Question 2 (Part 1): How can the new Section 1003(g) School Improvement Fund regulations be best utilized to turn around challenged high schools?

School Improvement Grants (SIGs) will flow to states in the form of grants. States will award funds to districts with the lowest achieving, high-poverty schools. Readers should pay particular attention to the four models provided. I will have more to say on the models.

• Notice of proposed requirements would pertain to School Improvement Grants (SIGs) authorized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the FY 2009 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill.
• Requirements would govern the total $3.546 billion in FY 2009 school improvement funds ($3 billion – ARRA; $546 million – regular FY 2009 appropriations).
• Proposed requirements would define the criteria states must use to award school improvement funds to the districts with the lowest-achieving Title I schools that demonstrate the greatest need for the funds.
• Priority will also be given to districts that also wish to serve the lowest-achieving secondary schools that are eligible for, but not receive, Title I funds.
• Public comments are due by September 25, 2009.

Background

• NCLB required the Department of Education to award SIGs to each state based on the state’s proportionate share of Title I funds; in turn, each state must provide subgrants to districts that apply for those funds to assist their Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.
• States must allocate 95% of their school improvement funds directly to districts, although states may directly provide assistance in implementing school reform strategies with the approval of the districts that would receive the funds.
• A district’s total subgrant may not be less than $50,000 or more than $500,000 per year for each participating Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.
• States must give priority to districts with the lowest-achieving schools that demonstrate: 1) the greatest need for the funds; and 2) the strongest commitment to ensuring that the funds are used to provide adequate resources to enable the lowest-achieving schools to meet their goals for substantially raising the achievement of their students.

Identifying and Serving the Lowest-Achieving Title I Schools

• To drive school improvement funds to districts with the greatest need, the Department of Education would require each state to identify three tiers of schools:

• Tier I: the lowest-achieving 5% of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the state, or the five lowest-achieving Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the state, whichever number of schools is greater.
• Tier II: equally low-achieving secondary schools (both middle and high schools) in the state that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds.

• Funds should be targeted to “dropout factories” and their feeder middle schools.

• Tier III: the remaining Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that are not Tier I schools.

• The Department of Education encourages states to establish criteria to give priority to applications from districts that, after addressing the needs of their Tier I and Tier II schools, focus school improvement funds on a subset of their Tier III schools.

• Districts that wish to receive SIGs would submit applications to their state identifying which Tier I and Tier II schools they would commit to serve; states would give priority to districts serving Tier I and Tier II schools.