Special Education: Grant Programs Designed to Serve Children Ages 0-5
Published: 2002-04-25T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: In fiscal year 2001, the federal government spent $7 billion on the following three special education grant programs: Special Education Grants to States (School-age Grants), Special Education Grants Preschool (Preschool Grants) and Special Education Grants for Infants and Families with Disabilities (Infants Grants). School-age and Preschool Grants are similar, except for the age ranges served, while Infant Grants differ in goals, performance objectives, performance measures, eligibility, and services. The key distinction between School-Age and Preschool Grants is that School-age Grants serve children ages three through 21, whereas Preschool Grants serve only children ages three through five. States receive funds from all three grants, and some states report they use both School-age and Preschool funds to provide the same range of services to children aged three through five. Although states receive funds from all three grants, local agencies may receive funds from only one grant, or from all three. Eighteen of the 19 states GAO reviewed reported that the range of services they provide to children ages three through five is the same as those they provide with Preschool Grants. Evaluations show that half the children who received preschool services (mainly speech and language therapy) no longer needed them on reaching school age. Consolidating the two grants would eliminate coordination problems, but it is unclear whether program efficiency would increase. At the federal level, Education is already administering School-age and Preschool Grants as one program. State and local officials said that consolidation would not significantly reduce administrative burden.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In fiscal year 2001, the federal government spent about $7 billion on three  special education grant programs mandated by the Individuals with  Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These grants are Special Education  Grants to States (School-age Grants), Special Education Preschool Grants  (Preschool Grants) and Special Education Grants for Infants and Families  with Disabilities (Infant Grants). This review is one of four reports you  have requested looking at overlap among early childhood education and  care programs. Our work has shown that if such programs are designed to  achieve similar outcomes for the same target group and are not well- coordinated, the potential exists for ineffective service delivery and  administrative inefficiencies. This potential exists for School-age Grants  and Preschool Grants because School-age Grants serve children ages 3  through 21 and Preschool Grants serve children ages 3 through 5.
These three grant programs are not programs in the typical sense because  they do not carry out a distinct set of functions through their own delivery  systems. Instead, the programs serve as funding streams, merging with  much greater state and local resources to support state and local  programs. State and local programs supported by the three grants served  approximately 6.6 million children in fiscal year 2001. Of these children,  about 830,000 were receiving early intervention and special education and  related services—231,000 were under 3 years-old and 599,000 were age 3  through 5.
Specifically, you asked us: (1) How similar are the goals/objectives,  performance measures, eligibility criteria, and the services allowed by  these programs? (2) Do states and local agencies receive funding from  more than one of these grants and, if so, do they use the funds to provide  the same range of services to children in the same age group? (3) What is  known about the effectiveness of these programs and of the early  interventions they fund? (4) What opportunities exist for better  coordination among the programs or consolidation of the programs to  achieve efficiencies?
To answer these questions, we reviewed pertinent documents, including  state monitoring reports issued by the U.S. Department of Education’s  (Education) Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), which  provided detailed information about state and local efforts to implement  IDEA. We examined the grant application process and administrative  structure for each grant program, conducted interviews with special  education program officials and representatives from special education  stakeholder groups (parents and state directors of special education),  conducted comprehensive state-level interviews in four states—Maine,  Minnesota, Ohio, and Virginia—and conducted structured telephone  interviews with officials from 15 states. We selected the four states for  comprehensive interviews based, in part, on recommendations from state- level officials and others with a direct interest in these programs. We also  considered variations in how states administer these programs and  selected states that represented a variety of administrative structures and  geographic regions. For the telephone interviews, we selected at least 1  state from each of Education’s 10 regions. In order to obtain a wide range  of perspectives on program administration, we also considered which  state agency had been designated to administer Infant Grants. We  performed our work from June 2001 through February 2002 in accordance  with generally accepted government auditing standards.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The 50 states and the District of Columbia spent an estimated $50 billion  on special education for children from birth through age 21 in school year  1999-00. About 12 percent of this amount came from federal funds,  specifically IDEA grants (10 percent) and Medicaid funds (2 percent).(See fig. 1.) In addition to federal funds, other sources are used to support  the provision of special education and related services for children with  disabilities, such as state general and special education funds, local funds,  and private insurance.
Under IDEA, three grants can fund services to children under age 6.  School-age Grants provide money to states to help them serve all eligible  children, ranging in age from 3 through 21. Preschool Grants provide  money to states to help serve 3 through 5-year-olds with disabilities and  require states to have policies and procedures that assure a free  appropriate public education for all 3 through 5-year-olds with disabilities  as a condition for receiving other IDEA funds for this age range. Infant  Grants provide money to states to serve children under age 3 who have  developmental delays or a condition that will probably result in a  developmental delay, or at a state’s discretion, who are otherwise at risk of  developmental delays. Unlike the other two grants, Infant Grants provide  services to both children and their families, primarily in settings that are  not school-based. (See table 1.)
Program overlap occurs when programs have the same goals, the same  activities or strategies to achieve them, or the same targeted recipients. As  noted in a House Government Reform and Oversight Committee report, “A  certain amount of redundancy is understandable and can be beneficial if it  occurs by design as part of a management strategy to foster competition,  provide better service delivery to customer groups, or provide emergency  backup.”  Because both School-age and Preschool grants can be used to  serve the same target recipients, children with disabilities ages 3 through  5, they can be characterized as overlapping. However, this overlap does  not necessarily lead to duplication of services, which involves providing  identical services to identical target groups.
Education allocates funds from School-age, Preschool, and Infant Grants  to all states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, based on federal  formulas. At the state level, School-age and Preschool Grants are  administered by the state educational agency (SEA), and Infant Grants are  administered by a designated lead agency, most frequently the state’s  department of health or human services. A fixed portion of School-age and  Preschool grants may be retained for state-level activities and program  administration, although the majority of funds from these grants are  passed through SEAs to local educational agencies (LEAs), generally  school districts, according to a federally mandated formula. Infant Grants  may be distributed to local public and private agencies by designated state  lead agencies using state-developed criteria.
Education’s OSEP monitors activities funded by these grants and the  extent to which states comply with IDEA in a process known as  continuous improvement monitoring. Several states are selected each year  for in-depth monitoring, including on-site data collection, based on various  factors, such as when they were last monitored, information from grant  applications, and information on each state’s status in achieving improved  results and compliance.
section_title: School-Age and Preschool Grants Are Similar Except for Age Range Served; Infant Grants Differ
paragraphs: School-age and Preschool Grants share the same goal, performance  objectives, and performance measures; fund the same range of services;  and have similar eligibility requirements except for the age-range served,  while Infant Grants differ from these grants in almost all respects. (See  table 2.)
School-age and Preschool Grants share the common goal of improving  results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local  educational agencies to provide children with disabilities access to high- quality education that will help them meet challenging standards and  prepare them for employment and independent living. The two programs  use the same set of performance objectives and performance measures.  For example, one objective of both is that preschool children with  disabilities receive services that prepare them to enter school ready to  learn. As a performance measure for this objective, both programs use an  increase in the percentage of preschool children receiving special  education services who have readiness skills when they reach  kindergarten. These programs also pay for the same range of special  education and related services, such as physical and occupational therapy  and technology to assist the disabled, such as voice-activated software.  Special education and related services are generally provided at school. To  be eligible for these services, children must be classified by the state as  having a disability and as a result of the disability need special education  and related services. The key distinction between the two grants is that  School-age grants serve children ages 3 through 21, whereas Preschool  Grants serve only children ages 3 through 5.
The goal, performance objectives, performance measures, eligibility  criteria, and types of services allowed for Infant Grants differ from those  for School-age and Preschool Grants. This grant is designed to assist states  in developing and implementing a statewide, comprehensive system to  provide early intervention services for infants and toddlers with  disabilities (and at a state’s discretion those who are at risk of  experiencing developmental delays) and their families. The goal of Infant  Grants is to enhance children’s functional development and increase  families’ capacity to increase their children’s development using a  comprehensive system of early intervention services, including health  services, such as tube feeding or intermittent catheterization, and family  training. Objectives are broad and each has performance measures. For  example, an increase in the percentage of all children under age 3  receiving age-appropriate services in nonschool settings is a performance  measure for the objective of providing services at home or in daycare,  when appropriate. To be eligible for services under Infant Grants, children  must be under age 3 and have a developmental delay or the potential to  develop one. Because of the age-specific developmental needs of infants  and toddlers, health and family services provided under Infant Grants are  more comprehensive than under the other two grants. These services are  provided primarily in nonschool settings, generally in the home or at a day- care site.
section_title: States Receive All Grants and Many Provide Services to 3 through 5 Year-Olds with School-Age as well as Preschool Grants
paragraphs: All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico receive grants from  each of the three programs, which they distribute to various local public  and private agencies. Whether a local agency receives funds from any one  grant depends on whether it is serving the relevant age group. For  example, the Roanoke Interagency Coordinating Council in Virginia, which  serves children from birth through age 2, receives Infant Grants but not  School-age and Preschool Grants. However, many LEAs receive more than  one grant. For example, the Mapleton Local School District in Ohio  received School-age and Preschool Grants in School Year 2001-2002, while  the South Washington County School District in Minnesota received funds  from all three programs.
Many states use more than one grant to fund the same range of services  for 3 through 5 year-olds. Officials in 18 of the states we contacted told us  they may use School-age Grants to serve 3 through 5 year-olds—the same  group of children served by Preschool Grants. Only one of the states we  contacted, Alaska, does not permit School-age Grants to be used to pay for  services for preschoolers. Also, in a survey of SEAs conducted by the  National Early Childhood Technical Assistance System, 37 SEAs reported  that they use funds from School-age Grants to support the provision of  special education and related services for preschool children with  disabilities. Since they are not required to track such information, none of  the 19 states we contacted were able to tell us the percentage of School- age Grant funds they used to provide services for children aged 3 through  5, although officials in several states said that the amount was small.  Similarly, 18 of the 19 states could not provide us with the percentage of  children aged 3 through 5 who received services provided with School-age  Grants.
Many states could not report the extent to which School-age Grants fund  services for 3 through 5 year-olds because of how expenditures are  tracked. The states we contacted reported they track expenditures by  budget functions, such as salaries or transportation, and not by individual  services provided or ages of children receiving services. These states do  not require LEAs to report expenditure data in a way that would allow  them to determine the extent to which School-age Grants fund services for  3 through 5 year-olds, nor does IDEA require it. Education requires only  that states report the number of children ages 3 through 5 collectively  receiving special education and related services under School-age and  Preschool Grants. IDEA does not require specific information about how  many children are served under each.
section_title: Grants’ Impact Not Yet Evaluated, and Few Data Are Available on Effectiveness of Special Education Programs for Young Children
paragraphs: The effectiveness of these grant programs has not yet been evaluated, in  part, because federal special education funds are only one source used to  pay for services for this age group. Rather than functioning as operating  programs, these grants add to the stream of funds supporting on-going  state and local programs. Therefore, it is difficult to isolate the impact of  federal funding for special education from the impact of other funding  sources. Instead, studies have tended to focus on how IDEA is being  implemented and on the overall progress of children who receive special  education services, without directly attributing these outcomes to the  receipt of particular services.
In the 1997 amendments to IDEA, Congress mandated a full, national  assessment to determine the progress in the implementation of IDEA,  including the effectiveness of state and local efforts to provide a free  public education appropriate for the needs of students with disabilities  and to provide early intervention services to infants and toddlers. In  response to this mandate, OSEP has contracted with several research  organizations to complete a number of studies. None of these studies will  attempt to isolate the contribution of IDEA grants from the effects of state  and local efforts to improve outcomes for young children; Congress did  not prescribe such a stringent assessment of program effectiveness.
Instead, three of these studies contracted by OSEP are outcome  evaluations, focused on describing the short-term and long-term outcomes  for young children enrolled in programs supported, in part, by these  grants. The National Early Intervention Longitudinal Study will follow  children entering early intervention services supported by Infant Grants.  The Pre-Elementary Education Longitudinal Study will follow children  who received preschool special education services through their  experience in preschool and early elementary school. The Special  Education Elementary Longitudinal Study is documenting the experience  of children enrolled in special education as they move from elementary  school to middle and high school. The results from these studies will not  be available for several years, although OSEP has issued initial reports  describing the demographic characteristics of some study participants,  their families, and schools.
In addition to these evaluations describing children’s outcomes, OSEP has  contracted a study examining how these programs are implemented. The  Special Education Expenditure Project is intended to answer a variety of  questions on the characteristics of expenditures on programs and services  for preschool special education students. The first in an anticipated series  of reports derived from this project was issued in March 2002 and provides  an overview of special education spending in school year 1999-2000 in the  50 states and the District of Columbia. This report presents aggregate  data on how much is spent nationally and how these funds are allocated  among broad program areas. In particular, the report notes that preschool  programs account for about 9 percent of special education expenditures  overall and that 8 percent ($4.1 billion) was spent on preschool programs  operated within public schools and 1 percent ($263 million) was spent on  preschool programs operated outside public schools.
In addition to the efforts now underway to evaluate outcomes and  expenditures on services for young children enrolled in programs  supported by IDEA grants, we found studies from two states—Delaware  and Pennsylvania—on the outcomes of children in special education  preschool programs. The Delaware study found that nearly half of the  children who participated in Preschool Grants-supported programs in  Delaware between 1997 and 1999 were able to transition into the regular  education program by the time they were 6 and 7 years-old. The Delaware  study also found that children who participated in preschool special  education had significantly higher grades in kindergarten and first grade  than children with disabilities who did not and that the gap in grades grew  between kindergarten and first grade. The researchers responsible for the  Delaware study attributed the higher grades to the children’s participation  in programs supported by Preschool Grants. The Pennsylvania study  found that fewer than half of the preschoolers who participated in early  intervention services in Pennsylvania between 1991 and 1995 were  participating in school-age special education programs between 1996 and  1997, leading researchers to suggest that preschool early intervention  services may have helped reduce the severity of the developmental delay  for some participating children.
section_title: Some Local Coordination and Program Overlap Issues Exist
paragraphs: We found some opportunities for better local coordination between  programs funded with Infant Grants and preschool programs, but we were  unable to determine the extent to which overlap between School-age and  Preschool Grants may result in service duplication. We found evidence of  problems with the transition of 3 year-olds between local programs funded  with Infant Grants and preschool programs in 8 of 13 states for which  OSEP issued monitoring reports in the last 2 years. While we could not  ascertain whether overlap between School-age and Preschool Grants  results in service duplication, program officials indicated that the overlap  between School-age and Preschool Grants does not result in  administrative inefficiencies.
subsections: section_title: Some Coordination Problems Identified in the Transition from Infant Grants Programs
paragraphs: We found some lack of coordination between local programs funded by  Infant Grants and preschool programs, which can be funded by Preschool  or School-age Grants, in several states. Service gaps between programs  funded by Infant Grants and preschool programs can occur for children who turn 3 before the beginning of the school year in which they can start  attending preschool. IDEA has addressed this problem by allowing Infant  Grants to be used after the third birthday to pay a free appropriate public  education until the beginning of the next school year. Also, federal rules  require that states develop written transition plans for each child to show  how the transition between the two programs will be managed, and  Education monitors and enforces these rules. Specifically, the designated  lead agency for the Infant Grants must discuss with and train parents  regarding future placements for their child and have developed procedures  to help the child adjust to a new setting. To further coordinate this  transition, the Infant Grants statute requires that the lead agency, with the  approval of the family, must convene a conference among the Infant  Grants lead agency, the family, and the LEA at least 90 days before the  child is eligible for preschool services. In addition to the Infant Grants  transition requirements, the School-age Grants statute requires LEAs to  participate in transition planning conferences arranged by the lead agency.  Children should begin receiving services no later than their third birthday.
In 2000 and 2001, OSEP identified problems in the transition from  programs funded by Infant Grants into preschool programs in 8 of the 13  states that it monitored for compliance with IDEA. OSEP monitoring  reports cited a range of problems related to transitions from programs  funded with Infant Grants into preschool that resulted in gaps in services  for preschoolers. Some of the problems cited include: not holding  transition planning conferences within 90 days of a child’s third birthday  (6 states); the failure of local educational agency representatives to attend  these conferences, despite being invited to do so (3 states); and providing  inadequate information about the transition process to parents (2 states).  The lack of adequate information resulted in confusion and unwillingness  to cooperate with service coordinators’ requests on the part of some  parents and forced other parents to seek out preschool services on their  own. In response to these problems, OSEP has required corrective action  plans for each of the 8 states to address areas of noncompliance with  IDEA related to the transition from programs funded by Infant Grants into  preschool programs.
In addition to the problems cited in OSEP’s monitoring reports, we found  some further evidence of problems when children leave Infant Grants  programs in our site visit to Ohio. One state official told us that children  and families may not receive needed services when they transition from  the state’s Infant Grants programs into preschool because preschool  programs have more stringent eligibility criteria and lack the family focus  of early intervention programs funded by Infant Grants. Also, a  representative of the Ohio Coalition for the Education of Children with  Disabilities told us that some school districts did not understand that they  are legally required to provide services for preschool children with  disabilities.
These problems were not evident in the other states we visited. Officials in  Maine, Minnesota, and Virginia did not report a lack of coordination  between programs funded by Infant Grants and preschool programs in  those states. Transition issues for these programs appear to have been  eliminated in Maine and Minnesota because each state operates a single  program to provide early intervention and special education services for  children from birth through age 5. In those states, programs funded with  Infant Grants and preschool programs are both operated through a single  agency, rather than through two agencies, as is the case with most of  states. In Virginia, transition issues have been minimized because the  state requires public education for children with disabilities beginning at  age 2—a year earlier than is required under federal law. More than two- thirds of children receiving early intervention services in Virginia  transition into public preschool programs as soon as they become eligible.
section_title: Overlap in Ages Served by School-age and Preschool Grants Might Result in Duplication
paragraphs: Because of overlap between School-age and Preschool Grants, which can  both serve children ages 3 through 5, there is some potential for service  duplication if the two programs do not coordinate at the local level. We  were unable to further evaluate the extent to which coordination problems  may exist because there were no data available that would allow us to do  so, in that states are not required to distinguish between funding sources  when reporting the ages of children served by School-age and Preschool  Grants. Officials from the 4 states where we conducted comprehensive  interviews did not report any coordination problems for these programs  and were not able to provide evidence about whether or not service  duplication occurs. At the federal level, there is no administrative overlap  between School-age and Preschool Grants because Education already  administers these grants as if they were one program. For example,  Education requires a single application for both programs and applies a  single set of goals, performance objectives, performance measures, and  reporting requirements to both programs.
Overlap between School-age and Preschool Grants could be addressed in a  number of ways, according to our analysis. Narrowing the age range  served by School-age Grants to ages 6 through 21 or consolidating the two  grants into a single grant, either with or without a reserved amount of  funds for preschool services, could eliminate overlap between these  programs. However, advantages and disadvantages exist for each option.  (See table 3).
The first three options would ensure that children ages 3 through 5 are  eligible for services under only one program. The first option, narrowing  the age range for School-age Grants, has the advantage of preserving  targeted funds to serve preschoolers by continuing Preschool Grants.  However, under this option, states would lose the flexibility that they now  have to devote a greater share of federal special education funds to serving  preschoolers, if that is their priority.
The second option, consolidating School-age and Preschool Grants into a  single grant, has several advantages. It would eliminate potential overlap  for 3 through 5 year-olds, make it easier to track funds spent on  preschoolers, and may increase the ability of local school districts to  target federal special education funds to children of any age, depending on  local needs. However the last advantage could also be seen as a  disadvantage, potentially reducing services for preschoolers in those local  school districts where they are not considered to be as high a priority as  services for older children. State administrators and parents told us they  are concerned this option would eliminate safeguards for targeted  preschool funding and may lead to a reduction in services for children  ages 3 through 5, although states have been required to provide special  education services to children ages 3 through 5 since 1992 in order to be  eligible for Preschool Grants and other IDEA funds targeted to children  ages 3 through 5 with disabilities. State officials told us that serving  preschoolers, whether in special education or otherwise, is not a priority  for all local school districts, and expenditures of funds for 3 through 5  year-olds would have to compete with the needs of older special education  students. School districts generally do not provide regular education  services to children ages 3 through 4. Moreover, as of November 2001, 39  states require kindergarten be offered to 5 year-olds, but only 12 require  pupil attendance.
The third option, consolidating School-age and Preschool Grants into a  single grant, but reserving some funds for preschool services also would  eliminate potential overlap of IDEA grants for 3 through 5 year-olds.  However, this option has the advantage of preserving minimum spending  levels for preschoolers by including a set-aside provision in the grant  legislation. Depending on how the legislation is written, a potential  disadvantage to this option would be the loss of some flexibility in how  states may allocate funds for preschoolers and other ages of children. This  would occur if the legislation prescribes fixed levels of spending for both  age ranges. Nevertheless, some of the officials and other interested parties  that we contacted indicated that, if the programs were to be consolidated,  they would prefer including a set-aside provision.
Although there are potential advantages to eliminating program overlap,  overall, changes to the current structure of federal grants for special  education would probably not result in a significant reduction in  administrative burden at the state and local levels. Retaining the current  structure would preserve targeted funds for preschoolers and not  introduce different administrative requirements, but the possibility of  service duplication would continue. Many of the state and local  administrators with whom we spoke indicated they do not see the need for  any changes in the current structure of these grants. In addition,  Education officials have noted a growing level of support for early  intervention programs among lawmakers, program administrators and  child advocates, which, in their opinion, justifies maintaining separate  grants to support these programs.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: The Department of Education has recognized that there is some potential  for a gap in services for 3 year-olds as they move from programs funded by  Infants Grants into preschool programs and requires that states and local  agencies minimize these service gaps by following federal requirements  for program coordination and transition planning. However, we have seen  evidence that in at least a few localities, states have failed to ensure that  federal regulations are being followed. Education has addressed known  transition problems by requiring these states to develop and implement  corrective action plans that will bring them into compliance with IDEA.
Although there is overlap between School-age and Preschool Grants  because both allow for services to 3 through 5 year-olds, it is not clear  whether this overlap presents problems of service duplication or  unnecessary administrative burden that would indicate the need to change  how the grants are structured. Program experts and federal, state, and  local administrators that we interviewed did not report any problems and  there were no data available that would allow us to determine the extent  to which program overlap resulted in coordination or administrative  problems.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Response
paragraphs: We provided the Department of Education an opportunity to comment on  a draft of this report and received technical comments which we have  incorporated into this report as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Chairman of your  subcommittee, the Secretary of Education, and appropriate congressional  committees. Copies will also be made available to other interested parties  upon request. If you have questions regarding this report, please call me at  (202) 512-7215 or Eleanor Johnson, assistant director, at (202) 512-7209.  Other contributors are listed in the appendix.
section_title: Appendix: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to those above, Elspeth Grindstaff, Patrick DiBattista and Jon  Barker made major contributions to this report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Head Start and Even Start: Greater Collaboration Needed on Measures of  Adult Education and Literacy. GAO-02-348. Washington, D.C.: 2002.  March 29, 2002.
Bilingual Education: Four Overlapping Programs Could Be  Consolidated. GAO-01-657. Washington, D.C.: 2001. May 14, 2001.
Early Childhood Programs: The Use of Impact Evaluations to Assess  Program Effects. GAO-01-542. Washington, D.C.: April 16, 2001.
Title I Preschool Education: More Children Served, but Gauging Effect  on School Readiness Difficult. GAO/HEHS-00-171. Washington, D.C.:  September 20, 2000.
Early Education and Care: Overlap Indicates Need to Assess  Crosscutting Programs. GAO/HEHS-00-78. Washington, D.C.: April 28,  2000.
Evaluations of Even Start Family Literacy Program Effectiveness.  GAO/HEHS-00-58R. Washington, D.C.: March 8, 2000.
Early Childhood Programs: Characteristics Affect the Availability of  School Readiness Information. GAO/HEHS-00-38. Washington, D.C.:  February 28, 2000.
Managing for Results: Using the Results Act to Address Mission  Fragmentation and Program Overlap. GAO/AIMD-97-146. Washington,  D.C.: August 29, 1997.