Evaluation of State Expanded 

Learning Time (ELT)

Section A

April 3, 2013
Contract Number:

ED-IES-12-C-0086

Mathematica Reference Number:

40166-300

Submitted to:

Institute of Education Sciences

IES/NCEE

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20208

Project Officer: Erica Johnson

Submitted by:

Mathematica Policy Research

600 Alexander Park

Suite 100

Princeton, NJ 08540

Telephone: (609) 799-3535

Facsimile: (609) 799-0005

Project Director: Phil Gleason

Evaluation of State Expanded 

Learning Time (ELT)

Section A

April 3, 2013
ii

CONTENTS

PART A: SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT 

SUBMISSION ...................................................................................................1

JUSTIFICATION...............................................................................................1

1. Circumstances Necessitating the Collection of Information................1

2. Purposes and Uses of Data................................................................3

3. Use of Technology to Reduce Burden.................................................4

4. Efforts to Avoid Duplication of Effort.................................................4

5. Methods to Minimize Burden on Small Entities...................................4

6. Consequences of Not Collecting Data................................................5

7. Special Circumstances.......................................................................5

8. Federal Register Announcement and Consultation.............................5

9. Payments or Gifts..............................................................................5

10. Assurances of Confidentiality ............................................................5

11. Additional Justification for Sensitive Questions..................................6

12. Estimates of Hours Burden ................................................................6

13. Estimates of Cost Burden to Respondents..........................................7

14. Estimates of Annual Costs to the Federal Government.......................7

15. Reasons for Program Changes or Adjustments ..................................7

16. Plan for Tabulation and Publication of Results ...................................7

17. Approval Not to Display the OMB Expiration Date..............................7

18. Explanation of Exceptions .................................................................8

APPENDIX A: STATE ELT PLANS REPORT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

APPENDIX B: STATE ELT PLANS REPORT INTERVIEW ADVANCED LETTER

APPENDIX C: MATHEMATICA CONFIDENTIALITY PLEDGE
PART A: SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR PAPERWORK 

REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION

This OMB package requests clearance to conduct semi-structured interviews with 21st Century 

Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) state coordinators. The state coordinator interviews will 

be used to produce a State Expanded Learning Time (ELT) Plans Report. The purpose of this data 

collection is to provide early State Education Agency (SEA) implementation information for the 

states that have received the optional Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility 

to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT. In addition, the information will be used by the Institute 

of Education Sciences (IES) to guide potential future impact studies in this area. The report will 

summarize these states’ ELT plans and focus on how they plan to use these funds to support ELT, 

the level of their support, and how they will monitor subgrantees’ ELT implementation. Included in 

this request is the State ELT Plans Report interview protocol (Appendix A), State ELT Plans Report 

interview advanced letter (Appendix B) and Mathematica’s internal confidentiality pledge (Appendix 

C).

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) within the Department of Education (ED) has 

contracted with Mathematica Policy Research and its partners Abt Associates, Synergy Enterprises 

(SEI), and Evidence-Based Education Research & Evaluation (EBERE), to conduct the interviews 

and write the report.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Circumstances Necessitating the Collection of Information

a. Statement of Need for ELT Data Collection

The specific legislation authorizing this data collection is Title IV, Part B, Sections 4201-4206 of 

the ESEA, as amended by No Child Left Behind (NCLB), which allow community learning centers 

to establish or expand activities which provide opportunities for academic enrichment beyond the 

normal school day and also allow for an evaluation of such activities. Section 9401 of ESEA gives 
2

the Secretary of Education the authority to grant flexibility to states regarding the provisions of 

ESEA. As part of the ESEA flexibility, states may opt to request a waiver “to permit community 

learning centers that receive funds under the Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers 

(21st CCLC) program to use those funds to support expanded learning time during the school day in 

addition to activities during nonschool hours or periods when school is not in session (that is, before 

and after school or during summer recess).”

The federal government is also actively promoting ELT through other initiatives, including 

Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants, and a growing number of schools have adopted

ELT programs. Although there are no comprehensive national data on the current number of ELT 

schools, the National Center on Time & Learning (NCTL) has identified 1,026 schools in 36 states 

and the District of Columbia that provided substantially more learning time than surrounding public 

schools in school year (SY) 2011–2012. These initiatives are distributed widely across the country.

This State ELT Plans Report will provide valuable information to states and the federal 

government on states’ use of the optional ESEA Flexibility to use 21st CCLC funds to fund and 

encourage the adoption of ELT. The report will also describe the features of the ELT programs 

adopted, the challenges that states have encountered, and the strategies used to meet those 

challenges.

b. Research Questions

The State ELT Plans Report will address the following research questions: 

 How do the states plan to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT? 

 How do states define eligible ELT programs?

 What is the process for awarding 21st CCLC funds to districts? 

 How do the states plan to monitor districts’ use of ELT funds?

c. Data Collection Plan
3

To address the study research questions and to obtain consistent information on each ESEA 

Flexibility state’s ELT plans, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with the 21st CCLC 

coordinators of the 22 states that have applied for and received the optional 21st CCLC 

ESEAFlexibility to obtain information for the State ELT Plans Report. These calls will occur in

summer 2013. If additional states receive optional 21st CCLC Flexibility approval, or if the fiscal year 

(FY) 2013 budget includes ELT as an allowable use of 21st CCLC funds, we may conduct interviews 

with these additional states. The interviews will be conducted by individuals who will be specifically 

trained to conduct these interviews. Prior to the interview, respondents will receive an advanced 

letter (Appendix B) that describes the data collection. A member of the research team will then 

follow-up and request copies of relevant documents, such as the state Request for Proposals (RFP) 

for the 21st CCLC grant competition (if released) and any documentation the state has shared with 

prospective grantees, which will be used to tailor the interview and reduce burden on the 

respondent.

d. Study Activities and Time Line

The interview and report are expected to be completed in 13 months. We will conduct 

interviews in summer 2013 once we have received OMB clearance, and prepare the State ELT Plans 

Report in the fall 2013. 

2. Purposes and Uses of Data

The purpose of this study is to document states’ use of the optional ESEA Flexibility to use 21st

CCLC funds to support ELT. ELT is increasingly being regarded as an important education policy 

to promote improved instruction; however, adopting ELT presents many challenges for states, 

districts and schools. This report will provide policymakers and practitioners with important insight 

into approaches to support and encourage ELT and describe the features of state-supported ELT 

programs. The State ELT Plans Report will summarize the information obtained from the 

interviews with 21st CCLC state coordinators.
4

3. Use of Technology to Reduce Burden

The coordinator interviews are designed to obtain reliable information in an efficient way that 

minimizes respondent burden. The semi-structured interviews with the 21st CCLC state coordinators 

will be conducted over the telephone. Prior to conducting interviews, we will review state RFPs for 

21st CCLC subgrants, if available, and any other publicly available sources. We will use a protocol to 

ensure that we collect the required information efficiently and we will avoid asking for information

during the interviews that we are able to obtain from the state RFP or from other public sources, 

such as state websites.

4. Efforts to Avoid Duplication of Effort

The 21st CCLC state coordinator interviews avoid unnecessary collection of information from 

multiple sources. For example, the study will obtain preliminary information about state ELT 

programs from state RFPs, state and district websites, and grant applications, if available. 

No other national study has been conducted (or is underway) to address the research questions 

included in this study. The Policy and Program Studies Service (PPSS) has recently completed data 

collection for a study of 21st CCLC state competitions. The PPSS study includes case studies of nine 

states (some of which have the optional ESEA Flexibility to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT 

and some of which do not) and nine districts within those states. However, the timing of the PPSS 

data collection did not allow for inclusion of information about the upcoming 21st CCLC 

competitions in most states since spring 2013 is the first opportunity for most states to incorporate 

ELT into their 21st CCLC competitions. The IES study of ELT will include all states which receive 

the optional ESEA Flexibility to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT and will collect in-depth 

information about the ELT aspect of their 21st CCLC state competitions. 

5. Methods to Minimize Burden on Small Entities

The entities for the study are 21st CCLC state coordinators. Burden is minimized for all 

respondents by requesting only the minimum data required to meet study objectives. 
5

6. Consequences of Not Collecting Data

The interviews with 21st CCLC state coordinators are necessary to produce the State ELT Plans 

Report. This report will provide important information for ED, policymakers and practitioners on 

the use of 21st CCLC funds to support ELT as well as information to guide potential future impact 

studies in this area. Without the data collected for this study, ED will have less information to guide 

potential future evaluation efforts in this area and will not know how its investment in ELT, through 

21st CCLC grants, can help promote and support the adoption of ELT.

7. Special Circumstances

There are no special circumstances associated with the school recruiting effort.

8. Federal Register Announcement and Consultation

a. Federal Register Announcement

The 60-day notice to solicit public comments was published in Volume 78, Number 18, pages

5793-5794 of the Federal Register on January 28, 2013.

b. Consultations Outside of the Agency

The interview protocol has been reviewed internally within ED.

c. Unresolved Issues

None.

9. Payments or Gifts

The study does not plan to give gifts to 21st CCLC state coordinators for participating in the 

interviews. 

10. Assurances of Confidentiality

The interviews with the 21st CCLC state coordinators will be conducted in accordance with all 

relevant regulations and requirements. These include the Education Sciences Institute Reform Act 

of 2002, Title I, Part E, Section 183, that requires “[a]ll collection, maintenance, use, and wide 

dissemination of data by the Institute ... to conform with the requirements of section 552 of Title 5, 
6

United States Code, the confidentiality standards of subsections (c) of this section, and Sections 444 

and 445 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232 g, 1232h).” These citations refer 

to the Privacy Act, the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, and the Protection of Pupil Rights 

Amendment. The study will also adhere to requirements of subsection (d) of section 183 

prohibiting disclosure of individually identifiable information as well as making the publishing or 

inappropriate communication of individually identifiable information by employees or staff a felony.

All members of the study team with access to the data will be trained and certified on the 

importance of confidentiality and data security. All data will be kept in secured locations and 

identifiers will be destroyed as soon as they are no longer required.

The following safeguards are routinely employed by Mathematica to carry out confidentiality 

assurances during the study: 

 All Mathematica employees sign a confidentiality pledge (Appendix C) emphasizing its 

importance and describing their obligation.

 Identifying information is maintained on separate forms and files, which are linked only 

by sample identification number.

 Access to hard copy documents is strictly limited. Documents are stored in locked files 

and cabinets. Discarded materials are shredded.

 Computer data files are protected with passwords and access is limited to specific users. 

 Especially sensitive data are maintained on removable storage devices that are kept 

physically secure when not in use.

11. Additional Justification for Sensitive Questions

The state ELT protocol will not contain items considered to be of a sensitive nature. 

12. Estimates of Hours Burden

Currently, 22 states have received the optional ESEA Flexibility to use 21st CCLC funds to 

support ELT. We will conduct interviews with each of the 21st CCLC state coordinators in these 

states. The interview and supplying of any relevant documents (e.g., 21st CCLC grant competitions 

RFPs) will take approximately one hour. Therefore, the estimated burden hours for interviews with 
7

the 21st CCLC coordinators and providing of relevant documents is 22 hours, or approximately 7.3 

hours per year for three years.

13. Estimates of Cost Burden to Respondents

There are no start-up costs for respondents.

14. Estimates of Annual Costs to the Federal Government

The total cost to the Federal government of carrying out this study is $1,720,373, to be 

expended over the study period of thirteen months. 

15. Reasons for Program Changes or Adjustments

This is a new data collection.

16. Plan for Tabulation and Publication of Results

We will prepare a State ELT Plans Report that will document all 21st CCLC Flexibility states’ 

plans for ELT by providing a description of the range of ELT policies and their implementation. 

The projected release date for this report is winter 2014. 

The State ELT Plans Report will present findings from interviews with information to states 

and the federal government on states’ use of the ESEA Flexiblity to use 21st CCLC funds. The 

report will address how states plan to use 21st CCLC funds to support ELT, how they define ELT, 

as well as the process for awarding and monitoring the use of funds. The report will also describe 

the features of the ELT programs adopted, the challenges that states have encountered, and the 

strategies used to meet those challenges. In presenting results from the State ELT interviews, we will 

tabulate the number of states falling into different categories with respect to these topics or, where 

appropriate, the mean values of particular characteristics across responding states.

The report will be written in a style and format accessible to policymakers and practitioners, and 

will comply fully with the standards set by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).

17. Approval Not to Display the OMB Expiration Date

The study will display the OMB expiration date.
8

18. Explanation of Exceptions

No exceptions are being sought.
9

www.mathematica-mpr.com

Improving public well-being by conducting high-quality, objective research and surveys

Princeton, NJ ■ Ann Arbor, MI ■ Cambridge, MA ■ Chicago, IL ■ Oakland, CA ■ Washington, DC

Mathematica® is a registered trademark of Mathematica Policy Research