Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education 

Formula Grants Program 

Volume II: Technical Appendices 

Prepared for: 

U.S. Department of Education 

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development 

Policy and Program Studies Service 

Prepared by: 

Policy Studies Associates 

Leslie M. Anderson 

Alisha Butler 

SRI International 

Katrina Woodworth 

2019 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This report was produced under U.S. Department of Education Contract No. GS-10F-0554N/BPA Order EDPEP-16-A-0005/TO02 with SRI International. Jean Yan and Joanne Bogart served as the contracting officer’s 

representatives. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the 

Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, 

commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred. For the 

reader’s convenience, this publication contains information about and from outside organizations, including 

hyperlinks and URLs. Inclusion of such information does not constitute an endorsement by the Department. 

U.S. Department of Education 

Betsy DeVos 

Secretary 

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development 

James Blew 

Assistant Secretary 

Policy and Program Studies Service 

Gregory Fortelny 

Director 

2019 

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While 

permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service, Implementation 

of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program, Volume II: Technical Appendix. Washington, D.C., 

2019. 

This report is available on the Department’s website at: 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html. 

Availability of Alternate Formats 

Requests for documents in alternate formats such as Braille or large print should be submitted to the 

Alternate Format Center by calling 202-260-0852 or by contacting the 504 coordinator via email at 

om_eeos@ed.gov. 

Notice to Limited English Proficient Persons 

If you have difficulty understanding English you may request language assistance services for Department 

information that is available to the public. These language assistance services are available free of charge. If 

you need more information about interpretation or translation services, please call 1-800-USA-LEARN (1-

800-872-5327) (TTY: 1-800-437-0833), or email us at: Ed.Language.Assistance@ed.gov. Or write to: U.S. 

Department of Education, Information Resource Center, LBJ Education Building, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Washington, D.C. 20202. 

Content Contact: 

Jean Yan 

Phone: (202) 205-6212 

Email: Jean.Yan@ed.gov 
 

 

 

 

Contents 

Appendix A: Supplemental Exhibits .................................................................................................... 1 

Appendix B: Data Collection Instruments......................................................................................... 59 

Appendix C: Title VI Indian Student Eligibility Certification Form (ED 506 Form) ............................ 82 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program i 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibits 

Exhibit A-1. Distribution of the Title VI grantees, by type, 2017–18............................................ 2 

Exhibit A-2. Distribution of Title VI Indian Education grantees, by grant award size, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................... 2 

Exhibit A-3. Services and activities provided through Title VI funds, by service category, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................... 3 

Exhibit A-4. Title VI grant-funded services and activities provided, by grantee type, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................... 4 

Exhibit A-5. Average number of services and activities provided in 2017–18, 

by grant award size................................................................................................... 5 

Exhibit A-6. Average number of services and activities provided in 2017–18, 

by grantee type......................................................................................................... 5 

Exhibit A-7. Title VI grant-funded services and activities provided, by grant award size, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................... 6 

Exhibit A-8. Grantees offering teachers and support staff professional development 

on Title VI-funded services and activities, 2017–18 ................................................. 7 

Exhibit A-9. Title VI-funded services and activities for which professional development 

was offered or planned, by grantee type, 2017–18 ................................................. 8 

Exhibit A-10. Title VI-funded services and activities for which professional development 

was offered or planned, by grant award size, 2017–18 ........................................... 9 

Exhibit A-11. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education for 

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students, 2017–18 ............................ 10 

Exhibit A-12. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education, 

by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................................... 10 

Exhibit A-13. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 ................................................................................. 11 

Exhibit A-14. Grantees reporting challenges to using culturally responsive practices to 

deliver Title VI-funded services, 2017–18............................................................... 12 

Exhibit A-15. Grantees reporting that using culturally responsive practices to deliver 

Title VI-funded services was very or somewhat challenging, 

by grant award size, 2017–18................................................................................. 13 

Exhibit A-16. Grantees reporting that using culturally responsive practices to deliver 

Title VI-funded services was very or somewhat challenging, by grantee type, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................. 14 

Exhibit A-17. Grantees reporting on the extent to which it was challenging to use culturally 

responsive practices across all Title VI-funded services, 2017–18......................... 15 

Exhibit A-18. Factors challenging Title VI grantees’ efforts to deliver Title VI-funded 

services using culturally responsive practices, 2017–18 ........................................ 16 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program ii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-19. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in Title VI grantees’ 

efforts to deliver Title VI-funded services using culturally responsive 

practices, by grantee type, 2017–18 ...................................................................... 17 

Exhibit A-20. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in Title VI grantees’ efforts to 

deliver Title VI-funded services using culturally responsive practices, by grant 

award size, 2017–18 ............................................................................................... 18 

Exhibit A-21. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees 

coordinate Title VI-funded services and activities, 2017–18.................................. 19 

Exhibit A-22. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees 

coordinate Title VI-funded services and activities, 2017–18, by grant 

award size, 2017–18 ............................................................................................... 20 

Exhibit A-23. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees 

coordinate Title VI-funded services and activities, by grantee type, 2017–18 ...... 21 

Exhibit A-24. Strategies Title VI grantees use to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded 

services and activities with other programs, 2017–18........................................... 22 

Exhibit A-25. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and 

activities, 2017–18 .................................................................................................. 23 

Exhibit A-26. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and 

activities, by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................... 23 

Exhibit A-27. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and 

activities, by grant award size, 2017–18................................................................. 24 

Exhibit A-28. Grantees reporting challenges to coordinating Title VI-funded services with 

other programs, 2017–18 ....................................................................................... 24 

Exhibit A-29. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in grantees’ efforts to 

coordinate Title VI-funded services with other programs, by grantee type, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................. 25 

Exhibit A-30. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in grantees’ efforts to 

coordinate Title VI-funded services with other programs, by grant award size, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................. 26 

Exhibit A-31. Strategies grantees used to identify students eligible to receive 

Title VI-funded services, 2017–18........................................................................... 27 

Exhibit A-32. Strategies grantees used to identify students eligible to receive 

Title VI-funded services, by grant award size, 2017–18 ......................................... 28 

Exhibit A-33. Strategies grantees used to identify students who are eligible to receive 

Title VI-funded services, by grantee type, 2017–18 ............................................... 29 

Exhibit A-34. Grantees reporting challenges with strategies to identify students eligible to 

receive Title VI-funded services, 2017–18.............................................................. 30 

Exhibit A-35. Strategies to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services 

that were somewhat or very challenging, by grant award size, 2017–18.............. 31 

Exhibit A-36. Strategies to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services 

that were somewhat or very challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18.................... 32 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program iii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-37. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data 

collected on the ED 506 forms, 2017–18................................................................ 33 

Exhibit A-38. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data 

collected on the ED 506 forms, by grant award size, 2017–18 .............................. 33 

Exhibit A-39. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data 

collected through the ED 506 forms, by grantee type, 2017–18 ........................... 34 

Exhibit A-40. Grantees reporting challenges using strategies to ensure that the data 

collected through the ED 506 form are accurate and complete, 2017–18 ............ 35 

Exhibit A-41. Strategies to ensure that the data collected through the ED 506 form are 

accurate and complete that were somewhat or very challenging, 

by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................................... 36 

Exhibit A-42. Strategies to ensure that the data collected through the ED 506 form are 

accurate and complete that were somewhat or very challenging, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 ................................................................................ 37 

Exhibit A-43. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, 

2017–18 .................................................................................................................. 38 

Exhibit A-44. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, 

by grant award size, 2017–18................................................................................. 38 

Exhibit A-45. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, 

by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................................... 39 

Exhibit A-46. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder 

groups, 2017–18 .................................................................................................... 39 

Exhibit A-47. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder 

groups, by grant award size, 2017–18.................................................................... 40 

Exhibit A-48. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder 

groups, by grantee type, 2017–18.......................................................................... 40 

Exhibit A-49. Groups represented on Title VI Parent Advisory Committees, 2017–18 ............... 41 

Exhibit A-50. Groups represented on Title VI Parent Advisory Committees, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 ................................................................................ 41 

Exhibit A-51. Frequency of Title VI Parent Advisory Committee Meetings in 2017–18 .............. 41 

Exhibit A-52. Frequency of Title VI Parent Advisory Committee Meetings, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 ................................................................................ 42 

Exhibit A-53. Title VI Parent Advisory Committee support for planning, 2017–18 ..................... 42 

Exhibit A-54. Title VI Parent Advisory Committee support for planning, 2017–18, 

by grant award size, 2017–18................................................................................. 43 

Exhibit A-55. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, 2017–18.............. 44 

Exhibit A-56. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, 

by grantee type, 2017–18 ...................................................................................... 45 

Exhibit A-57. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 ................................................................................ 46 

Exhibit A-58. Grantees reporting challenges to efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and 

activities, 2017–18 .................................................................................................. 47 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program iv 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-59. Efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and activities that were 

somewhat or very challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18 .................................... 48 

Exhibit A-60. Efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and activities that were 

somewhat or very challenging, by grant award size, 2017–18............................... 49 

Exhibit A-61. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects, 2017–18 .................................................... 50 

Exhibit A-62. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects for American Indian and Alaska Native 

students, by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................... 51 

Exhibit A-63. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects, by grant award size, 2017–18................... 52 

Exhibit A-64. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI-funded project 

objectives, 2017–18................................................................................................ 53 

Exhibit A-65. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI project objectives, 

by grantee type, 2017–18....................................................................................... 54 

Exhibit A-66. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI-funded project 

objectives, by grant award size, 2017–18............................................................... 55 

Exhibit A-67. Title VI grantees reporting challenges to implementing data collection or 

data use strategies, 2017–18.................................................................................. 56 

Exhibit A-68. Data collection or data use strategies that were somewhat or very 

challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18................................................................... 57 

Exhibit A-69. Data collection or data use strategies that were somewhat or very 

challenging, 2017–18 ............................................................................................. 58 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program v 
This page intentionally left blank 
 

Appendix A. Supplemental Exhibits 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 1. Introduction 

Exhibit A-1. Distribution of the Title VI grantees, by type, 2017–18 

Percent 

School districts 88 

BIE schools 10 

Tribes and Indian community-based organizations 2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 88 percent of grantees were school districts (including both single-applicant school 

districts and consortia of school districts). 

Source: Data provided to this study by the Office of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Education (n = 1,304). 

Exhibit A-2. Distribution of Title VI Indian Education grantees, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Percent 

≤ $5K 4 

$5,001–$20,000 25 

$20,001–$40,000 25 

$40,001–$60,000 13 

$60,001–100,000 14 

$100.001–200,000 12 

$200,001–400,000 5 

> $400K 2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 4 percent of Title VI grantees were awarded $5,000 or less. 

Source: Data provided to this study by the Office of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Education (n = 1,304). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 2 
 

Chapter 2. Providing Title VI-Funded Services to Eligible American

Indian and Alaska Native Youth 

Exhibit A-3. Services and activities provided through Title VI funds, by service category, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support 87 1.0 

Academic enrichment 57 1.5 

Gifted and talented program 17 1.1 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment 74 1.3 

Indian education 56 1.5 

Native language instruction 35 1.4 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 62 1.4 

College and career 

College preparation 45 1.5 

Mentoring 41 1.5 

Student advocacy/leadership 40 1.4 

Career preparation 37 1.4 

Counseling 35 1.4 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 42 1.5 

Substance abuse prevention 24 1.5 

Suicide prevention 24 1.2 

Violence prevention 21 1.2 

School readiness 

Family literacy 26 1.3 

Early childhood programs 26 1.3 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 4 0.6 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 87 percent of grantees used Title VI funds to provide academic support. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 14 (n = 1,152). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 3 
 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-4. Title VI grant-funded services and activities provided, by grantee type, 

2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support* 89 1.0 67 4.3 

Academic enrichment 57 1.5 53 4.6 

Gifted and talented program 16 1.1 23 3.9 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment 74 1.4 76 3.9 

Indian education* 53 1.6 84 3.3 

Native language instruction* 31 1.4 75 4.0 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 63 1.5 60 4.5 

School readiness 

Family literacy 26 1.3 30 4.2 

Early childhood programs 25 1.4 22 3.8 

College and career 

College preparation* 47 1.5 23 3.5 

Mentoring 42 1.5 33 4.3 

Student advocacy/leadership 40 1.5 36 4.4 

Career preparation* 39 1.5 24 3.9 

Counseling 36 1.5 38 4.1 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies* 43 1.5 28 4.1 

Substance abuse prevention 24 1.3 28 4.1 

Suicide prevention 22 1.3 28 4.1 

Violence prevention 20 1.2 25 4.0 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 4 0.6 3 1.6 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 89 percent of district grantees and 67 percent of BIE and tribal grantees used Title VI 

funds to provide academic support. 

Note: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 14 (school district n = 1,032; BIE schools and tribes n = 120). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-5. Average number of services and activities provided in 2017–18, by grant award size 

Mean SE 

Grantees with larger awards 8.3* 0.2 

Grantees with smaller awards 6.7* 0.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, grantees with larger awards provided an average of 8.3 services and activities, and 

grantees with smaller awards provided an average of 6.7 activities. 

Note: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 14 (grantees with larger awards n = 594; grantees with smaller awards n = 558). 

Exhibit A-6. Average number of services and activities provided in 2017–18, by grantee type 

Mean SE 

School districts 7.5 0.4 

BIE schools and tribes 7.5 0.1 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, school districts and BIE schools and tribes provided an average of 7.5 services and 

activities. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 14 (school districts n = 1,032; BIE schools and tribes n = 120). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 5 
 

 

 

 

 

I 

Exhibit A-7. Title VI grant-funded services and activities provided, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support 86 1.4 87 1.4 

Academic enrichment* 61 2.0 52 2.1 

Gifted and talented program 16 1.5 18 1.6 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment* 80 1.7 68 2.0 

Indian education* 65 2.0 47 2.1 

Native language instruction* 43 2.0 28 1.9 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement* 68 1.9 57 2.1 

School readiness 

Family literacy * 25 1.9 20 1.7 

Early childhood programs 31 1.8 26 1.9 

College and career 

College preparation* 51 2.1 38 2.1 

Mentoring* 45 2.0 37 2.0 

Student advocacy/leadership* 46 2.0 33 2.0 

Career preparation* 44 2.0 30 1.9 

Counseling 38 38 31 2.0 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies* 50 2.1 33 2.0 

Substance abuse prevention 26 1.8 23 1.8 

Suicide prevention* 26 1.8 19 1.7 

Violence prevention 22 1.7 19 1.7 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 4 0.8 4 0.8 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 86 percent of grantees with larger awards and 87 percent with smaller awards used 

Title VI funds to provide academic support. 

Note: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 14 (grantees with larger awards n = 594; grantees with smaller awards n = 558). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I I 

Exhibit A-8. Grantees offering teachers and support staff professional development on Title VIfunded services and activities, 2017–18 

Offered professional 

development in this area 

Planned to offer 

professional 

development in this area 

N/A: Did not offer or plan 

to offer professional 

development in this area 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support 62 1.4 14 1.0 24 1.3 

Academic enrichment 45 1.5 20 1.2 35 1.4 

Gifted and talented program 14 1.0 27 1.3 59 1.5 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment 57 1.5 16 1.1 27 1.3 

Indian education 44 1.5 21 1.2 34 1.4 

Native language instruction 21 1.2 23 1.2 57 1.5 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 44 1.5 19 1.2 37 1.4 

College and career 

College preparation 28 1.3 23 1.3 48 1.5 

Mentoring 28 1.3 23 1.2 49 1.5 

Student advocacy/leadership 31 1.4 22 1.2 47 1.5 

Career preparation 29 1.3 23 1.2 49 1.5 

Counseling 29 1.3 21 1.2 50 1.5 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 29 1.3 24 1.3 47 1.5 

Substance abuse prevention 24 1.3 25 1.3 51 1.5 

Suicide prevention 26 1.3 26 1.3 49 1.5 

Violence prevention 22 1.2 26 1.3 52 1.5 

School readiness 

Early childhood programs 23 1.2 22 1.2 55 1.5 

Family literacy 22 1.2 25 1.3 53 1.5 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in 

correctional facilities 3 0.5 26 1.3 72 1.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 62 percent of grantees offered professional development to teachers and support staff 

in the area of academic support, 14 percent planned to offer professional development, and 24 percent did not 

offer or plan to offer professional development in this area. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 15 (n = 1,146). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-9. Title VI-funded services and activities for which professional development was offered 

or planned, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support 76 1.3 75 4.0 

Academic enrichment 64 1.5 72 4.1 

Gifted and talented program* 40 1.5 58 4.5 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment 72 1.4 80 3.7 

Indian education* 64 1.5 85 3.3 

Native language instruction* 39 1.5 77 3.8 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 62 1.5 71 4.2 

College and career 

College preparation 52 1.6 54 4.6 

Mentoring 51 1.6 59 4.5 

Student advocacy/leadership* 52 1.6 64 4.4 

Career preparation 51 1.6 57 4.5 

Counseling 49 1.6 61 4.5 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 53 1.6 57 4.5 

Substance abuse prevention* 47 1.6 64 4.4 

Suicide prevention* 50 1.6 64 4.4 

Violence prevention* 50 1.6 61 4.5 

School readiness 

Early childhood programs 44 1.5 51 4.6 

Family literacy* 45 1.6 59 4.5 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities* 27 1.4 69 4.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 76 percent of districts and 75 percent of BIE offered or planned to offer professional 

development to teachers and support staff in the area of academic support. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 15 (school districts n = 1,027; BIE schools and tribes n = 119). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 8 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I 

I 

Exhibit A-10. Title VI-funded services and activities for which professional development was offered 

or planned, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic support and enrichment 

Academic support 77 1.7 75 1.8 

Academic enrichment 68 1.9 62 2.1 

Gifted and talented program 43 2.0 40 2.1 

Language and culture 

Cultural enrichment* 79 1.7 67 2.0 

Indian education* 73 1.8 58 2.1 

Native language instruction* 47 2.1 39 2.1 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 65 2.0 60 2.1 

College and career 

College preparation* 56 2.0 47 2.1 

Mentoring 55 2.0 47 2.1 

Student advocacy/leadership 57 2.0 49 2.1 

Career preparation* 57 2.0 46 2.1 

Counseling 51 2.1 49 2.1 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies* 58 2.0 47 2.1 

Substance abuse prevention 51 2.1 46 2.1 

Suicide prevention 53 2.1 49 2.1 

Violence prevention 50 2.1 47 2.1 

School readiness 

Early childhood programs 46 2.1 43 2.1 

Family literacy 51 2.1 42 2.1 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 31 1.9 26 1.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 77 percent of grantees with larger awards and 75 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards offered or planned to offer professional development to teachers and support staff in the area of academic 

support. 

Note: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 15 (grantees with larger awards n = 590; grantees with smaller awards n = 556). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-11. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education for American 

Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Incorporate AI/AN history and culture into the curriculum 70 1.3 

Use AI/AN teachers and support staff 68 1.4 

Connect AI/AN students with mentors or counselors from tribal community 48 1.5 

Deliver instruction in AI/AN students’ heritage language 32 1.4 

Administer assessments in AI/AN languages 15 1.0 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 70 percent of grantees supported culturally responsive education by incorporating 

American Indian and Alaska Native history and culture into the curriculum. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 16 (n = 1,150). 

Exhibit A-12. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education, 

by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Incorporate AI/AN history and culture into the curriculum* 69 1.4 83 3.5 

Use AI/AN teachers and support staff* 66 1.5 83 3.4 

Connect AI/AN students with mentors or counselors from 

tribal community 48 1.6 56 4.5 

Deliver instruction in AI/AN students’ heritage language* 28 1.4 68 4.3 

Administer assessments in AI/AN languages* 12 1.0 38 4.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 69 percent of school districts and 83 percent of BIE and tribal grantees supported 

culturally responsive education by incorporating American Indian and Alaska Native history and culture into the 

curriculum. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 16 (school districts n = 1,030; BIE schools and tribes n = 120). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 10 
 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-13. Title VI grantee practices to support culturally responsive education, 

by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Incorporate AI/AN history and culture into the curriculum* 77 1.7 64 2.0 

Use AI/AN teachers and support staff* 79 1.7 55 2.1 

Connect AI/AN students with mentors or counselors from 

tribal community* 58 2.0 38 2.1 

Deliver instruction in AI/AN students’ heritage language* 40 2.0 24 1.8 

Administer assessments in AI/AN languages* 19 1.5 10 1.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 77 percent of grantees with larger awards and 64 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards supported culturally responsive education by incorporating American Indian and Alaska Native history and 

culture into the curriculum. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 16 (grantees with larger awards n = 592; grantees with smaller awards n = 558). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-14. Grantees reporting challenges to using culturally responsive practices to deliver 

Title VI-funded services, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

n Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic enrichment and support 

Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool 

programs) 

617 5 0.9 18 1.6 76 1.7 

Academic support (e.g., homework support, 

study skills) 

943 4 0.7 19 1.3 77 1.4 

Gifted and talented program 170 4 1.5 13 2.6 83 2.9 

Language and culture 

Native language instruction 391 14 1.8 24 2.2 62 2.5 

Indian education (e.g., language, history) 619 6 1.0 25 1.7 68 1.9 

Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field trips) 823 4 0.6 21 1.7 76 1.5 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 689 18 1.5 33 1.8 49 1.9 

College and career 

College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT 

preparation, college visits) 

457 6 1.1 20 1.9 74 2.1 

Mentoring 445 5 1.1 21 1.9 74 2.1 

Student advocacy/leadership 437 4 1.0 21 1.9 75 2.1 

Career preparation (e.g., career exploration, 

internships) 

390 4 1.0 26 2.2 70 2.3 

Counseling 372 4 1.1 18 2.0 77 2.2 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 429 8 1.3 28 2.2 64 2.3 

Suicide prevention 246 6 1.5 25 2.8 69 3.0 

Substance abuse prevention 254 4 1.1 26 3.0 70 2.9 

Violence prevention 219 4 1.3 26 3.0 70 3.1 

School readiness 

Family literacy 275 7 1.6 24 2.6 69 2.8 

Early childhood programs 263 4 1.2 18 2.2 78 2.6 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 27 11 6.2 37 9.5 52 9.8 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that provided academic enrichment, 5 percent reported that using 

culturally responsive practices to deliver academic enrichment was very challenging, 18 percent reported that it 

was somewhat challenging, and 76 percent reported that it was minimally challenging or not challenging. 

Notes: The number of respondents for this exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that reported providing 

each type of practice (Exhibit A-3). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% 

due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 18 (n = 27–943). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Exhibit A-15. Grantees reporting that using culturally responsive practices to deliver Title VI-funded 

services was very or somewhat challenging, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards

n Pct. SE n Pct. SE 

Academic enrichment and support 

Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool programs) 345 24 2.3 272 23 2.6 

Academic support (e.g., homework support, study skills) 487 24 1.9 456 22 1.9 

Gifted and talented program 81 24 4.7 89 11 3.4 

Language and culture 

Native language instruction 245 39 3.1 146 37 4.0 

Indian education (e.g., language, history) 369 31 2.1 250 32 30 

Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field trips) 459 22 1.9 364 28 2.4 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 390 51 2.5 299 50 2.9 

School readiness 

Early childhood programs 134 26 3.8 129 18 3.4 

Family literacy 173 29 3.5 102 34 4.7 

College and career 

College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT preparation, 

college visits) 240 24 2.6 186 29 3.3 

Mentoring 257 25 2.7 188 27 3.3 

Student advocacy/leadership 266 24 2.6 171 27 3.4 

Career preparation (e.g., career exploration, internships) 240 24 2.6 186 28 3.7 

Counseling 215 24 2.9 157 21 3.2 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 271 38 3.0 158 33 3.7 

Suicide prevention 150 37 4.0 96 21 4.2 

Substance abuse prevention 141 33 4.0 113 27 4.2 

Violence prevention 124 36 4.3 95 22 4.3 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 15 60 12.9 12 33 13.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that provided academic enrichment, 24 percent of grantees with larger 

awards and 23 percent of grantees with smaller awards reported that using culturally responsive practices to 

deliver this service was somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: The number of respondents for this exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that reported providing 

each type of practice (Exhibit A-3). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 18 (grantees with larger awards n = 15–487; grantees with smaller awards n = 12–456). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I I I 

I

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Exhibit A-16. Grantees reporting that using culturally responsive practices to deliver Title VI-funded 

services was very or somewhat challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

n Pct. SE n Pct. SE 

Academic enrichment and support

Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool programs) 555 25 1.8 62 15 4.5

Academic support (e.g., homework support, study skills) 868 23 1.4 75 19 4.5 

Gifted and talented program 142 18 3.2 28 14 6.6 

Language and culture 

Native language instruction 304 39 2.8 87 34 3.1 

Indian education (e.g., language, history) 520 33 2.1 99 25 4.4 

Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field trips) 734 25 1.6 89 19 4.2 

Parent involvement 

Parent involvement 618 51 2.0 71 45 5.6 

School readiness 

Early childhood programs 239 23 2.7 24 13 6.8 

Family literacy 241 35 8.2 34 30 3.0 

College and career 

College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT preparation, 

college visits) 433 17 7.6 24 27 2.1 

Mentoring 406 26 7.8 39 26 2.2 

Student advocacy/leadership 395 26 7.0 42 25 2.2 

Career preparation (e.g., career exploration, internships) 362 17 7.6 28 30 2.4 

Counseling 340 38 8.6 32 21 2.2 

Prevention 

Dropout prevention strategies 399 36 2.4 30 37 8.8 

Suicide prevention 214 30 3.2 32 34 8.4 

Substance abuse prevention 220 29 3.1 34 41 8.5 

Violence prevention 189 30 3.3 30 30 8.4 

Correctional facilities programs 

Programs for students in correctional facilities 24 50 10.4 3 33 27.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that provided academic enrichment, 25 percent of district grantees and 

15 percent of BIE and tribal grantees reported that using culturally responsive practices to deliver this service was 

somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: The number of respondents for this exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that reported providing 

each type of practice (Exhibit A-3). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 18 (school districts n = 24–868; BIE tribes and schools n = 3–99). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 14 
 

Exhibit A-17. Grantees reporting on the extent to which it was challenging to use culturally 

responsive practices across all Title VI-funded services, 2017–18 

Percent 

Minimally challenging or not challenging 42 

 Somewhat challenging or very challenging 58 

 

 

 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 42 percent of grantees reported that using culturally responsive practices to deliver 

Title VI-funded services was minimally challenging or not challenging. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 18 (n = 1,113). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 15 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-18. Factors challenging Title VI grantees’ efforts to deliver Title VI-funded services using 

culturally responsive practices, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging

Somewhat 

challenging

Minimally/not 

challenging

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Availability of school staff who are 

knowledgeable about heritage languages 63 1.9 24 1.7 13 1.4 

Availability of school staff with expertise in 

culturally responsive education 39 1.9 41 1.9 21 1.6 

Availability of staff within our organization (e.g., 

LEA/BIE/tribe) with expertise in culturally 

responsive education 

35 1.9 37 1.9 28 1.8 

Availability of school staff who are 

knowledgeable about students’ cultural 

backgrounds 

31 1.8 41 1.9 28 1.8 

Availability of professional development or 

training in culturally responsive education 31 1.8 40 1.9 29 1.8 

Access to instructional materials to support 

culturally responsive education for American 

Indian/Alaska Native students (e.g., materials 

related to heritage languages, textbooks that 

include American Indian/Alaska Native history 

and culture) 

28 1.8 35 1.9 38 1.9 

Aligning state and local policy with goals of 

culturally responsive education for American 

Indian/Alaska Native students (e.g., 

incorporating American Indian/Alaska Native 

culture into the curriculum; administering 

assessments in American Indian/Alaska Native 

languages) 

24 1.7 40 2.0 36 1.9 

Multiple tribal cultures represented among 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 20 1.6 35 1.9 45 2.0 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that reported that using culturally responsive practices to deliver Title 

VI grant-funded services was somewhat or very challenging, 63 percent reported that the availability of school staff 

knowledgeable about heritage languages was very challenging. 

Notes: Only grantees that considered it somewhat or very challenging to deliver services using culturally responsive practices on Item 18 

responded to this question. Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% due to 

rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 19 (n = 653). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 16 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-19. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in Title VI grantees’ efforts to deliver 

Title VI-funded services using culturally responsive practices, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Aligning state and local policy with goals of culturally 

responsive education for AI/AN students (e.g., incorporating 

AI/AN culture into the curriculum; administering assessments 

in AI/AN languages) 

63 2.1 72 5.6 

Multiple tribal cultures represented among AI/AN students 56 2.1 41 6.6 

Availability of staff within our organization (e.g., LEA/BIE/tribe) 

with expertise in culturally responsive education* 74 1.8 54 6.0 

Availability of school staff with expertise in culturally 

responsive education 80 1.6 69 5.6 

Availability of school staff who are knowledgeable about 

students’ cultural backgrounds* 74 1.8 58 5.9 

Availability of school staff who are knowledgeable about 

heritage languages 89 1.3 66 5.7 

Availability of professional development or training in 

culturally responsive education 71 1.9 65 5.9 

Access to instructional materials to support culturally 

responsive education for AI/AN students (e.g., materials 

related to heritage languages, textbooks that include AI/AN 

history and culture) 

62 2.0 64 5.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees who reported using culturally responsive practices to deliver grantfunded services somewhat or very challenging, 63 percent of district grantees and 72 percent of BIE and tribal 

grantees reported that aligning state and local policy with goals of culturally responsive education was somewhat 

or very challenging. 

Notes: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Only grantees that considered it somewhat or very challenging to deliver 

services using culturally responsive practices on Item 18 responded to this question. Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” 

or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 19 (school districts n = 582; BIE schools and tribes n = 71). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-20. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in Title VI grantees’ efforts to deliver 

Title VI-funded services using culturally responsive practices, by grant award size, 

2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Availability of school staff who are knowledgeable about 

heritage languages 87 1.8 87 2

Availability of school staff with expertise in culturally 

responsive education 79 2.2 79 2.3 

Availability of school staff who are knowledgeable about 

students’ cultural backgrounds 73 2.4 71 2.6 

Availability of professional development or training in 

culturally responsive education 70 2.5 72 2.6 

Availability of staff within our organization (e.g., 

LEA/BIE/tribe) with expertise in culturally responsive 

education 

68 2.5 76 2.5 

Access to instructional materials to support culturally 

responsive education for AI/AN students (e.g., materials 

related to heritage languages, textbooks that include AI/AN 

history and culture) 

64 2.6 60 2.8 

Aligning state and local policy with goals of culturally 

responsive education for AI/AN students (e.g., incorporating 

AI/AN culture into the curriculum; administering assessments 

in AI/AN languages) 

63 2.6 64 2.9 

Multiple tribal cultures represented among AI/AN students 54 2.7 55 3.1 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees who reported using culturally responsive practices to deliver Title VI 

grant-funded services somewhat or very challenging, 87 percent of grantees with larger awards and 87 percent of 

grantees with smaller awards reported that the availability of school staff who are knowledgeable about heritage 

languages was somewhat or very challenging. 

Note: Only grantees that considered it somewhat or very challenging to deliver services using culturally responsive practices on Item 18 

responded to this question. Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 19 (grantees with larger awards n = 350; grantees with smaller awards n = 303). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 18 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-21. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees coordinate 

Title VI-funded services and activities, 2017–18 

Yes No Don’t know 

Not applicable: 

Program not 

offered/available 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Title I, Part A 67 1.4 24 1.3 8 09 1 0.3 

IDEA programs 57 1.5 30 1.4 11 0.9 2 0.4 

Johnson-O’Malley programs 45 1.5 37 1.4 7 0.8 11 0.9 

Education for Homeless Children 

and Youth Program 43 1.5 41 1.5 9 0.9 7 0.7 

Programs delivered by local social 

service providers 35 1.4 48 1.5 10 0.9 7 0.7 

Impact Aid 34 1.4 45 1.5 10 0.9 11 0.9 

Title III, Language Instruction for 

English Learners 

29 1.3 51 1.5 8 0.8 12 1.0 

Title IV (student support, 

enrichment grants) 29 1.3 48 1.5 11 0.9 12 1.0 

Title I, Part D, Neglected and 

Delinquent Programs 27 1.3 49 1.5 11 0.9 13 1.0 

State-funded programs 21 1.6 44 1.9 20 1.5 15 1.4 

Other federally funded programs 20 1.6 44 1.9 21 1.6 15 1.4 

Other BIE programs 16 1.1 58 1.5 12 0.9 14 1.0 

Other programs serving at-risk 

students and families 15 1.4 49 1.9 21 1.6 15 1.4 

Title I, Part C, Migrant Education 

Program 14 1.0 60 1.4 10 0.9 15 1.1 

Locally funded programs 12 1.3 50 1.9 22 1.6 16 1.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 67 percent of grantees coordinated services and activities with Title I, Part A. 

Note: The five programs referenced by their Title number (e.g., Title I, Part A) are authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act (ESEA). The Title IV programs covered in the survey questionnaire specifically included Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants 

(Part A) and 21st Century Community Learning Centers (Part B). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 23 (n = 1,146). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-22. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees coordinate 

Title VI-funded services and activities, 2017–18, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Title I, Part A 74 1.9 73 2.0 

IDEA programs 68 2.0 62 2.2 

Johnson-O’Malley programs* 63 2.0 46 2.4 

Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program* 59 2.2 43 2.3 

Programs delivered by local social service providers 44 2.2 41 2.3 

Impact Aid* 59 2.2 36 2.3 

Title III, Language Instruction for English Learners* 42 2.2 30 2.2 

Title IV (student support, enrichment) 42 2.3 SS 2.3 

Title I, Part D, Neglected and Delinquent Programs* 43 2.3 29 2.2 

State-funded programs 27 3.2 29 3.1 

Other federally funded programs 37 3.2 27 3.1 

Other BIE programs 24 2.0 20 2.0 

Other programs serving at-risk students and families 28 3.1 18 2.6 

Title I, Part C, Migrant Education Program* 23 2.0 15 1.8 

Locally funded programs 23 2.9 17 2.6 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 74 percent of grantees with larger awards and 73 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards reported coordinating services and activities with Title I, Part A. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

The five programs referenced by their Title number (e.g., Title I, Part A) are authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

(ESEA). The Title IV programs covered in the survey questionnaire specifically included Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants 

(Part A) and 21st Century Community Learning Centers (Part B). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 23 (grantees with larger awards n = 545; grantees with smaller awards n = 495). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 20 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-23. Types of federal, state, and local programs with which Title VI grantees coordinate 

Title VI-funded services and activities, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Title I, Part A 73 1.5 83 3.7 

IDEA programs* 63 1.6 84 3.9 

Johnson-O’Malley programs* 57 1.7 40 5.6 

Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program* 51 1.7 54 5.3 

Programs delivered by local social service providers* 41 1.7 54 5.2 

Impact Aid* 44 1.7 27 5.5 

Title III, Language Instruction for English Learners* 35 1.6 47 5.8 

Title IV (student support, enrichment)* 36 1.7 55 5.3 

Title I, Part D, Neglected and Delinquent Programs* 34 1.7 57 5.6 

State-funded programs 33 2.4 26 6.8 

Other federally funded programs 31 2.4 37 7.1 

Other BIE programs* 15 1.3 75 4.4 

Other programs serving at-risk students and families 23 2.2 23 6.2 

Title I, Part C, Migrant Education Program* 19 1.4 23 5.0 

Locally funded programs 20 2.1 20 5.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 73 percent of district grantees and 83 percent of BIE and tribal grantees reported 

coordinating services and activities with Title I, Part A. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 23 (school districts n = 940; BIE schools and tribes n = 100). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 21 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-24. Strategies Title VI grantees use to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities with other programs, 

2017–18 

Participating in 

interagency task 

forces or 

committees Sharing data Sharing costs 

Building linkages 

among programs, 

agencies, and 

organizations 

Sharing 

information on 

programs/services 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Title I, Part A 30 1.7 68 1.7 49 1.8 42 1.8 59 1.8 

Title I, Part C 29 3.6 58 3.9 36 3.8 39 3.8 50 3.9 

Title I, Part D, Neglected and Delinquent Programs 31 2.6 60 2.8 65 2.7 45 2.8 54 2.8 

Title III, Language Instruction for English Learners 29 2.5 60 2.7 40 2.7 42 2.7 56 2.7 

Title IV (student support, enrichment) 30 2.5 62 2.6 44 2.7 42 2.7 54 2.7 

Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program 28 2.0 62 2.2 35 2.2 38 2.2 51 2.3 

Impact Aid 32 2.4 64 2.5 54 2.5 40 2.5 53 2.5 

IDEA programs 28 1.8 67 1.8 44 1.9 43 1.9 54 2.0 

Johnson-O’Malley programs 39 2.1 69 2.0 51 2.2 44 2.2 61 2.1 

Other Bureau of Indian Education/Bureau of Indian 

Affairs programs 36 3.5 56 3.7 37 3.6 40 3.6 57 3.6 

Programs delivered by local social service providers 34 2.4 46* 2.5* 24 2.1 44 2.5 52 2.5 

Other federally funded programs 36 4.1 69 4.0 61 4.2 54 4.3 56 4.3 

State funded programs 38 4.0 70 3.8 67* 3.9* 61* 4.1* 71* 3.8* 

Locally funded programs 45 5.5 55 5.5 55 5.5 59 5.5 59 5.5 

Other programs serving at-risk students and families 45 5.1 54 5.1 46 5.1 60 5.0 66 4.8 

Other 46 8.8 67 8.3 61 8.6 58 8.7 70 8.1 

Exhibit reads: Among Title VI grant coordinators whose projects coordinated services and activities with the Title I, Part A program, 30 percent reported that, 

in 2017–18, their project participated in interagency task forces or committees as a strategy to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities 

with other programs. 

Note: Includes only respondents reporting in Item 23 that their project coordinated Title VI-funded services and activities with other programs. 

Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 24 (n = 33–765) 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 22 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-25. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities, 

2017–18 

Percent SE 

Sharing data on American Indian and Alaska Native students 76 1.3 

Sharing information on effective programs/services to address the needs of 

American Indian and Alaska Native students 70 1.4 

Sharing costs associated with providing services for American Indian and Alaska 

Native students 61 1.5 

Building programmatic linkages among programs, agencies and organizations 53 1.6 

Participating in interagency task forces or committees 44 1.6 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 76 percent of grantees shared data on American Indian and Alaska Native students to 

facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 24 (n = 1,004). 

Exhibit A-26. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities, by 

grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Sharing data on American Indian and Alaska Native students 79 1.4 70 4.4 

Sharing information on effective programs/services to address 

the needs of American Indian and Alaska Native students 71 1.5 62 4.7 

Sharing costs associated with providing services for American 

Indian and Alaska Native students 

59 1.6 72 4.3 

Building programmatic linkages among programs, agencies 

and organizations 53 1.7 58 4.7 

Participating in interagency task forces or committees 44 1.7 41 4.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 79 percent of districts and 70 percent of BIE schools and tribes shared data on American 

Indian and Alaska Native students to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 24 (school districts n = 895; BIE schools and tribes n = 109). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-27. Strategies used to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded services and activities, by 

grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Sharing data on American Indian and Alaska Native students* 82 1.7 70 2.1 

Sharing information on effective programs/services to address 

the needs of American Indian and Alaska Native students* 78 1.8 62 2.2 

Sharing costs associated with providing services for American 

Indian and Alaska Native students* 67 2.0 53 2.3 

Building programmatic linkages among programs, agencies 

and organizations* 61 2.1 45 2.3 

Participating in interagency task forces or committees* 49 2.2 38 2.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 82 percent of grantees with larger awards and 70 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards shared data on American Indian and Alaska Native students to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded 

services and activities. 

Note: *Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 24 (grantees with larger awards n = 530; grantees with smaller awards n = 474). 

Exhibit A-28. Grantees reporting challenges to coordinating Title VI-funded services with other 

programs, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Limited staff time or capacity to coordinate 

services 31 1.4 32 1.4 38 1.5 

Physical distance between programs, agencies, 

and organizations serving American 

Indian/Alaska Native students 

16 1.2 21 1.3 63 1.5 

Blending funding/sharing costs across programs 

and services 12 1.1 26 1.4 62 1.6 

Sharing or linking data on American 

Indian/Alaska Native students across programs, 

agencies, and organizations 

9 0.9 27 1.4 64 1.5 

Identifying areas for programmatic linkages 

among programs, agencies, and organizations 7 0.8 33 1.5 60 1.6 

Competing priorities across programs, agencies, 

and organizations serving American 

Indian/Alaska Native students 

7 0.8 29 1.4 64 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 31 percent of grantees reported that limited staff time or capacity was very challenging, 

32 percent reported it was somewhat challenging, and 38 percent reported that limited staff time or capacity was 

either minimally challenging or not challenging to their efforts to coordinate with other federal, state, and 

local programs. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 25 (n = 1,039). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 24 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-29. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in grantees’ efforts to coordinate Title 

VI-funded services with other programs, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Limited staff time or capacity to coordinate services 62 1.6 69 4.5 

Identifying areas for programmatic linkages among programs, 

agencies, and organizations 39 1.6 44 4.8 

Blending funding/sharing costs across programs and services 38 1.7 39 4.8 

Competing priorities across programs, agencies, and 

organizations serving American Indian/Alaska Native students 36 1.6 39 4.8 

Physical distance between programs, agencies, and 

organizations serving American Indian/Alaska Native students 36 1.6 46 54 

Sharing or linking data on American Indian/Alaska Native 

students across programs, agencies, and organizations 35 1.6 41 4.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 62 percent of district grantees and 69 percent of BIE and tribal grantees reported that 

limited staff time or capacity to coordinate services was somewhat or very challenging to their efforts to 

coordinate with other federal, state, and local programs. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 25 (school districts n = 931; BIE schools and tribes n = 108). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 25 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-30. Factors that were somewhat or very challenging in grantees’ efforts to coordinate 

Title VI-funded services with other programs, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE

Limited staff time or capacity to coordinate services 62 2.1 62 2.2 

Identifying areas for programmatic linkages among programs, 

agencies, and organizations 40 2.1 40 2.3 

Blending funding/sharing costs across programs and services 38 2.2 38 2.3 

Competing priorities across programs, agencies, and 

organizations serving American Indian/Alaska Native students 37 2.1 35 2.2 

Sharing or linking data on American Indian/Alaska Native 

students across programs, agencies, and organizations 37 2.1 34 2.2 

Physical distance between programs, agencies, and 

organizations serving American Indian/Alaska Native students 36 2.1 37 2.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 62 percent of grantees with larger awards and 62 percent grantees with smaller awards 

reported that limited staff time or capacity to coordinate services was somewhat or very challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 25 (grantees with larger awards n = 543; grantees with smaller awards n = 496). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 26 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 3. Identifying Program-Eligible Children and Planning 

Services to Meet Their Needs 

Exhibit A-31. Strategies grantees used to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded 

services, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Include questions about students’ American Indian/Alaska Native status as part of 

the school registration processes 76 1.3 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 75 1.3 

Generate reports for students who identified their primary or secondary ethnicity 

as American Indian/Alaska Native on enrollment forms 66 1.4 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to notify American 

Indian/Alaska Native families about available Title VI-funded services for eligible 

children 

53 1.5 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal organizations to determine 

American Indian/Alaska Native student eligibility to receive Title VI-funded services 

(e.g., help to distinguish multiple federal definitions of American Indian/Alaska 

Native students, including Title VI grant definition versus Johnson-O’Malley Act 

definition) 

47 1.6 

Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to schools 45 1.5 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, presentations, meetings) to 

identify Title VI-eligible American Indian/Alaska Native students with school 

and/or district staff.: 

39 1.5 

Collaborate and coordinate with organizations that work with American 

Indian/Alaska Native families to notify them about available Title VI-funded services 35 1.5 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 31 1.4 

Local tribes and tribal organizations 27 1.4 

School or tribal-based committees 22 1.3 

Community-based organizations 18 1.2 

Local government agencies 11 0.9 

Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 

N/A: My project did not identify students eligible to receive Title-VI funded services 

for the 2017–18 school year 1 0.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 76 percent of grantees included questions about students’ American Indian and Alaska Native 

status as part of the school registration process. 

Note: BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 2 (n = 1,071). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-32. Strategies grantees used to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded 

services, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets* 80 1.7 71 2 

Include questions about students’ American Indian/Alaska 

Native status as part of the school registration processes 77 1.8 75 1.9 

Generate reports for students who identified their primary or 

secondary ethnicity as American Indian/Alaska Native on 

enrollment forms 

69 2 62 2.1 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to notify 

American Indian/Alaska Native families about available Title 

VI-funded services for eligible children 

55 2.1 50 2.2 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to determine American Indian/Alaska Native 

student eligibility to receive Title VI-funded services (e.g., help 

to distinguish multiple federal definitions of American 

Indian/Alaska Native students, including Title VI grant 

definition versus Johnson-O’Malley Act definition)* 

54 2.2 40 2.2 

Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to 

schools* 50 2.1 40 2.2 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) to identify Title VI-eligible American 

Indian/Alaska Native students* 

46 2.1 32 2.1 

Collaborate and coordinate with organizations that work with 

American Indian/Alaska Native families to notify them about 

available Title VI-funded services* 

41 2.1 27 2 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee * 37 2.0 24 1.9 

Local tribes and tribal organizations* 35 2.0 19 1.7 

Local government agencies* 35 2.0 8 1.2 

School or tribal-based committees* 26 1.9 18 1.7 

Community-based organizations* 23 1.8 13 1.5 

Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 27 1.9 21 1.8 

N/A: My project did not identify students eligible to receive 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.4 Title-VI funded services for the 2017–18 school year 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 80 percent of grantees with larger awards and 71 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards included the ED 506 form in school enrollment packets. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 2 (grantees with larger awards n = 557; grantees with smaller awards n = 514). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 28 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-33. Strategies grantees used to identify students who are eligible to receive Title VIfunded services, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Include questions about students’ American Indian/Alaska 

Native status as part of the school registration processes* 77 1.3 40 8.3 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 76 1.3 66 8.0 

Generate reports for students who identified their primary or 

secondary ethnicity as American Indian/Alaska Native on 

enrollment forms* 

67 1.5 40 8.3 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to notify 

American Indian/Alaska Native families about available Title 

VI-funded services for eligible children 

53 1.6 51 8.5 

Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to schools 45 1.5 40 8.3 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) to identify Title VI-eligible 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 

40 1.5 34 8.0 

Collaborate and coordinate with organizations that work with 

American Indian/Alaska Native families to notify them about 

available Title VI-funded services 

35 1.5 37 8.2 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee* 31 1.4 11 5.4 

Local tribes and tribal organizations 27 1.4 34 8.0 

School or tribal-based committees 22 1.3 23 7.1 

Community-based organizations 18 1.2 26 7.4 

Local government agencies 10 0.9 34 8.0 

Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 24 1.3 37 8.2 

N/A: My project did not identify students eligible to receive 

Title-VI funded services for the 2017–18 school year 

1 0.2 0 0

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 77 percent of district grantees and 40 percent of BIE and tribal grantees included 

questions about students’ American Indian and Alaska Native status as part of the school registration process. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 2 (school districts n = 1,036; BIE schools and tribes n = 35). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 29 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-34. Grantees reporting challenges with strategies to identify students eligible to receive 

Title VI-funded services, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

n Pct. SE Pct. SE Pct. SE 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to 

notify AI/AN families about available Title VI services 

566 11 1.3 33 2.0 56 2.1 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to determine AI/AN student eligibility to 

receive Title VI-funded services (e.g., distinguish Title VI 

definition vs. Johnson-O’Malley Act definition) 

297 6 1.1 22 1.9 72 2.1 

Collaborate and coordinate with the Title VI parent 

advisory committee to notify AI/AN families about Title VI 

services 

325 5 1.2 20 2.2 76 2.4 

Collaborate and coordinate with local government 

agencies to notify AI/AN families about Title VI services 

114 4 1.7 23 3.9 77 3.0 

Collaborate and coordinate with community-based 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VI 

services 

193 4 1.4 19 2.8 77 3.0 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) to identify Title VI-eligible AI/AN 

students 

360 3 0.9 26 2.3 70 2.4 

Collaborate and coordinate with school or tribal-based 

parent committees to notify AI/AN families about Title VI 

services 

231 3 1.1 24 2.8 73 2.9 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VI 

services 

281 2 0.9 18 2.3 79 2.4 

Generate reports for students who identified their 

primary or secondary ethnicity as AI/AN on enrollment 

forms 

700 2 0.5 9 1.1 89 1.2 

Include questions about students’ AI/AN status as part of 

the school registration processes 

808 2 0.4 8 1.5 90 1.0 

Disseminate eligibility information to schools 480 1 0.5 8 1.2 91 1.3 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 796 1 0.4 5 0.8 94 1.5 

Include common tribal affiliations on ED 506 form 255 0.4 0.4 6 1.5 94 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among Title VI grantees that conducted targeted outreach to notify American Indian 

and Alaska Native families about available grant-funded services for eligible students, 11 percent of grantees 

reported that conducting targeted outreach was very challenging, 33 percent reported it was somewhat 

challenging, and 56 percent reported it was minimally challenging or not challenging. 

Notes: BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not respond to this question. The number of respondents for this 

exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that reported using each strategy to identify Title VI-eligible children 

(see Exhibit A-29). Numbers may not add to 100% due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 3 (n = 114–808). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 30 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-35. Strategies to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services that were 

somewhat or very challenging, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

n Pct. SE n Pct. SE 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) with district and/or school staff 

to identify Title VI-eligible AI/AN students 

214 47 3.4 146 44 4.1 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to 

notify AI/AN families about available Title VI-funded 

services for eligible AI/AN students 

307 43 2.8 259 45 3.1 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to determine AI/AN student eligibility to 

receive Title VI-funded services 

284 31 2.8 199 24 3.0 

Collaborate and coordinate with local government 

agencies to notify AI/AN families about Title VI-funded 

services 

74 27 5.2 40 23 6.8 

Collaborate and coordinate with school or tribal-based 

parent committees to notify AI/AN families about Title VIfunded services 

140 27 3.8 91 28 4.7 

Collaborate and coordinate with the Title VI parent 

advisory committee to notify AI/AN families about Title VIfunded services 

202 25 3.1 123 23 3.8 

Collaborate and coordinate with community-based 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VIfunded services 

126 22 3.7 67 24 5.3 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VIfunded services 

185 20 2.9 96 22 4.3 

Generate reports for students who identified their primary 

or secondary ethnicity as AI/AN on enrollment forms 

383 13 1.7 317 8 1.5 

Include questions about students’ AI/AN status as part of 

the school registration processes 

428 11 1.5 380 7 1.3 

Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to 

schools 

280 11 1.9 200 5 1.6 

Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 150 7 2.0 105 6 2.3 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 440 7 1.2 356 5 1.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that conducted awareness-raising activities to identify eligible 

students, 47 percent of grantees with larger awards and 44 percent of grantees with smaller awards reported that 

conducting awareness-raising activities was either somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not respond to this question. The number of respondents for this 

exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that reported using each strategy to identify Title VI-eligible children 

(see Exhibit A-29). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 3 (Grantees with larger awards n = 74–428; grantees with smaller awards n = 40–380). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 31 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-36. Strategies to identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services that were 

somewhat or very challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

n Pct. SE n Pct. SE 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to determine AI/AN student eligibility to 

receive Title VI-funded services 

483 50 2.4 137 28 2.1 

Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) to identify Title VI-eligible AI/AN 

students 

351 46 2.7 9 22 13.9 

Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to 

notify AI/AN families about available Title VI-funded 

services for eligible AI/AN students 

548 43 2.1 18 56 11.7 

Collaborate and coordinate with local government agencies 

to notify AI/AN families about Title VI funded services 

108 27 4.3 6 17 15.1 

Collaborate and coordinate with community-based 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VI funded 

services 

184 27 3.1 9 11 10.5 

Collaborate and coordinate with the Title VI parent advisory 

committee to notify AI/AN families about Title VI funded 

services 

321 23 2.4 4 25 21.7 

Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribal 

organizations to notify AI/AN families about Title VI funded 

services 

269 21 2.5 12 8 8.0 

Generate reports for students who identified their primary 

or secondary ethnicity as AI/AN on enrollment forms* 

686 10 1.1 14 36 12.8 

Collaborate and coordinate with school or tribal-based 

parent committees to notify AI/AN families about Title VI 

funded services 

223 9 1.0 8 13 11.7 

Include questions about students’ AI/AN status as part of 

the school registration processes 

794 9 1.0 14 21 11.0 

Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to 

schools* 

466 8 1.3 14 27 12.1 

Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 243 6 1.5 12 17 10.8 

Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 773 6 0.8 23 9 5.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collaborated and coordinated with organizations that work with 

American Indian and Alaska Native families, 50 percent of grantees with districts and 28 percent of BIE schools and 

tribes reported that collaborating and coordinating with local tribes and tribal organizations to determine 

American Indian and Alaska Native student eligibility to receive Title VI-funded services was either somewhat or 

very challenging. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. The number of respondents for this exhibit varies because the question was asked only of those respondents that 

reported using each strategy to identify Title VI-eligible children (see Exhibit A-29). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 3 (school districts n = 108–794; BIE schools and tribes n = 4–137). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 32 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-37. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data collected on 

the ED 506 forms, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Collect physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from new American 

Indian/Alaska Native families 

95 0.7 

Conduct an annual review of information collected through the ED 506 form to 

update information on eligible students (e.g., by removing students who have left 

and removing duplicate student entries) 

85 1.1 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to district student enrollment systems 66 1.5 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to state student enrollment systems 27 1.4 

Collect electronic copies of ED 506 forms from new American Indian/Alaska Native 

families 17 1.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 95 percent of grantees collected physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from new 

American Indian and Alaska Native families to ensure that the data collected from the forms were accurate and 

complete. 

Note: BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Indian Education Grant Coordinators, Item 5 (n = 1,039). 

Exhibit A-38. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data collected on 

the ED 506 forms, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Collect physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from new 

American Indian/Alaska Native families* 97 0.6 93 1.1 

Conduct an annual review of information collected through 

the ED 506 form to update information on eligible students 

(e.g., by removing students who have left and removing 

duplicate student entries)* 

88 1.4 81 1.7 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to district student 

enrollment systems* 73 1.9 59 2.2 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to state student 

enrollment systems 

27 1.9 27 2.0 

Collect electronic copies of ED 506 forms from new American 

Indian/Alaska Native families* 23 1.8 10 1.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 97 percent of grantees with larger awards and 93 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards collected physical copies of ED 506 forms from new American Indian and Alaska Native families. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 5 (grantees with larger awards n = 541; grantees with smaller awards n = 498). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 33 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-39. Strategies grantees used to ensure accuracy and completeness of the data collected 

through the ED 506 forms, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Collect physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from new 

American Indian/Alaska Native families 96 0.6 97 2.9 

Conduct an annual review of information collected through 

the ED 506 form to update information on eligible students 

(e.g., by removing students who have left and removing 

duplicate student entries) 

86 1.1 79 6.9 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to district student 

enrollment systems* 67 1.5 38 8.3 

Link data collected through the ED 506 form to state student 

enrollment systems 

27 1.4 12 5.5 

Collect electronic copies of ED 506 forms from new American 

Indian/Alaska Native families 17 1.2 24 7.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 96 percent of district grantees and 97 percent of BIE and tribal grantees collected 

physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from new American Indian and Alaska Native families. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 5 (school districts n = 1,005; BIE schools and tribes n = 34). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 34 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-40. Grantees reporting challenges using strategies to ensure that the data collected 

through the ED 506 form are accurate and complete, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Helping American Indian/Alaska Native 

parents/guardians collect and submit 

acceptable information (e.g., tribal membership 

or enrollment number, letter from tribe) to 

confirm their child’s eligibility to receive Title VIfunded services 

11 1.0 34 1.5 55 1.6 

Collecting completed ED 506 forms from 

American Indian/Alaska Native 

parents/guardians 

11 1.0 31 1.5 57 1.5 

Comparing information collected through the 

ED 506 form with school district records on 

students’ race/ethnicity (e.g., disaggregating 

information about students who identify as two 

or more races/ethnicities) 

6 0.7 20 1.3 75 1.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 11 percent of grantees reported that helping parents/guardians collect and submit 

acceptable information to confirm their child’s eligibility to receive grant-funded services was very challenging, 

34 percent reported that this was somewhat challenging, and 55 percent reported that this was minimally 

challenging or not challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 6 (n = 1,024). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 35 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-41. Strategies to ensure that the data collected through the ED 506 form are accurate and 

complete that were somewhat or very challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Helping American Indian/Alaska Native parents/guardians 

collect and submit acceptable information (e.g., tribal 

membership or enrollment number, letter from tribe) to 

confirm their child’s eligibility to receive Title VI-funded 

services* 

46 1.6 19 7.1 

Collecting completed ED 506 forms from American 

Indian/Alaska Native parents/guardians 43 1.6 29 7.8 

Comparing information collected through the ED 506 form 

with school district records on students’ race/ethnicity (e.g., 

disaggregating information about students who identify as 

two or more races/ethnicities) 

25 1.4 36 8.8 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 46 percent of district grantees and 19 percent of BIE schools and tribes reported that 

helping parents/guardians collect and submit acceptable information to confirm their child’s eligibility to receive 

grant-funded services was somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not 

respond to this question. Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 6 (school districts n = 990; BIE schools and tribes n = 34). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 36 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-42. Strategies to ensure that the data collected through the ED 506 form are accurate and 

complete that were somewhat or very challenging, by grant award size, 

2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE

Helping American Indian/Alaska Native parents/guardians 

collect and submit acceptable information (e.g., tribal 

membership or enrollment number, letter from tribe) to 

confirm their child’s eligibility to receive Title VI-funded 

services 

47 2.2 42 2.3 

Collecting completed ED 506 forms from American 

Indian/Alaska Native parents/guardians 43 2.1 42 2.2 

Comparing information collected through the ED 506 form 

with school district records on students’ race/ethnicity (e.g., 

disaggregating information about students who identify as 

two or more races/ethnicities) 

29 2.0 22 1.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 47 percent of grantees with larger awards and 42 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards reported that helping parents/guardians collect and submit acceptable information to confirm their child’s 

eligibility to receive grant-funded services was somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: BIE schools that used the ISEP count in place of the ED 506 form did not respond to this question. Analyses excluded respondents 

selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 6 (grantees with larger awards n = 534; grantees with smaller awards n = 490). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 37 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-43. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 90 0.9 

Educators 86 1.1 

Students 85 1.1 

School boards and/or district administrators 79 1.3 

School- or tribal based parent committees 73 1.4 

Tribes/tribal organizations 68 1.5 

Community-based organizations 50 1.6 

Institutions of higher education 32 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 90 percent 

collected information from the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee. 

Note: Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ 

needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (n = 972). 

Exhibit A-44. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, by grant award 

size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 91 1.3 90 1.4 

Educators 85 1.6 87 1.6 

Students 83 1.7 87 1.5 

School boards and/or district administrators 82 1.7 87 1.6 

School- or tribal based parent committees 73 2.0 74 2.1 

Tribes/tribal organizations* 77 1.9 57 2.3 

Community-based organizations 57 2.2 42 2.3 

Institutions of higher education* 40 2.2 25 2.0 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 91 percent of 

grantees with larger awards and 90 percent of grantees with smaller awards collected information from the Title VI 

Parent Advisory Committee. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any 

stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (grantees with larger awards n = 511; grantees with smaller awards n = 461). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 38 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-45. Stakeholder groups from which Title VI projects collected information, by grantee 

type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee* 94 0.8 62 5.0 

Educators 86 1.2 89 3.2 

Students 85 1.2 87 3.4 

School boards and/or district administrators 80 1.4 77 4.4 

School- or tribal based parent committees 72 4.6 73 1.5 

Tribes/tribal organizations* 71 1.5 31 4.8 

Community-based organizations 50 1.7 49 5.2 

Institutions of higher education 32 1.6 50 5.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 94 percent of 

districts and 62 percent of BIE schools and tribes collected information from the Title VI Parent Advisory 

Committee. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any 

stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (school districts n = 878; BIE schools and tribes n = 94). 

Exhibit A-46. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder groups, 

2017–18 

Percent SE 

Public hearings 70 1.5 

Convenings with stakeholder groups 64 1.6 

Surveys 62 1.6 

Interviews/focus groups 46 1.6 

Title VI-sponsored events/activities 42 1.6 

Listservs or other online forums 10 1.0 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 70 percent 

collected information from stakeholder groups through public hearings. 

Note: Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ 

needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (n = 945). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 39 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-47. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder groups, by 

grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards

Percent SE Percent SE

Public hearings* 76 1.9 62 2.3 

Convenings with stakeholder groups 67 2.1 61 2.3 

Surveys* 70 2.1 52 2.4 

Interviews/focus groups 48 2.2 44 2.3 

Title VI-sponsored events/activities* 51 2.2 32 2.2 

Listservs or other online forums 12 1.5 9 1.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 76 percent of 

grantees with larger awards and 62 percent of grantees with smaller awards collected information from 

stakeholder groups through public hearings. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any 

stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (grantees with larger awards n = 496; grantees with smaller awards n = 449). 

Exhibit A-48. Strategies Title VI grantees used to collect information from stakeholder groups, by 

grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE

Public hearings* 73 1.5 41 5.1 

Convenings with stakeholder groups* 66 1.6 51 5.2 

Surveys 62 1.7 62 5.0 

Interviews/focus groups 47 1.7 39 5.1 

Title VI-sponsored events/activities* 43 1.7 30 4.8 

Listservs or other online forums 11 1.1 10 3.1 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, among grantees that collected information from stakeholder groups, 73 percent of 

district grantees and 41 percent of BIE and tribal grantees collected information from stakeholder groups through 

public hearings. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Grantees that indicated on Item 9 that they did not consult with any 

stakeholders to identify American Indian and Alaska Native students’ needs did not answer this question. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 9 (school districts n = 852; BIE schools and tribes n = 93). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 40 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-49. Groups represented on Title VI Parent Advisory Committees, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Parents/guardians of AI/AN students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services 98 0.4 

Teachers 83 1.2 

Students eligible for Title VI-funded services 74 1.4 

Tribal leaders/representatives 37 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 96 percent of grantees reported that the parents/guardians of American Indian and 

Alaska Native students were represented on their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 20 (n = 1,028). 

Exhibit A-50. Groups represented on Title VI Parent Advisory Committees, by grant award size, 

2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Parents/guardians of AI/AN students eligible to receive 

Title VI-funded services 99 0.5 98 0.7 

Teachers 85 1.6 82 1.7 

Students eligible for Title VI-funded services* 80 1.7 68 2.1 

Tribal leaders/representatives* 43 2.1 31 2.1 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 99 percent of district grantees with larger awards and 98 percent of district grantees 

with smaller awards reported that the parents/guardians of American Indian and Alaska Native students were 

represented on their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 20 (grantees with larger awards n = 531; grantees with smaller awards n = 497). 

Exhibit A-51. Frequency of Title VI Parent Advisory Committee Meetings in 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Once during the academic year 30 1.4 

Monthly 21 1.3 

Quarterly 21 1.3 

Once each academic semester 19 1.2 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 30 percent of district grantees reported that their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

meets once during the academic year. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 21 (n = 1,019). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 41 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-52. Frequency of Title VI Parent Advisory Committee Meetings, by grant award size, 

2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Monthly* 27 1.9 15 1.6 

Quarterly* 26 1.9 17 1.7 

Once during the academic year* 20 1.7 40 2.2 

Once each academic semester 16 1.6 21 1.8 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 27 percent of district grantees with larger awards and 15 percent of grantees with 

smaller awards reported that their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee meets monthly. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 21 (grantees with larger awards n = 524; grantees with smaller awards n = 495). 

Exhibit A-53. Title VI Parent Advisory Committee support for planning, 2017–18 

Yes No Don’t know Not applicable 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Reviewing and approving Title VI 

Indian Education LEA Grants 

application components 

89 1.0 8 0.9 2 0.4 0.6 0.2 

Setting objectives for Title VIfunded services and activities 84 1.2 14 1.1 2 0.4 0.3 0.2 

Evaluating Title VI-funded 

activities and services 78 1.3 19 1.2 3 0.5 1 0.3 

Planning school-level nonacademic services and activities 

(e.g., field trips, cultural activities) 

62 1.5 34 1.5 2 0.5 2 1.4 

Allocating Title VI funds 61 1.5 36 1.5 2 0.5 1 0.3 

Identifying local partners to 

support Title VI-funded services 

and activities 

55 1.6 38 1.5 4 0.6 2 0.5 

Assisting with local assessments 

to identify American 

Indian/Alaska Native students’ 

educationally and culturally 

relevant academic needs 

48 1.6 46 1.6 3 0.6 3 0.5 

Conducting outreach related to 

ED 506 forms 36 1.5 58 1.5 4 1.6 2 0.5 

Hiring staff (e.g., teachers, 

counselors) to support Title VIfunded services and activities 

24 1.3 69 1.4 2 0.4 5 0.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 89 percent of district grantees reported that their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

reviewed and approved components of the Title VI grant application. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 22 (n = 1,028). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 42 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-54. Title VI Parent Advisory Committee support for planning, 2017–18, by grant award 

size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Reviewing and approving Title VI Indian Education LEA Grants 

application components* 94 1.1 85 1.6 

Setting objectives for Title VI-funded services and activities 82 1.7 86 1.5 

Evaluating Title VI-funded activities and services 80 1.7 76 1.9 

Planning school-level non-academic services and activities 

(e.g., field trips, cultural activities) 62 2.1 61 2.2 

Allocating Title VI funds 61 2.1 61 2.1 

Identifying local partners to support Title VI-funded services 

and activities* 60 2.1 49 2.2 

Assisting with local assessments to identify American 

Indian/Alaska Native students’ educationally and culturally 

relevant academic needs 

52 2.2 43 2.2 

Conducting outreach related to ED 506 forms 35 2.1 37 2.2 

Hiring staff (e.g., teachers, counselors) to support Title VIfunded services and activities* 29 2.0 18 1.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 94 percent of district grantees with larger awards and 85 percent of district grantees 

with smaller awards reported that their Title VI Parent Advisory Committee reviewed and approved components of 

the Title VI grant application. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 22 (grantees with larger awards n = 531; grantees with smaller awards n = 497). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 43 
Exhibit A-55. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, 2017–18 

Yes No Don’t know Not applicable 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative data (e.g., 

course grades, test scores, 

attendance rate, behavior, 

graduation and/or dropout 

data, college acceptance data) 

94 0.7 3 0.5 2 0.5 1 0.2 

Information from parents about 

students’ culturally relevant 

academic needs (e.g., school 

climate data) 

86 1.0 10 0.9 4 0.5 1 0.3 

Information from school 

teachers and administrators 

about students’ culturally 

relevant academic needs 

82 1.1 12 1.0 4 0.6 1 0.3 

Information from public 

hearings 73 1.3 21 1.2 4 0.5 3 0.5 

Information about services and 

activities delivered by other 

organizations that serve 

American Indian/Alaska Native 

student 

52 1.5 38 1.4 7 0.8 3 0.5 

School and district equity audit 

data (e.g., assessments of 

school resources, teacher 

placement, access to academic 

programs such as advanced 

placement courses and talented 

and gifted programs) 

49 1.5 36 1.4 11 0.9 5 0.6 

Published reports on issues 

related to American 

Indian/Alaska Native education 

(e.g., research produced by 

think tanks, university 

researchers, government 

agencies, tribal organizations) 

25 1.3 61 1.4 10 0.9 5 0.6 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 94 percent of grantees used school district-collected administrative data (e.g., course 

grades, test scores, attendance rate, behavior data, graduation and/or dropout data, and college acceptance data) 

to plan grant-funded services and activities. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 12 (n = 1,155). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 44 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-56. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, by grantee type, 

2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Administrative data (e.g., course grades, test scores, 

attendance rate, behavior, graduation and/or dropout data, 

college acceptance data) 

94 0.8 92 2.5 

Information from parents about students’ culturally relevant 

academic needs (e.g., school climate data) 87 1.1 83 3.4 

Information from school teachers and administrators about 

students’ culturally relevant academic needs 92 1.2 87 3.1 

Information from public hearings* 76 1.3 47 4.5 

Information about services and activities delivered by other 

organizations that serve American Indian/Alaska Native 

students* 

54 1.6 38 4.4 

School and district equity audit data (e.g., assessments of 

school resources, teacher placement, access to academic 

programs such as advanced placement courses and talented 

and gifted programs) 

49 1.1 42 4.5 

Published reports on issues related to American Indian/Alaska 

Native education (e.g., research produced by think tanks, 

university researchers, government agencies, tribal 

organizations) 

25 1.3 25 3.9 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 94 percent of school districts and 92 percent of BIE schools and tribes used school 

district-collected administrative data (e.g., course grades, test scores, attendance rate, behavior data, graduation 

and/or dropout data, and college acceptance data) to plan grant-funded services and activities. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 12 (school districts n = 1, 034; BIE schools and tribes n = 121). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 45 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-57. Data sources Title VI grant coordinators used to plan services, by grant award size, 

2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Administrative data (e.g., course grades, test scores, 

attendance rate, behavior, graduation and/or dropout data, 

college acceptance data) 

94 1.0 93 1.1 

Information from parents about students’ culturally relevant 

academic needs (e.g., school climate data)* 89 1.3 83 1.6 

Information from school teachers and administrators about 

students’ culturally relevant academic needs 84 1.5 81 1.7 

Information from public hearings* 77 1.7 68 2.0 

Information about services and activities delivered by other 

organizations that serve American Indian/Alaska Native 

student* 

59 2.0 45 2.1 

School and district equity audit data (e.g., assessments of 

school resources, teacher placement, access to academic 

programs such as advanced placement courses and talented 

and gifted programs) 

52 2.0 45 2.1 

Published reports on issues related to American Indian/Alaska 

Native education (e.g., research produced by think tanks, 

university researchers, government agencies, tribal 

organizations) 

29 1.9 20 1.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 94 percent of grantees with larger awards and 93 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards used school district-collected administrative data (e.g., course grades, test scores, attendance rate, 

behavior data, graduation and/or dropout data, and college acceptance data) to plan grant-funded services and 

activities. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 12 (grantees with larger awards n = 596; grantees with smaller awards n = 559). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 46 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-58. Grantees reporting challenges to efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and activities, 

2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Coordinating planned services with other 

organizations (e.g., coordinating mental health 

services with local health organization) 

11 1.0 28 1.5 61 1.6 

Obtaining input from tribes/tribal organizations 

to plan services 

11 1.0 23 1.3 66 1.4 

Obtaining input from the Title VI Parent 

Advisory Committee to plan services 

10 0.9 19 1.2 71 1.4 

Obtaining input from other stakeholders to plan 

services (e.g., parents, educators, students, 

community members, and/or comments from 

public hearings) 

7 0.8 27 1.3 66 1.5 

Identifying appropriate curricula/resources to 

support Title VI-funded planned services 

4 0.6 25 1.3 71 1.4 

Coordinating Title-VI funding for planned 

services with other funding sources (e.g., other 

federal funding, state funding) 

4 0.6 19 1.2 77 1.3 

Using data to identify American Indian/Alaska 

Native students’ educational and culturally 

relevant academic needs 

3 0.5 16 1.1 81 1.2 

Complying with grant requirements to fund 

planned services 

3 0.5 12 1.0 86 1.1 

Accessing data to identify American 

Indian/Alaska Native students’ educational and 

culturally relevant academic needs (e.g., course 

grades, test scores, attendance rate, behavior, 

graduation and/or dropout data, college 

acceptance data, parent information, teacher 

information, school and district equity audit 

data) 

2 0.4 12 1.0 86 1.0 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 11 percent of grantees reported that it was very challenging to coordinate planned 

services with other organizations, 28 reported it was somewhat challenging, and 61 percent reported it was 

minimally challenging or not challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 13 (n = 1,116). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 47 
 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-59. Efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and activities that were somewhat or very 

challenging, by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Coordinating planned services with other organizations 

(e.g., coordinating mental health services with local health 

organization) 

39 1.7 39 4.9 

Obtaining input from tribes/tribal organizations to plan 

services* 

34 1.6 47 5.8 

Obtaining input from other stakeholders to plan services (e.g., 

parents, educators, students, community members, and/or 

comments from public hearings) 

32 1.5 44 4.6 

Identifying appropriate curricula/resources to support Title VIfunded planned services 

29 1.5 27 4.2 

Obtaining input from the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

to plan services* 

27 1.4 47 5.4 

Coordinating Title VI funding for planned services with other 

funding sources (e.g., other federal funding, state funding) 23 1.4 26 4.4 

Using data to identify American Indian/Alaska Native students’ 

educational and culturally relevant academic needs 

19 1.2 23 3.9 

Complying with grant requirements to fund planned services 15 1.1 11 2.9 

Accessing data to identify American Indian/Alaska Native 

students’ educational and culturally relevant academic needs 

(e.g., course grades, test scores, attendance rate, behavior, 

graduation and/or dropout data, college acceptance data, 

parent information, teacher information, school and district 

equity audit data) 

14 1.1 14 3.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 39 percent of district grantees and 39 percent of BIE and tribal grantees reported that 

coordinating planned services with other organizations was somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 13 (school districts n = 1,002; BIE schools and tribes n = 114). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 48 
 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-60. Efforts to plan Title VI-funded services and activities that were somewhat or very 

challenging, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Coordinating planned services with other organizations (e.g., 

coordinating mental health services with local health 

organization) 

38 2.2 40 2.4 

Obtaining input from tribes/tribal organizations to plan 

services 

34 2 34 2.2 

Obtaining input from other stakeholders to plan services (e.g., 

parents, educators, students, community members, and/or 

comments from public hearings) 

33 2 34 2.1 

Identifying appropriate curricula/resources to support Title VIfunded planned services 

28 1.9 30 2

Obtaining input from the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

to plan services 

25 1.8 33 2

Coordinating Title-VI funding for planned services with other 

funding sources (e.g., other federal funding, state funding) 

22 1.8 25 2

Using data to identify American Indian/Alaska Native students’ 

educational and culturally relevant academic needs 

20 1.7 18 1.7 

Complying with grant requirements to fund planned services 15 1.5 14 1.5 

Accessing data to identify American Indian/Alaska Native 

students’ educational and culturally relevant academic needs 

(e.g., course grades, test scores, attendance rate, behavior, 

graduation and/or dropout data, college acceptance data, 

parent information, teacher information, school and district 

equity audit data) 

13 1.4 14 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 38 percent of grantees with larger awards and 40 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards reported that coordinating planned services with other organizations was somewhat or very challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 13 (grantees with larger awards n = 581; grantees with smaller awards n = 535). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 49 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 4. Measuring Progress toward Title VI Service Objectives 

Exhibit A-61. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects, 2017–18 

Percent SE 

Academic achievement/skill development 

Increase AI/AN students’ academic achievement 81 1.1 

Decrease achievement gaps between AI/AN students and other racial/ethnic 

groups 

27 1.3 

Enhance AI/AN students’ problem solving and cognitive skills development 25 1.3 

Language and culture 

Increase AI/AN students’ knowledge of cultural identity and awareness 60 1.4 

Increase Native American Language instruction programs 20 1.2 

School readiness and engagement 

Increase school attendance rate for AI/AN students 44 1.5 

Increase AI/AN students’ school readiness 35 1.4 

Increase parent engagement in AI/AN students’ schools 35 1.4 

College and career 

Increase graduation rate for AI/AN students 38 1.4 

Increase college enrollment for AI/AN students 26 1.3 

Increase career readiness skills for AI/AN students 25 1.3 

Prevention 

Decrease school dropout rate for AI/AN students 27 1.3 

Increase substance abuse prevention for AI/AN students 10 0.9 

Exhibit reads: In their 2017–18 grant application, 81 percent of grantees included increasing American Indian and 

Alaska Native students’ academic achievement among their project objectives. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 10 (n = 1,161). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 50 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-62. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects for American Indian and Alaska Native students, 

by grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic achievement/skill development 

Increase AI/AN students’ academic achievement* 83 1.2 71 4.1 

Decrease achievement gaps between AI/AN students and 

other racial/ethnic groups* 28 1.4 15 3.2 

Enhance AI/AN students’ problem solving and cognitive skills 

development 25 1.4 22 3.7 

Language and culture 

Increase AI/AN students’ knowledge of cultural identity and 

awareness* 59 1.5 73 4.0 

Increase Native American Language instruction programs* 18 1.2 42 4.4 

School readiness and engagement 

Increase school attendance rate for AI/AN students 45 1.5 35 4.3 

Increase AI/AN students’ school readiness 36 1.5 32 4.2 

Increase parent engagement in AI/AN students’ schools 34 1.5 39 4.4 

College and career 

Increase graduation rate for AI/AN students* 40 1.5 24 3.8 

Increase college enrollment for AI/AN students* 27 1.4 14 3.1 

Increase career readiness skills for AI/AN students 25 1.4 20 3.6 

Prevention 

Decrease school dropout rate for AI/AN students* 29 1.4 16 3.3 

Increase substance abuse prevention for AI/AN students 10 0.9 10 2.7 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 83 percent of district grantees and 71 percent of BIE and tribal grantees included 

increasing the graduation rate of American Indian and Alaska Native students among their project objectives. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 10 (school districts n = 1,036; BIE schools and tribes n = 125). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 51 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I 

I

Exhibit A-63. Objectives of Title VI-funded projects, by grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Academic achievement/skill development 

Increase AI/AN students’ academic achievement 81 1.6 82 1.6 

Decrease achievement gaps between AI/AN students and 

other racial/ethnic groups 26 1.8 27 1.9 

Enhance AI/AN students’ problem solving and cognitive skills 

development 25 1.8 25 1.8 

Language and culture 

Increase AI/AN students’ knowledge of cultural identity and 

awareness 

63 2.0 57 2.1 

Increase Native American Language instruction programs* 24 1.8 16 1.5 

School readiness and engagement 

Increase school attendance rate for AI/AN students 45 2.0 43 2.1 

Increase AI/AN students’ school readiness 34 1.9 36 1.9 

Increase parent engagement in AI/AN students’ schools 35 2.0 34 2.0 

College and career 

Increase graduation rate for AI/AN students* 46 2.0 30 1.9 

Increase college enrollment for AI/AN students 28 1.8 23 1.8 

Increase career readiness skills for AI/AN students 27 1.8 23 1.8 

Prevention 

Decrease school dropout rate for AI/AN students* 33 1.9 21 1.7 

Increase substance abuse prevention for AI/AN students 10 1.2 10 1.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 81 percent of grantees with larger awards and 82 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards included increasing the graduation rates of American Indian and Alaska Native students among their 

project objectives. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 10 (grantees with larger awards n = 600; grantees with smaller awards n = 561). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 52 
 

 

 

Exhibit A-64. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI-funded project objectives, 

2017–18 

Percent SE 

State standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska Native students 

receiving Title VI-funded services 83 1.1 

Attendance data for American Indian/Alaska Native students receiving Title VIfunded services 80 1.2 

Graduation/dropout data for American Indian/Alaska Native students receiving 

Title VI-funded services 66 1.4 

Local standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska Native students 

receiving 55 1.5 

Survey or focus group data collected from parents, guardians, or families of 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 46 1.5 

Survey or focus group data collected from American Indian/Alaska Native students 

receiving Title VI-funded services 43 1.5 

Staff surveys or focus group data (e.g., with teachers, administrators, and/or 

support personnel) collected from schools serving American Indian/Alaska Native 

students 

39 1.4 

College acceptance data for American Indian/Alaska Native students receiving 

Title VI-funded services 26 1.3 

Performance portfolios for American Indian/Alaska Native students receiving 

Title VI-funded services, including examples of student work and other artifacts 25 1.3 

Other culturally relevant measures 9 0.9 

N/A: None of these data sources were used 1 0.3 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 83 percent of grantees used state standardized assessments to measure progress 

toward project objectives. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 26 (n = 1,146). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 53 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-65. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI project objectives, by grantee 

type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

State standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska 

Native students receiving Title VI-funded services* 85 1.1 67 4.3 

Attendance data for American Indian/Alaska Native students 

receiving Title VI-funded services 80 1.2 77 3.9 

Graduation/dropout data for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services* 69 1.4 41 4.5 

Local standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska 

Native students receiving 56 1.5 51 4.6 

Survey or focus group data collected from parents, guardians, 

or families of American Indian/Alaska Native students 46 1.6 43 4.6 

Survey on focus group data collected from American 

Indian/Alaska Native students receiving Title VI-funded 

services 

43 1.5 42 4.5 

School staff surveys or focus group data (e.g., with teachers, 

administrators, and/or support personnel) collected from 

schools serving American Indian/Alaska Native students 

38 1.5 46 4.6 

College acceptance data for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services* 27 1.4 15 3.3 

Performance portfolios for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services, including examples 

of student work and other artifacts 

24 1.3 34 4.4 

Other culturally relevant measures* 8 0.8 21 3.8 

N/A: None of these data sources were used 1 0.3 3 1.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 85 percent of district grantees and 67 percent of BIE and tribal grantees used state 

standardized assessments to measure progress toward project objectives. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 26 (school districts n = 1,028; BIE schools and tribes n =118). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 54 
 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-66. Data sources used to measure progress toward Title VI-funded project objectives, by 

grant award size, 2017–18 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE 

State standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska 

Native students receiving Title VI-funded services 

86 1.4 81 1.7 

Attendance data for American Indian/Alaska Native students 

receiving Title VI-funded services 

82 1.6 77 1.8 

Graduation/dropout data for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services* 74 1.8 58 2.1 

Local standardized assessments for American Indian/Alaska 

Native students receiving 

59 2.0 51 2.1 

Survey or focus group data collected from parents, guardians, 

or families of American Indian/Alaska Native students* 53 2.1 38 2.1 

Survey or focus group data collected from American 

Indian/Alaska Native students receiving Title VI-funded 

services* 

49 2.1 36 2.0 

School staff surveys or focus group data (e.g., with teachers, 

administrators, and/or support personnel) collected from 

schools serving American Indian/Alaska Native students* 

44 2.0 34 2.0 

College acceptance data for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services 

29 1.9 34 2.0 

Performance portfolios for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students receiving Title VI-funded services, including examples 

of student work and other artifacts 

26 1.8 24 1.8 

Other culturally relevant measures* 13 1.4 5 1.0 

N/A: None of these data sources were used 1 0.4 1 0.4 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 86 percent of grantees with larger awards and 81 percent with smaller awards used 

state standardized assessments to measure progress toward project objectives. 

Note: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 26 (grantees with larger awards n = 592; grantees with smaller awards n = 554). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 55 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-67. Title VI grantees reporting challenges to implementing data collection or data use 

strategies, 2017–18 

Very 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Minimally/not 

challenging 

Percent SE Percent SE Percent SE 

Linking multiple student-level databases (e.g., 

state assessment data, college enrollment 

information) 

13 1.2 28 1.6 59 1.7 

Analyzing data to make decisions about project 

services and activities 

6 0.8 20 1.3 74 1.4 

Identifying appropriate data sources on Title VIeligible American Indian/Alaska Native students 5 0.7 19 1.2 76 1.3 

Accessing student-level data (e.g., state 

assessment data, collect enrollment 

information) for Title VI-eligible American 

Indian/Alaska Native students 

2 0.5 13 1.0 85 1.1 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 13 percent of Title VI grantees reported that linking multiple student-level databases 

was very challenging, 28 percent reported that it was somewhat challenging, and 59 percent reported that it was 

minimally challenging or not challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” Numbers may not add to 100% due to rounding. 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 27 (n = 1,080). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 56 
 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A-68. Data collection or data use strategies that were somewhat or very challenging, by 

grantee type, 2017–18 

School districts BIE schools and tribes 

Percent SE Percent SE 

Linking multiple student-level databases (e.g., state 

assessment data, college enrollment information) 

41 1.8 42 5.7 

Identifying appropriate data sources on Title VI-eligible 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 26 1.4 24 4.1 

Analyzing data to make decisions about project services and 

activities 

26 1.5 25 4.4 

Accessing student-level data (e.g., state assessment data, 

collect enrollment information) for Title VI-eligible American 

Indian/Alaska Native students 

15 1.1 19 3.8 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 41 percent of district grantees and 42 percent of BIE and tribal grantees reported that 

linking multiple student-level databases was somewhat or very challenging. 

Note: Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 27 (school districts n = 970; BIE schools and tribes n = 110). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 57 
Exhibit A-69. Data collection or data use strategies that were somewhat or very challenging, 

2017–18 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grantees with 

larger awards 

Grantees with 

smaller awards 

Percent SE Percent SE

Linking multiple student-level databases (e.g., state 

assessment data, college enrollment information)* 

46 2.3 36 2.5 

Identifying appropriate data sources on Title VI-eligible 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 25 1.8 23 1.8 

Analyzing data to make decisions about project services and 

activities 

27 2.0 26 2.1 

Accessing student-level data (e.g., state assessment data, 

collect enrollment information) for Title VI-eligible American 

Indian/Alaska Native students 

17 1.6 14 1.5 

Exhibit reads: In 2017–18, 46 percent of grantees with larger awards and 36 percent of grantees with smaller 

awards reported that linking multiple student-level databases was somewhat or very challenging. 

Notes: * Indicates the difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Analyses excluded respondents selecting “Not applicable” or “Don’t know.” 

Source: Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators, Item 27 (grantees with larger awards n = 565; grantees with smaller awards n = 515). 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 58 
 

Appendix B. Data Collection Instruments 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 59 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______ 

Survey of Title VI Grant Coordinators 

The Title VI Indian Education LEA Grants Program requires grantees to report the number of students eligible for 

services. The number includes all AI/AN students for whom schools or districts have collected an Indian Student 

Certification (ED 506) form that is signed by the child’s parent or guardian. This section asks questions designed 

to understand how grantees collect timely, accurate, and complete information about students eligible for Title 

VI-funded services. 

I. Identifying and Counting Eligible AI/AN Students 

1. [FOR LEAs ONLY] This school year, in 2017-18, approximately how many AI/AN tribes, bands, and groups 

(including federally recognized, state-recognized, terminated, and/or organized Indian groups) are (a) 

enrolled by your school district; and (b) served by Title VI-funded services? NOTE: If you do not know 

the answer to one or both of these questions, please write DK (“Don’t Know”) in the appropriate space 

below. 

a. Number of AI/AN tribes, bands and groups with students enrolled in the district: _______ 

b. Number of AI/AN tribes, bands, and groups with students served by Title VI-funded services: 

1a. [FOR BIE SCHOOLS ONLY] How does your school document your Indian student count? [Select one] 

a. Maintaining ED 506 Forms on Indian student 

b. Using the Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) average daily membership (ADM) count 

2. For this school year, 2017-18, which of the following strategies does your Title VI-funded project use to 

identify students who are eligible to receive Title VI-funded services? (Select ALL that apply.) 

a. Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) to notify AI/AN families about available Title VIfunded services for eligible AI/AN students 

b. Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, presentations, meetings) to identify Title VIeligible AI/AN students with: (Triggers drop down menu) 

• District staff (e.g., enrollment administrators, directors of other federal programs) 

• School staff (e.g., secretaries, administrators, counselors, teachers) 

c. [FOR LEAs ONLY] Collaborate and coordinate with local tribes and tribalorganizations to determine 

AI/AN student eligibility to receive Title VI-funded services (e.g., help to distinguish multiple federal 

definitions of AI/AN students, including Title VI grant definition versus Johnson-O’Malley Act definition) 

d. Collaborate and coordinate with organizations that work with AI/AN families to notify them about 

available Title VI-funded services: (Triggers drop down menu) 

• Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

• Local tribes and tribal organizations 

• Community-based organizations 

• Local government agencies 

• School- or tribal-based parent committees 

e. Include questions about students’ AI/AN status as part of the school registration processes 

f. Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 form 

g. Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) to schools 

h. Run reports for students who identified their primary or secondary ethnicity as AI/AN on school 

enrollment forms and submit information to the Title VI office 

i. Include ED 506 form in school enrollment packets 

j. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

k. N/A: My project did not identify students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services for the 2017-18 

school year. [Skip to Q4) 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 60 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

3. [[Note: Online survey software will pipe in the activities selected in Q2] For this school year, 2017-18, 

how challenging is each of the following strategies as your project seeks to identify Title VI-eligible 

AI/AN students? 

Not 

challenging

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

a. Conduct targeted outreach (e.g., by phone or email) 

to notify AI/AN families about available Title VIfunded services for eligible AI/AN students 

b. Conduct awareness-raising activities (e.g., trainings, 

presentations, meetings) to identify Title VI-eligible 

AI/AN students with [Online software will pipe in the 

responses selected in Q2] 

c. [FOR LEAs ONLY] Collaborate and coordinate with 

local tribes and tribalorganizations to determine 

AI/AN student eligibility to receive Title VI-funded 

services (e.g., help to distinguish multiple federal 

definitions of AI/AN students, including Title VI grant 

definition versus Johnson-O’Malley Act definition) 

d. Collaborate and coordinate with organizations that 

work with AI/AN families to notify them about 

available Title VI-funded services [Online software 

will pipe in the responses selected in Q2] 

e. Include questions about students’ AI/AN status as 

part of the school registration processes 

f. Include common tribal affiliations on the ED 506 

form 

g. Disseminate eligibility information (flyer, fact sheet) 

to schools 

h. Ask schools to run reports for students who 

identified their secondary ethnicity as AI/AN on 

enrollment forms and submit information to the Title 

VI office 

□ 

4. [For activities in Q3 considered “somewhat” or “very challenging”] In what way(s) are these strategies 

challenging? 

5. For this school year, 2017-18, which of the following strategies does your project use to ensure that the 

data collected through the Indian Student Certification (ED 506) form are accurate and complete? (Select 

ALL that apply.) 

a. Link data collected through the ED 506 form to district student enrollment systems 

b. Link data collected through the ED 506 form to state student enrollment systems 

c. Conduct an annual review of information collected through the ED 506 form to update information 

on eligible students (e.g., by removing students who have left and removing duplicate student 

entries) 

d. Collect physical copies of completed ED 506 forms from AI/AN families 

e. Collect electronic copies of ED 506 forms from AI/AN families 

f. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): _______________________________________________ 

g. N/A: We do not engage in any of theseactivities. 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 61 
 

 

 

 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

6. For this school year, 2017-18, how challenging is each of the following tasks as your project seeks to 

collect information or confirm the accuracy of information on Title VI-eligible students? 

Not 

challenging 

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

Don’t 

know 

N/A: We do not 

engage in this 

activity 

a. Helping AI/AN parents/guardians 

collect and submit acceptable 

information (e.g., tribal 

membership or enrollment 

number, letter from tribe) to 

confirm their child’s eligibility to 

receive Title VI-funded services 

b. Collecting completed ED 506 

forms from AI/AN parents/ 

guardians 

c. Comparing information collected 

through the ED 506 form with 

school district records on 

students’ race/ethnicity (e.g., 

disaggregating information about 

students who identify as two or 

more races/ethnicities) 

d. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

□ □ □ 

□ 

□ 

7. [For activities in Q6 considered “somewhat” or “very challenging”] In what ways are these tasks 

challenging? 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 62 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

II. Planning Title VI-funded Services for AI/AN Students 

Identifying AI/AN Students’ Needs 

8. How frequently does your project conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to identify AI/AN students’ 

educational and culturally related academicneeds? 

a. Semi-annually (i.e., twice peryear) 

b. Annually 

c. Every 2 years 

d. Every 3 years 

e. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY) 

f. We do not conduct assessments to identify AI/AN students’ educational and culturally related academic 

needs. (Skip to Q10) 

9. When your project conducted its last comprehensive needs assessment, which strategies were used to collect 

information from the following stakeholder groups about AI/AN students’ educational and culturally related 

academicneeds? 

N/A: My Title VI-funded project did not consult with any stakeholder groups to identify AI/AN 

students’ needs. (Skip to Q10) 

Note: Categories will change depending on grantee type (e.g., Tribes applying in lieu of an LEA 

would see “Other tribal organizations” for option “c”). 

Stakeholder groups Surveys 

Interviews/ 

focus groups 

Listservs or 

other 

online 

forums 

Convenings 

with 

stakeholder 

group 

Public 

hearings 

Title VIsponsored 

events/ 

activities 

Other (specify) 

[Online version 

will include popup box for 

response] 

Not 

consulted 

about AI/AN 

students’ 

needs 

N/A: Not a 

stakeholder 

a. Title VI Parent Advisory 

Committee 

b. School- or tribal-based 

parent committees 

c. Tribes/tribal organizations 

d. School boards and/or other 

district administrators 

e. Educators (i.e., 

administrators, teachers) 

f. Students 

g. Institutions of higher 

education 

h. Community-based 

organizations 

i. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

___________________ 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 63 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10. Which of the following objectives did your project identify in its 2017-18 grant application to address AI/AN 

students’ educational and culturally related academic needs? (Select ALL that apply.) 

a. Increase AI/AN students’ school readiness 

b. Increase AI/AN students’ academic achievement 

c. Decrease achievement gaps between AI/AN students and students of other racial/ethnic groups 

d. Increase AI/AN students’ knowledge of cultural identity and awareness 

e. Enhance AI/AN students’ problem solving and cognitive skills development 

f. Increase school attendance rate for AI/AN students 

g. Decrease school dropout rate for AI/AN students 

h. Increase graduation rate for AI/AN students 

i. Increase AI/AN students’ career readiness skills (e.g., technology skills, leadershipskills) 

j. Increase college enrollment for AI/AN students 

k. Increase substance abuse prevention for AI/AN students 

l. Increase parent engagement in AI/AN students’ schools 

m. Increase Native American Language instruction programs 

n. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 64 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

Planning Services and Activities to Support AI/AN Students’ Needs 

11. In planning for this school year, 2017-18, which strategies, if any, did your project use to collect input from 

the following stakeholders to plan Title VI-funded services and activities? 

N/A: My Title VI-funded project did not consult with any stakeholder groups to plan Title VIfunded services and activities to support AI/AN students’ needs. (Skip toQ12) 

Surveys 

Interviews/ 

focus groups 

Online 

forums 

Convenings 

with 

stakeholder 

group 

Public 

hearings 

Title VIsponsored 

events/ 

activities 

Other 

(specify) 

Not consulted 

to plan project 

services and 

activities 

N/A: Not a 

stakeholder 

a. Title VI Parent 

Advisory 

Committee 

b. School- or 

tribal-based 

parent 

committees 

c. Tribes/tribal 

organizations 

d. School boards 

and/or other 

district 

administrators 

e. Educators (i.e., 

administrators, 

teachers) 

f. Students 

g. Institutions of 

higher 

education 

h. Communitybased 

organizations 

i. Other LEAs or 

LEA consortia 

within the state 

j. Other (PLEASE 

SPECIFY): 

____________ 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 65 
 

 

 

 

12. In planning for this school year, 2017-18, which of the following data sources did your project use 

to plan Title VI-funded services and activities? (Select ALL that apply.) 

N/A: My Title VI-funded project did not use any data sources to plan services and activities to 

support AI/AN students’ needs. (Skip to Q13) 

Data sources 

a. Administrative data collected by the school district (e.g., course grades, test scores, 

attendance rate, behavior, graduation and/or dropout data, college acceptance data) 

b. Published reports on issues related to AI/AN education (e.g., research produced by 

think tanks, university researchers, government agencies, tribal organizations) 

c. Information about services and activities delivered by other organizations that serve 

AI/AN students 

d. Information from public hearings 

e. Information from parents about students’ culturally relevant academic needs (e.g., 

school climate data) 

f. Information from school teachers and administrators about students’ culturally relevant 

academic needs 

g. School and district equity audit data (e.g., assessments of school resources, teacher 

placement, access to academic programs such as advanced placement courses and 

talented and gifted programs) 

h. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 66 
 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

13. In planning for this school year, 2017-18, how challenging were each of the following in your Title VIfunded project’s efforts to plan services and activities? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Not 

challenging 

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

Don’t 

know 

a. Obtaining input from the Title VI Parent 

Advisory Committee to plan services 

b. Obtaining input from tribes/tribal 

organizations to plan services 

c. Obtaining input from other stakeholders to 

plan services (e.g., parents, educators, 

students, community members, and/or 

comments from public hearings) 

d. Accessing data to identify AI/AN students’ 

educational and culturally relevant 

academic needs (e.g., course grades, test 

scores, attendance rate, behavior, 

graduation and/or dropout data, college 

acceptance data, parent information, 

teacher information, school and district 

equity audit data) 

e. Using data to identify AI/AN students’ 

educational and culturally relevant 

academic needs 

f. Coordinating planned services with other 

organizations (e.g., coordinating mental 

health services with local health 

organization) 

g. Coordinating Title-VI funding for planned 

services with other funding sources (e.g., 

other federal funding, state funding) 

h. Identifying appropriate curricula/resources 

to support Title VI-funded planned services 

i. Complying with grant requirements to 

fund planned services 

j. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 67 
 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ n n 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

III. Title VI-funded Services and Activities 

14. For this school year, 2017-18, does your project use Title VI funding to provide the following services and 

activities to eligible AI/AN students? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Yes No 

a. Native language instruction 

b. Early childhood programs 

c. Indian education (e.g., language, history) 

d. Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field trips) 

e. Academic support (e.g., homework support, study skills) 

f. Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool programs) 

g. College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT preparation, college visits) 

h. Career preparation (e.g., career exploration, internships) 

i. Gifted and talented program 

a. Student advocacy/leadership 

b. Mentoring 

c. Suicide prevention 

d. Violence prevention 

e. Substance abuse prevention 

f. Counseling 

g. Family literacy 

h. Parent involvement 

i. Dropout prevention strategies 

j. Programs for students in correctional facilities 

k. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 68 
 

 

 

 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ n n n 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

15. For this school year, 2017-18, does, or will, your project offer professional development to teachers 

and/or school support staff to support the delivery of the following services or activities to eligible AI/AN 

students? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Yes, in 2017-18 we offer 

professional development 

to teachers and/or 

support staff in this area 

No, but we plan to offer 

professional 

development in this area 

N/A: We do not plan

to offer professional 

development to 

teachers or staff in 

this area 

a. Native language instruction 

b. Early childhood programs 

c. Indian education (e.g., language, 

history) 

d. Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field 

trips) 

e. Academic support (e.g., homework 

support, study skills) 

f. Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool 

programs) 

g. College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT 

preparation, college visits) 

h. Career preparation (e.g., career 

exploration, internships) 

i. Gifted and talented program 

j. Student advocacy/leadership 

k. Mentoring 

l. Substance abuse prevention 

m. Suicide prevention 

n. Violence prevention 

o. Counseling 

p. Family literacy 

q. Parent involvement 

r. Dropout prevention strategies 

s. Programs for students in correctional 

facilities 

t. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 69 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

 □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 

16. [Note: Online survey software will pipe in the education-related services selected in Q14] For each of the 

educational services your project funds this school year, 2017-18, which use the following practices to support a 

culturally responsive education (i.e., an education that draws on students’ identities and backgrounds to foster 

inclusive learning environments) for AI/AN students? (For each row, select as many responses as apply.) 

Deliver 

instruction in 

AI/AN students’ 

heritage 

language 

Use instructional

strategies that 

reflect different

learning 

styles 

Incorporate

AI/AN 

history and 

culture into 

the curriculum 

Administer 

assessments 

in AI/AN 

languages 

Use AI/AN

teachers 

and/or 

support 

staff 

Connect AI/AN 

students with 

mentors or 

counselors 

from tribal 

community Other 

Don’t 

know 

N/A: None 

of these 

practices 

are used 

for this 

service 

a. Native language 

instruction 

b. Early childhood 

education 

c. Indian education 

(e.g., language, 

history) 

d. Cultural 

enrichment (e.g., 

events, field trips)

e. Academic 

support (e.g., 

homework 

support, study 

skills) 

f. Academic 

enrichment 

(e.g., 

afterschool 

programs) 

g. College 

preparation (e.g., 

ACT or SAT 

preparation, 

college visits) 

h. Career 

preparation (e.g., 

career 

exploration, 

internships) 

i. Gifted and 

talented program

j. Dropout 

prevention 

strategies 

k. Programs for 

students in 

correctional 

facilities 

l. Other (PLEASE 

SPECIFY): 

[NOTE: If “N/A” or “Don’t know” selected for all practices in Q16, respondent skips to Q18] 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 70 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

17. Please provide a brief example of an educational service your project funds to support a culturally 

responsive education for AI/AN students. 

18. [Note: Online survey software will pipe in services selected in Q14] For this school year, 2017-18, how 

challenging is delivering the following services using culturally responsive practices? (Select ONE 

response for each row.) 

Not 

challenging 

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

Don’t 

know 

a. Native language instruction 

b. Early childhood education 

c. Indian education (e.g., language, history) 

d. Cultural enrichment (e.g., events, field trips) 

e. Academic support (e.g., homework support, 

study skills) 

f. Academic enrichment (e.g., afterschool 

programs) 

g. College preparation (e.g., ACT or SAT 

preparation, college visits) 

h. Career preparation (e.g., career exploration, 

internships) 

i. Gifted and talented program 

j. Student advocacy/leadership 

k. Mentoring 

l. Substance abuse prevention 

m. Suicide prevention 

n. Violence prevention 

o. Counseling 

p. Family literacy 

q. Parent involvement 

r. Dropout prevention strategies 

s. Programs for students in correctional facilities 

t. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): I I I I I I I I I I 

[NOTE: If “Not challenging,” or “Minimally challenging,” or “Don’t know” selected for all items in Q18, 

skip to Q20] 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 71 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

19. [If any services in Q18 are considered “Somewhat” or “Very” challenging to deliver using culturally 

responsive practices] For this school year, 2017-18, how challenging is each of the following factors in 

delivering services using culturally responsive practices? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Not 

Challenging 

Minimally 

Challenging 

Somewhat 

Challenging 

Very 

Challenging Don’t know 

a. Aligning state and local policy with goals of 

culturally responsive education for AI/AN 

students (e.g., incorporating AI/AN culture 

into the curriculum; administering 

assessments in AI/AN languages) 

b. Multiple tribal cultures represented among 

eligible AI/AN students 

c. Availability of staff within our organization 

(e.g., LEA/BIE/tribe) with expertise in 

culturally responsive education 

d. Availability of school staff with expertise in 

culturally responsive education 

e. Availability of school staff who are 

knowledgeable about students’ cultural 

backgrounds 

f. Availability of school staff who are 

knowledgeable about heritage languages 

g. Availability of professional development or 

training in culturally responsive education 

h. Access to instructional materials to 

support culturally responsive education for 

AI/AN students (e.g., materials related to 

heritage languages, textbooks that include 

AI/AN history and culture) 

i. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

Title VI Parent Advisory Committee 

20. For this school year, 2017-18, which of the following groups, if any, are represented on your Title VI Parent 

Advisory Committee? (Select ALL that apply.) 

a. Parents/guardians of AI/AN students eligible to receive Title VI-funded services 

b. Parents/guardians of students not from recognized AI/AN tribes, bands, or groups 

c. Teachers 

d. Students eligible for Title VI-funded services 

e. Students not from recognized AI/AN tribes, bands, or groups as defined on the ED 506 form 

f. Representatives from tribes on Indian lands within 50 miles of schools that enroll students from 

respective tribes, bands, and/or groups 

g. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): _________________________ 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 72 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ 

□ □ □ 

n n n 

n n n 

n n n 

n n n 

□ □ □ 

n n n 

□ □ □ 

n n n 

21. During this school year, 2017-18, how frequently does your Title VI Parent Advisory Committee meet? 

a. Once during the academic year 

b. Once each academic semester 

c. Quarterly 

d. Monthly 

e. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): __________________________ 

22. During this school year, 2017-18, which of the following activities, if any, does your Title VI Parent Advisory 

Committee support? (Select ALL that apply.) 

Yes No

Don’t 

know 

a. Reviewing and approving Title VI Indian Education LEA Grants application 

components 

b. Assisting with local assessments to identify AI/AN students’ educationally 

and culturally related academic needs 

c. Conducting outreach related to ED 506 Forms 

d. Setting objectives for Title VI-funded services and activities 

e. Allocating Title VI funds 

f. Evaluating Title VI-funded activities and services 

g. Hiring staff (e.g., teachers, counselors) to support Title VI-funded services 

and activities 

h. Identifying local partners to support Title VI-funded services and activities 

i. Planning school-level non-academic services and activities (e.g., field trips, 

cultural activities) 

j. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): ____________________________ 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 73 
 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

IV. Coordinating Title VI Services with Other Programs and Services 

23. For this school year, 2017-18, does your project coordinate Title VI-funded services and activities with 

any of the following programs? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Yes No

Don’t 

know 

N/A: Program 

not offered/ 

available 

a. Title I, Part A under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

(ESEA) [as reauthorized under the Every Student Succeeds Act 

(ESSA)] (i.e., improving basic programs operated by LEAs) 

b. Title I, Part C under ESEA (i.e., Migrant Education Program) 

c. Title I, Part D under ESEA (i.e., prevention and intervention 

programs for children and youth who are neglected, delinquent, or 

at risk) 

d. Title III of ESEA (i.e., language instruction for English learners and 

immigrant students) 

e. Title IV of ESEA (i.e., student support and academic enrichment 

grants, 21st Century Community Learning Centers, family 

engagement in education programs) 

f. Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program (authorized 

under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act) 

g. Impact aid 

h. Individuals with Educational Disabilities Act (IDEA) programs 

i. Johnson-O’Malley programs 

j. Other Bureau of Indian Education/Bureau of Indian Affairs 

programs 

k. Other federally funded programs (PLEASE SPECIFY): __________ 

l. State funded programs (PLEASE SPECIFY): __________________ 

m. Programs delivered by local social service providers (e.g., the 

health department, housing authority) 

n. Other programs serving at-risk students, families, and/or 

communities (PLEASE SPECIFY): ___________________________ 

o. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): _________________________ _ 

[Note: If “No,” “Don’t Know,” or “N/A” selected for ALL items, skip to Q25] 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 74 
 

 

 

 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

 □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

24. [Note: Online survey software will pipe in programs selected in Q23] For this school year, 2017-18, 

which of the following strategies does your project use to facilitate coordination of Title VI-funded 

services and activities with other programs? (Select ALL that apply for eachrow.) 

Participating 

in 

interagency 

task forces or 

committees 

Sharing

data on 

AI/AN 

students 

Sharing costs 

associated 

with providing 

services 

for AI/AN 

students 

Building programmatic 

linkages among 

programs, agencies and

organizations serving 

AI/AN 

students 

Sharing information 

on effective 

programs/services to

address the needs of

AI/AN 

students Other 

a. Title I, Part A under the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 

(as reauthorized under ESSA) (i.e., 

improving basic programs operated 

by LEAs) 

b. Title I, Part C under ESEA (i.e., 

Migrant Education Program) 

c. Title I, Part D under ESEA (i.e., 

prevention and intervention 

programs for children and youth 

who are neglected, delinquent, or 

at risk) 

d. Title III of ESEA (i.e., language 

instruction for English learners and 

immigrant students) 

e. Title IV of ESEA (i.e., student 

support and academic enrichment 

grants, 21st Century Community 

Learning Centers, family 

engagement in education 

programs) 

f. Education for Homeless Children 

and Youth Program (authorized 

under the McKinney-Vento 

Homeless Assistance Act) 

g. Impact aid 

h. Individuals with Educational 

Disabilities Act (IDEA) programs 

i. Johnson-O’Malley programs 

j. Other Bureau of Indian Education/ 

Bureau of Indian Affairs programs 

k. State-funded programs (PLEASE 

SPECIFY) 

l. Other federally funded programs 

(PLEASE SPECIFY) 

m. Programs delivered by local social 

service providers (e.g., the health 

department, housing authority) 

n. Other programs serving at-risk 

students, families, and/or 

communities (PLEASE SPECIFY) 

o. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY) 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 75 
 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ 

25. For this school year, 2017-18, how challenging is each of the following aspects of coordinating Title VIfunded services with other programs? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Not 

challenging 

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

Don’t 

know 

a. Competing priorities across programs, 

agencies, and organizations serving AI/AN 

students 

b. Identifying areas for programmatic linkages 

among programs, agencies, and 

organizations 

c. Blending funding/sharing costs across 

programs and services 

d. Limited staff time or capacity to coordinate 

services 

e. Sharing or linking data on AI/AN students 

across programs, agencies, and 

organizations 

f. Physical distance between programs, 

agencies, and organizations serving AI/AN 

students 

g. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): _____________ 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 76 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

□ □ □ □ □ □ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

V. Measuring Progress Toward Title VI Project Objectives 

26. For the 2016-17 school year, which of the following data sources did your Title VI-funded project use to 

measure progress toward project objectives (e.g., increase school readiness, academic achievement, 

knowledge of cultural identity and awareness, school attendance) (Select ALL that apply.) 

a. Performance portfolios for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services, including examples of 

student work and other artifacts 

b. Survey or focus group data for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

c. Other culturally relevant measures (PLEASE DESCRIBE): __________________ 

d. Attendance data for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

e. Graduation/dropout data for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

f. College acceptance data for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

g. School staff surveys or focus group data (e.g., with teachers, administrators, and/or support personnel) 

collected from schools serving AI/AN students 

h. Survey or focus group data collected from parents, guardians, or families of AI/AN students 

i. State standardized assessments for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

j. Local standardized assessments for AI/AN students receiving Title VI-funded services 

k. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

l. N/A: None of these data sources were used. 

27. For the 2016-17 school year, how challenging was implementing each of the following data 

collection or data use strategies? (Select ONE response for each row.) 

Not 

challenging 

Minimally 

challenging 

Somewhat 

challenging 

Very 

challenging 

Don’t 

know 

N/A: 

We do not 

do this 

a. Identifying appropriate data sources on 

Title VI-eligible AI/AN students 

b. Collecting data from parents of Title 

VI-eligible AI/AN students 

c. Collecting data from tribes/tribal 

organizations on Title VI-eligible AI/AN 

students 

d. Accessing student-level data (e.g., 

state assessment data, college 

enrollment information) for Title VIeligible AI/AN students 

e. Linking multiple student-level databases 

(e.g., state assessment data, college 

enrollment information) 

f. Analyzing data to make decisions about 

project services and activities (PLEASE 

EXPLAIN): _____________________ 

g. Other (PLEASE SPECIFY): 

28. [For factors in Q27 considered “very challenging”] In what way(s) were these data collection or data use 

strategies challenging 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 77 
 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

29. What do you believe are successful Title VI strategies for serving AI/AN students’ educational and 

culturally relevant academic needs? Why? 

30. Is there anything that you would like to add that you think we should know about the Title VI grant in [your 

Thank you for completing this survey! 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 78 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Title VI Grant Coordinator Interview Protocol 

I. Background 

1. How long have you been the coordinator of the Title VI grant? 

2. What other responsibilities do you have, if any? 

a. What percent of your time (in FTEs) do you spend on administering the Title VI grant? 

II. Services Provided 

3. What are the key features of your district’s [tribe’s, school’s] comprehensive program for meeting 

the needs of Native children? 

4. During the 2017-18 school year, what specific services and activities does your Title VI funding 

support? [Probe for services reported on EASIE APR Report that interviewee does not mention.] 

a. How many eligible Native students receive each of these types of services and activities? 

b. When and where are these services and activities provided to eligible Native students? 

c. In what ways has your project tried to make the services and activities culturally responsive? 

[Prompt for each of the following]: 

i. Instruction in students’ heritage language (i.e., the language used by local tribes) 

ii. Native history and culture are incorporated into the curriculum 

iii. Learning is connected to students’ local contexts, such as their town or community (i.e., 

place-based learning) 

iv. Teachers receive professional development in culturally responsive instructional strategies 

v. Native teachers and support staff are hired 

d. What are the challenges to providing culturally responsive services and activities to eligible 

Native students? [Probe for small/large Native student population size, adequate funding, 

accessibility, internet connectivity] 

e. How are these challenges addressed? 

f. How do these services and activities support your [district or school’s] comprehensive program 

for meeting the needs of Native students? 

5. In the last 5 years, has your project added, dropped, or modified the services and activities provided 

through this grant? If yes: 

a. What Title VI-funded services and activities have been added, dropped, or modified? 

b. What led to the changes? [Probe for role of stakeholder input, needs assessment, new 

information about culturally responsive practices.] 

6. What services and activities do you think should be added, dropped, or modified among the 

portfolio of services and activities your [project] offers to Native students? Why? Are there needed 

services that your project lacks the capacity to provide? If so, why? 

7. How do you coordinate Title VI-funded services and activities with other projects/funding sources 

that serve the needs of Native students and/or at-risk students and families? 

a. With what other projects/funding sources are Title VI services and activities coordinated? 

[Probe for Title I/II/III/IV, Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program, BIE (e.g., 

Johnson-O’Malley), Impact Aid, IDEA, state and local programs/funds.] 

b. How is service delivery coordinated? [Probe for shared staff, shared supplies and materials, 

shared space, other resources.] 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 79 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

c. What strategies or processes have facilitated this service coordination? [Probe for cost-sharing 

agreements or Memoranda of Understanding, interagency task forces or committees, data 

sharing agreements, conducting joint trainings.] 

d. What are the barriers to coordinating services and activities to serve the needs of Native 

students? [Probe for alignment of policy and/or regulation.] 

III. Planning Services 

8. What process does your [LEA/school/tribe] use to develop a comprehensive plan to meet the needs 

of Native children? 

9. How do you identify Native students’ unique educational and culturally related academic needs? 

a. What information do you gather? [Probe for student outcome data, surveys, focus groups.] 

b. How often do you assess student needs for the purposes of project planning? How much time is 

required to assess student needs? 

10. Which stakeholders do you usually go to in seeking input to plan grant-funded services and activities 

for eligible Native students? 

11. Describe the role of your Title VI Parent Advisory committee. 

12. What is the composition of your Title VI Parent Advisory committee? [Probe for number of parents, 

teachers, tribal elders or other representatives, secondary school students.] 

13. In planning for the 2017-18 or 2018-19 school year, have you consulted with the Title VI Parent 

Advisory Committee? 

14. What mechanisms are in place to ensure consultation with the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee? 

[Probe for regular meetings, public hearing, written communication, other.] 

15. What is the focus of the consultation with the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee? [Probe for needs 

assessment, selecting services, planning for service delivery.] 

16. How effective is the Title VI Parent Advisory Committee? 

a. How do you assess the effectiveness of the committee? 

b. What challenges does the committee face in planning grant-funded services and activities? 

17. In planning for the 2017-18 or 2018-19 school year, have you consulted with tribes or tribal 

organizations? 

18. What mechanisms are in place to ensure consultation with tribes? [Probe for regular meetings, 

public hearing, interagency task force, written communication, other.] 

19. What is the focus of the consultation with tribes? [Probe for needs assessment, selecting services, 

planning for service delivery.] 

20. How effective is the tribal consultation? 

a. How do you assess the effectiveness of the tribal consultation? 

b. What challenges arise during tribal consultation? 

21. Of the stakeholders you consult, which are most influential for purposes of selecting services and 

activities to support Native students? Why? 

22. Where else do you get information about appropriate services and activities for the eligible Native 

students? 

a. How do you learn about culturally responsive services and activities? 

23. Ultimately, what factors determine which services and activities are provided to eligible Native 

students? [Probe for use of needs assessment, input from stakeholders and public hearing, 

information about culturally responsive practices, local capacity and availability of services.] 

24. If you could design an ideal program, what would it look like? 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 80 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. Identifying and Counting Eligible Children 

25. What processes does your district have in place for identifying students who may be eligible for Title 

VI-funded services? [Probe for specific procedures and policies.] 

26. In what ways does your district work with partners to support parents and guardians in completing 

the Indian student certification (ED 506) form? Ask about work with each of the following groups: 

a. Parents and parent committees 

b. School or district staff 

c. Community members 

d. Tribal leaders, organizations 

e. Health department, housing authority, child and family services, or other agencies 

27. What strategies are most effective in ensuring that forms are completed accurately and submitted 

in time to qualify for services? 

28. What challenges does your district face in its efforts to identify students eligible for Title VI-funded 

services? [Probe for engaging schools to conduct targeted outreach to Native parents/guardians 

regarding project-eligible children; improving the online accessibility of information about eligibility, 

conflicts with self-reported race/ethnicity data for other purposes, complications with tribal 

recognition and membership.] 

29. What is the estimated cost to your district in terms of time and money of identifying eligible Native 

students and ensuring completion of the ED 506 form? 

30. [For tribe and BIE grantees only] Are all of the students your school serves members of [name] 

tribe? Are all eligible for Title VI-funded services? [If school serves students who are members of 

other tribes], do you face any issues with official tribal recognition and/or membership that make it 

difficult to identify students for services? How tribes collaborate with the LEA to verify attendance 

(e.g. check the roster)? 

V. Measuring Progress Toward Title VI Project Objectives 

31. What are your project objectives for the 2017-18 school year? [Probe for the objectives reported on 

EASIE Budget Report that are not mentioned.] 

32. What tools or data sources does your project use to measure progress toward each of these 

objectives? [Probe for measures aligned with each objective and those reported on the EASIE APR 

Report.] 

33. What challenges does your project face in measuring progress toward project objectives? [Probe for 

access to data, resources to collect data, time/capacity to analyze data.] 

34. To what extent are services and activities modified in light of data or evidence of progress? Why or 

why not? Specific examples? Which data sources are most useful for informing decisions? 

35. Are there challenges or other factors that inhibit the use of any data sources for making decisions 

about project services and activities? If yes, please describe. 

VI. Wrap-up 

36. What are your hopes for your community by having Title VI-funded services and activities available 

to serve the needs of eligible Native students? 

37. Is there anything else that we did not cover but you think is important for the study to capture 

about your Title VI project? 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 81 
 

Appendix C: Title VI Indian Student Eligibility 

Certification Form (ED 506 Form) 

Implementation of the Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 82 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Department of Education 

Office of Indian Education 

Washington, DC 20202 

TITLE VI ED 506 INDIAN STUDENT ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION FORM 

Parent/Guardian: This form serves as the official record of the eligibility determination for each individual child included in the 

student count. You are not required to complete or submit this form. However, if you choose not to submit a form, your child 

cannot be counted for funding under the program. This form should be kept on file and will not need to be completed every year. 

Where applicable, the information contained in this form may be released with your prior written consent or the prior written 

consent of an eligible student (aged 18 or over), or if otherwise authorized by law, if doing so would be permissible under the 

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, and any applicable state or local confidentiality requirements. 

STUDENT INFORMATION 

Name of the Child Date of Birth Grade 

(As shown on school enrollment records) 

Name of School 

TRIBAL ENROLLMENT 

Name of the individual with tribal enrollment: 

(Individual named must be a descendent in the first or second generation) The individual with tribal membership is the: 

Child Child's Parent Child's Grandparent 

Name of tribe or band for which individual above claimsmembership: 

The Tribe or Band is (select only one): 

Federally Recognized 

State Recognized 

Terminated Tribe (Documentation required. Must attach to form) 

Member of an organized Indian group that received a grant under the Indian Education Act of 

1988 as it was in effect October 19, 1994. (Documentation required. Must attach to form) 

Proof of enrollment in tribe or band listed above, as defined by tribe or band is: 

A. Membership or enrollment number (if readily available) OR 

B. Other Evidence of Membership in the tribe listed above (describe andattach) 

Name and address of tribe or band maintaining enrollment data for the individual listed above: 

Name Address 

City State Zip Code 

ATTESTATION STATEMENT 

I verify that the information provided above is accurate. 

Name Parent/Guardian Signature 

Address City State Zip Code 

Email Address Date 

Implementation of the ESEA Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 83 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ED 506 FORM 

FOR APPLICANTS: 

PURPOSE: To comply with the requirements in 20 USC 7427(a), which provides that: “The Secretary shall require that, as part of an application for a 

grant under this subpart, each applicant shall maintain a file, with respect to each Indian child for whom the local educational agency provides a free 

public education, that contains a form that sets forth information establishing the status of the child as an Indian child eligible for assistance under 

this subpart, and that otherwise meets the requirements of subsection (b)”. 

MAINTENANCE: A separate ED 506 form is required for each Indian child that was enrolled during the count period. A new ED 506 form does NOT 

have to be completed each year. All documentation must be maintained in a manner that allows the LEA to be able to discern, for any given year, 

which students were enrolled in the LEA’s school(s) and counted during the count period indicated in the application. 

FOR PARENTS/GUARDIANS: 

DEFINITION: Indian means an individual who is (1) A member of an Indian tribe or band, as membership is defined by the Indian tribe or band, 

including any tribe or band terminated since 1940, and any tribe or band recognized by the State in which the tribe or band resides; (2) A 

descendant of a parent or grandparent who meets the requirements described in paragraph (1) of this definition; (3) Considered by the Secretary 

of the Interior to be an Indian for any purpose; (4) An Eskimo, Aleut, or other Alaska Native; or (5) A member of an organized Indian group that 

received a grant under the Indian Education Act of 1988 as it was in effect on October 19, 1994. 

STUDENT INFORMATION: Write the name of the child, date of birth and school name and grade level. 

TRIBAL ENROLLMENT INFORMATION: Write the name of the individual with the tribal membership. Only one name is needed for this section, even 

though multiple persons may have tribal membership. Select only one name: either the child, child’s parent or grandparent, for whom you can 

provide membership information. 

Write the name of the tribe or band of Indians to which the child claims membership. The name does not need to be the official name as it appears 

exactly on the Department of Interior’s list of federally-recognized tribes, but the name must be recognizable and be of sufficient detail to permit 

verification of the eligibility of the tribe. Check only one box indicated whether it is a Federally Recognized, State Recognized, Terminated Tribe or 

Organized Indian Group. If Terminated Tribe or Organized Indian Group is elected, additional documentation is required and must be attached to this 

form. 

• Federally Recognized- an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity limited to those indigenous to the U.S. The Department of 

Interior maintains a list of federally-recognized tribes, which OIE can provide you upon request. 

• State Recognized- an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity that has recognized status by a State. The U.S. Department of 

Education does not maintain a master list. It is recommended that you use official state websitesonly. 

• Terminated Tribe-a tribal entity that once had a federally recognized status from the United States Department of Interior 

and had that designation terminated. 

• Organized Indian Group- Member of an organized Indian group that received a grant under the Indian Education Act of 1988 

as it was in effect October 19, 1994. 

Write the enrollment number establishing the membership of the child, if readily available, or other evidence of membership. If the child is not a 

member of the tribe and the child’s eligibility is through a parent or grandparent, either write the enrollment number of the parent or grandparent, 

or provide other proof of membership. Some examples of other proof of membership may include: affidavit from tribe, CDIB card or birth certificate. 

Write the name and address of the organization that maintains updated and accurate membership data for such tribe or band of Indians. 

ATTESTATION STATEMENT: Provide the name, address and email of the parent or guardian of the child. The signature of the parent or guardian of 

the child verifies the accuracy of the information supplied. 

The Department of Education will safeguard personal privacy in its collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of information about individuals 

and make such information available to the individual in accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act. 

PAPERWORK BURDEN STATEMENT According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of 

information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1810-0021. 

The time required to complete this portion of the information collection per type of respondent is estimated to average: 15 minutes per Indian 

student certification (ED 506) form; including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete 

and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this 

form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your 

individual submission of this form, write directly to: Office of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., LBJ/Room 

3W203, Washington, D.C. 20202-6335. OMB Number: 1810-0021 Expiration Date: 02/29/2020. 

Implementation of the ESEA Title VI Indian Education Formula Grants Program 84