Funding
Basic Concept:
Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is a federal program that supplies financial assistance in the form of grants through state educational agencies (SEAs) to local educational agencies (LEAs) and public schools that enroll high percentages of underachieving children who typically live in low-income situations. Overall, it aims to aid children who are failing or at risk of failing to achieve challenging state academic standards in order to ensure that all children receive an equal and significant opportunity to obtain a high quality education.
Specifically, Title I funds provide extra support in reading and mathematics, additional teachers and materials of instruction, English proficiency classes and tests, and after-school and summer programs to extend and reinforce the regular school curriculum.
Who holds “the power:” Because states receive the federal funding, there is no direct federal oversight of Title I schools. Within each state, SEAs possess some oversight abilities, but individual municipalities are the legal entities responsible for running schools and providing the vast majority of funding through local tax dollars (according to Harvard Ed. Magazine.) 1
History of Title I: 2
In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson passed the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), designed to close the skill gap in reading, writing, and mathematics between children from low-income households and non-low income students. Title I set the parameters for financial assistance to local educational agencies for this purpose.
The Title was amended both in 1968 and 1972. It maintained the goal of extending basic education to all, but launched new programs to increase the number of certified education specialists and other supportive activities.
In 2002, President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act amended ESEA, setting a new goal of all students reaching proficiency standards by 2013-14.
In 2015, The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was signed into law, reauthorizing the 50-year-old ESEA. This law focuses on fully preparing all students for success in college and careers.
Eligibility Requirements: 3
For funding purposes, the U.S. Department of Education determines a child eligible for Title I benefits if the child is
Age 5-17 years old and resides in
A family with an income at or below the poverty line (value according to the U.S. Department of Commerce)
A family with an income above the poverty line, but receives aid from Title IV of the Social Security Act (Temporary Aid to Needy Families, TANF)
An institution for neglected or delinquent children, such as a juvenile correctional institution or other locally operated program for delinquent youth
A foster home in which the foster parents receive compensation from the state or county for the child’s support
Who Benefits:
The U.S. Department of Education delineates that in addition to children from low-income situations, Title I typically benefits children with limited English proficiency, migratory children, children with disabilities, Native American children, and children in need of reading assistance.
The National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP) states that in 2010, 44% of children, amounting to approximately 31.9 million*, lived in a low-income situation (defined as 200% of FPL, a gross annual income of $44,700 for a family of four, which is roughly 200% FPL) 4 that would qualify them for Title I benefits (but may not all be eligible due to age restrictions.) 5 This value has since changed. According to the NCCP, in 2018, 41% of children lived in poverty (29.6 million.)
However, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, in school year 2009-2010, Title I served only 21 million low-income students*, the majority of whom were in grades Kindergarten through 5th grade (see chart 1.) 6
These statistics from The National Center for Children in Poverty and The National Center for Education Statistics imply that roughly 10.9 million children who lived in low-income situations and were eligible for Title I benefits did not receive its services.
Title I Funding Breakdown: 7
In order to fund this program, SEAs are required to allocate an annual federal grant to their LEAs as well as carry out a statewide system of technical assistance and support to the LEAs.
Formulas for calculating Title I allocations differ with each grant, but most Title I grant formulas require calculating an authorization amount as a prerequisite to calculating the final allocation amount.
The authorization amount is the amount of funding that a state or LEA is eligible to receive under Title I. This value is based on (1) the number of children in the state, (2) the per-pupil cost of education in that state, and (3) the percentage of the state’s per-pupil cost that Congress can fund.*
*Note: When writing Title I legislation, Congress intended on sanctioning the federal government to pay 40 cents on the dollar per child for educational services provided by Title I. However, this amount can vary, as explained below.
Basic Funding7: In order to qualify for a Basic Grant, an LEA must have at least 10 children that fulfill the eligibility requirements and must represent more than 2% of the 5-17 year old population.
Formula for Determining Authorization Amount for Basic Grants for each LEA:
(Eligibility Count) X (Adjusted SPPE) = Authorization Amount
The SPPE (state per-pupil expenditure) is an attempt to issue an equal distribution of Title I funds, because the per-pupil costs of education differ from state to state. So, the federal government does not provide every LEA the same rate per child.
Because Congress decided that LEAs should receive no more than 40 cents on the dollar per child, the SPPE is multiplied by 0.40 to determine the amount Congress must supply each LEA per Title-I eligible child, thus creating the Adjusted SPPE.*
*Note: Because some states may have an Adjusted SPPE that is disproportionately high or low in comparison to the US Average SPPE, Title I legislation also states that a state’s adjusted SPPE cannot be less than 32% or more than 48% of the US Average SPPE.
Once all Title I provisions are considered, an LEA receives its allocation amount. This value is almost always different from the authorization amount because Congress rarely appropriates funds equal to the total of all local and state authorized amounts. This is due to circumstances that occur during the federal budget process where Congress considers the annual appropriations bills. While it is mandatory that Congress fund discretionary programs like Title I, authorizing legislation from education committees does not have a budgetary effect. In other words, no money is allocated to Title I until the annual Labor Health and Health Services Education appropriations bill sets the actual dollar level for Title I funding for the year, which is frequently less than the authorized value. Therefore, Congress possesses the jurisdiction to adjust the spending and revenue levels for the bill to wherever they see fit for that year with respect to other bills/programs that require federal funding.
There are also other changing requirements that modify an LEA’s allocation amount each year so it cannot be determined by a fixed formula:
A “hold harmless provision” means that a state should not experience a loss of more than 15% of its funds just because of a drop in an eligibility count for that fiscal year.
A state receives a Small State Minimum (value varies each fiscal year) when the sum of LEA allocations for a state is less than the set Small State Minimum value. This is to ensure that no state receives less than a minimum threshold of funding.
Once these rates are adjusted for each fiscal year, the allocation amount for each SEA is determined with the following formula:
Allocation amount Divided by Total Title I appropriations= Authorization amount Divided by Sum total of all authorized amounts
Concentrated Funding: 7
Concentration Grants are awarded to an LEA that has an especially large population of low-income and disadvantaged children, specifically an eligibility count of 15% of its 5-17 year old population. This allows LEAs to receive additional funds on top of the Title I Basic Grant.
The authorization amounts for Concentration Grants are calculated in the same way as Basic Grants.
Allocation amounts for Concentration Grants are also calculated in the same way as Basic Grants, except that calculating a State Small Minimum will be the smaller of these two amounts:
(1) 0.25% of the total Concentration Grants appropriations for the fiscal year, plus 0.35% of the total amount allocated to states in excess of the amount allocated for the grant in that fiscal year, or
(2) the average of (a) the amount in point (1) above and, (b) the greater of the following two amounts: (i) $340,000 or (ii) the eligibility count multiplied by 150% of the national average per-pupil payment
Targeted Funding: 7
A Targeted Grant provides more money per child as a district’s poverty rate increases, allowing the higher poverty-stricken areas of a state to receive more funds than others. In order to qualify for a Targeted Grant, an LEA must have an eligibility count of at least 10 and must be 5% of that LEA’s 5-17 year old population.
The authorization amounts for Targeted Grants for a qualifying LEA equals the LEA’s weighted eligibility count multiplied by its Adjusted SPPE.
The eligibility count weighing system measures an LEA’s “need” and assigns a different “weight factor.”
The allocation amounts are calculated similar to concentrated grants except with the weighted eligibility count.
Education Finance Incentive Funding (EFIG): 7
EFIG provide LEAs with additional funding for eligible schools, the exact amount of which varies on state equity and effort in funding public education. To qualify for an EFIG, an LEA must have an eligibility count of at least 10 and must represent at least 5% of its 5- to 17-year-old population.
The authorization amounts for EFIG is the value of the state’s eligibility count multiplied by its EFIG Adjusted SPPE, its Effort Factor (which ensures that states that devote a greater percentage of their resources to education receive more EFIG funding than states that spend a lesser percentage), and its Equity Factor (which ensures that LEAs in states with the least disparity between high-spending and low-spending LEAs receive more EFIG funding.)
The allocation amounts for EFIG entails calculating an LEA’s Small State Minimum and Maintenance of Effort (MOE), which describes if a state’s advocacy for higher education decreases from one year to the next. Details not presented here.
Funding Statistics: 8
In FY 2015, there were 11.6 million children that were formula-eligible for Title I funding, which amounted to approximately 21.4% of the 5-17 year old population.
Title I allocations for FY 2015 totaled to $14.3 billion, which creates an allocation per formula-eligible child of $1,227.
The Basic Grant was the most common issued grant while the Concentration Grant was the least common (see chart 2).
For FY 2015*
Grant Type
Amount Allocated
Number of Formula-Eligible Children
Average Allocation per Eligible Child
Basic Grant
$6.4 billion
11.6 million
$550
Targeted Grant
$3.3 billion
11.6 million
$282
EFIG
$3.3 billion
11.6 million
$282
Concentration Grant
$1.3 billion
10.1 million
$134
*Note: The allocation amount for each of the four grant types is based on a different number of formula-eligible children. Thus, the total allocation per formula-eligible child ($1,227) does not equal the sum of the allocations per formula-eligible child for each grant type (last column.)
Other Highlights:
In FY 2015, the highest Title I allocations per child were issued in both the most and least densely populated areas, with large cities (25,000 children or more) receiving $1,466 per eligible child and remote rural areas (less than 300 children) receiving $1,313 per eligible child.
At the same time, these largest and smallest districts acquired higher percentages of Title I funds than their percentages of their eligible population, meaning that populations that possess neither the highest nor the lowest population of eligible children received a significantly smaller percentage of their Title I allocation than they were initially authorized for.
Nationally, the highest percentage of formula-eligible children were from Puerto Rico (55.9 percent), the District of Columbia (32.5 percent), and Mississippi (32.2 percent.) New Hampshire and North Dakota has the lowest percentages (9.9 percent and 11.8 percent, respectively.)
Additionally, Maryland and New York were the two states that received the highest Title I allocations per formula-eligible child that did not receive state minimum allocations ($1,588 and $1,611, respectively.)
In FY 2018, 52 grants were awarded (each state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico) totaling to $15,759,802,000, the average award being $299,644,215. From 2013-present, this allocation amount shows an increasing trend. 9
See link for more information on the organization of grants by locale/state: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/titlei/ch_02.asp
Shortcomings of Title I:
Discrepancy between authorization and allocation amounts of funds does not give LEAs reliable estimates of funds per pupil that they will receive for each fiscal year.
Federal funding formulas can allow some states to receive funds a percent higher or lower than the percentage of their formula-eligible population. This includes states such as California, Texas, and North Carolina that are receiving less funds than needed to completely accommodate their formula-eligible population.
This links to states with the most and least densely populated areas receiving higher percentages of funds than the percentage of their formula-eligible populations, meaning that midsize towns and suburban areas are receiving significantly lower funds than what their eligible population deserves.
In relation to state and local funding, federal funding is quite low, averaging to about $500-$600 per year. States must rely mainly on their local fundraising programs to raise sufficient educational funds. 5
Title I eligibility requirements do not accomodate children of undocumented immigrant parents
A May 19, 2019 Washington Post article10 discusses how schools in Baltimore City, MD, which are estimated to have a low-income student population of approximately 90% are considered by the government to have only a 32% low-income student population.
This is because applying to these federal programs require families to possess forms of direct certification, or evidence that they participate in federal public assistance programs. Most immigrant families do not partake in such programs due to their fear to apply because of the current administration’s threats toward undocumented immigrants.
According to The National Center for Education Statistics, 7 more children than deemed “eligible” by Title I receive its services due to Title I’s schoolwide programs that benefit all children in a school district regardless of income. In 2019, while only about 11.6 million children are recorded “formula eligible” for Title I services, about 25 million students receive Title I benefits, partially due to these schoolwide programs. This suggests that many children who do not necessarily need Title I services are taking advantage of its funding, and potentially using funds that could be reallocated to areas and districts that are not receiving full funding.
Endnotes
Pelsue, Brendan. “When it Comes to Education, the Federal Government…” Harvard Ed Magazine, 2017. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/17/08/when-it-comes-education-federal-government-charge-um-what
Information from the ESEA network, https://www.eseanetwork.org/about/titlei
Information from the US Department of Education, https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/legislation.html
According to the 2010 Federal Poverty Guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
Statistics from The National Center for Children in Poverty, http://www.nccp.org/profiles/US_profile_6.html
Statistics from The National Center for Education Statistics, https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=158
Information provided by The National Center for Education Statistics January 2016 Report- Allocating Grants for Title I, https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/AnnualReports/pdf/titleI20160111.pdf
Information acquired from The National Center for Education Statistics Title I Allocations report for FY 2015, https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/titlei/ch_01.asp
According to the US Department of Education Funding Status Information, https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/funding.html