvement. 

• Most grantees supported culturally responsive education 

by incorporating American Indian and Alaska Native 

history and culture into the curriculum and employing 

American Indian and Alaska Native teachers and support 

staff. 

• Most grantees relied on three strategies to identify 

eligible students: (1) including questions about students’ 

American Indian and Alaska Native status in the school 

registration process, (2) including Title VI student 

eligibility certification forms in enrollment packets, and 

(3) generating reports for students who identified as 

American Indian and Alaska Native on enrollment forms. 

• Most grantees collected information about students’ 

needs from the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee and 

other stakeholder groups, commonly through public 

hearings, convenings with the stakeholder groups, and 

surveys. 

• Grantees reported using multiple data sources for 

project planning, including administrative data and 

information from parents, teachers, and administrators, 

and from public hearings. 

• Most grantees used state standardized assessment 

scores, attendance data, and graduation or dropout data 

to measure progress toward their Title VI 

project objectives. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS 

In the 2017–18 school year, the Title VI program provided 

grants to 1,304 grantees. These grantees included school 

districts (88 percent), schools funded or operated by the BIE 

(10 percent), and tribes and Indian community-based 

organizations (2 percent). Grant award sizes ranged from the 

statutory minimum of $4,000 to a high of $3.3 million. More 

than half the Title VI grants were under $40,000, with a 

median size of $36,608. 

SERVICES FOR ELIGIBLE STUDENTS 

The most common Title VI-funded services were academic 

support, cultural enrichment, and parent involvement. 

Grantees used Title VI funds to support an array of activities 

and services to support better educational outcomes for 

American Indian and Alaska Native children. The most 

common were academic support such as assistance with 

homework and study skills (87 percent), cultural enrichment 

such as field trips and special events (74 percent), and parent 

involvement (62 percent). Other services supported through 

Title VI funds included college preparation (45 percent), 

mentoring (41 percent), student advocacy and leadership 

(40 percent), career preparation (37 percent), and counseling 

(35 percent); and family literacy and early childhood programs 

(both 26 percent). Funds also supported prevention programs 

focused on school dropout (42 percent), substance abuse (24 

percent), suicide (23 percent), and violence (21 percent). 

Grantees most often supported culturally responsive 

services by incorporating American Indian and Alaska Native 

history and culture into the curriculum and using American 

Indian and Alaska Native teachers and staff. 

Most grantees supported culturally responsive education by 

incorporating American Indian and Alaska Native history and 

culture into the curriculum (70 percent) and using American 

Indian and Alaska Native teachers and support staff (68 

percent). Less commonly used practices included connecting 

American Indian and Alaska Native students with mentors or 

counselors from the tribal community (48 percent), delivering 

instruction in American Indian and Alaska Native students’ 

native language (32 percent), or administering assessments in 

students’ native languages (15 percent). 

IDENTIFYING ELIGIBLE CHILDREN 

Most grantees relied on three strategies to identify eligible 

students: including questions about students’ American 

Indian and Alaska Native status in the school registration 

process, including eligibility forms in enrollment packets, 

and generating reports for students who identified as 

American Indian and Alaska Native on enrollment forms. 

About three quarters (76 percent) of Title VI grantees 

included questions about students’ American Indian and 

Alaska Native status in the school registration process, 75 

percent included student eligibility certification forms in 

school enrollment packets, and 66 percent generated reports 

for students who identified their primary or secondary 

ethnicity as American Indian or Alaska Native on enrollment 

forms. Just over half (53 percent) of grant coordinators 

reported conducting targeted outreach to notify American 

Indian and Alaska Native families about Title VI-funded 

services available for eligible children. 

ASSESSING NEEDS AND PLANNING SERVICES 

Most grantees collected information about students’ needs 

from stakeholder groups, commonly through public 

hearings, convenings with stakeholder groups, and surveys. 

Grantees often collected information about American Indian 

and Alaska Native students’ educational and culturally related 

academic needs from Title VI Parent Advisory Committees, 

educators (e.g., principals, teachers), students, school boards, 

district administrators, and school- or tribe-based parent 

committees. In conducting their needs assessments, grantees 

tended to rely on face-to-face communication such as public 

hearings (70 percent) and convenings (64 percent), although 

many also used surveys (62 percent). 

Grantees reported using multiple data sources for project 

planning, including administrative data and information 

from parents, teachers, and administrators and from public 

hearings. 

In planning services for American Indian and Alaska Native 

students, most grantees used the information gathered 

through their needs assessments, including administrative 

data such as course grades, test scores, and attendance data 

(94 percent); information from parents (86 percent) and 

teachers and administrators (82 percent); and information 

gathered through public hearings (73 percent). 

MEASURING PROGRESS TOWARD PROJECT 

OBJECTIVES 

To measure progress toward service objectives, most 

grantees used state standardized assessment scores, 

attendance data, and graduation or dropout data. 

All grantees are required to identify the data sources they will 

use to measure progress toward meeting their Title VI project 

objectives. Most grantees used state standardized 

assessment scores (83 percent), attendance data (80 

percent), and graduation or dropout data (66 percent). Less 

commonly used data sources included survey or focus group 

data collected from parents, guardians, or families of 

American Indian and Alaska Native students (46 percent), 

from the students themselves (43 percent), or from staff in 

schools serving American Indian and Alaska Native students 

(39 percent).