Early Childhood Education Funding: Federal, State, and Private Resources

• February 5, 2013 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

With the increased focus in recent years on Pre-Kindergarten learning, you may be asking where you can find funding for early childhood education.  Your school may be looking to establish or expand a pre-school program, or you may need funds for an independent pre-school program.  Public funding for Pre-Kindergarten education mainly comes from three sources: state funding, federal Special Education (IDEA) funds for Pre-K, and federal Head Start funding.

Federal Funding

One way in which the federal DOE has shown its commitment to early learning is by increasing the funding to both IDEA for Pre-K and federal Head Start over the last two years.  In addition, there are other federal funding sources for Pre-K: social services programs, like the federal Child Care and Development fund, and federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.  And there are provisions in Title I that allow schools to use some Title I funds for Pre-Kindergarten programs, such as the stipulation allowing schoolwide Title I programs to “establish or enhance prekindergarten programs for children below the age of 6.”  According to the federal non-regulatory guidance, Serving Preschool Children Through Title I, “The use of Title I funds for a preschool program is a local decision.”

Some new federal sources of Pre-K funding have also been created: Promise Neighborhoods (which has an early learning component) and the Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge grants are likely to continue in some form as signature programs of the Obama administration. During the next four years, the federal DOE will focus more intently on the full Pre-K – Grade 3 continuum, especially working with Congress to embed Pre-K-3 strategies in a new ESEA.

But some Pre-K programs have also been cut from the federal budget, such as Even Start and Early Reading First.  The purpose of the latter – “to enhance the early language, literacy, and prereading development of preschool age children” – has been absorbed into the newer Striving Readings Comprehensive Literacy grant, which provides a continuum of reading from birth through twelfth grade, though the future of SRCL is somewhat in question.

State Funding

In 2011, 39 states provided Pre-K funding (the other 11 states were: Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming).  In fact, more children are enrolled in state funded Pre-Kindergarten programs than in any other publicly funding Pre-K program, though the per-student amount varies dramatically in states from $2,000 to $11,000.  State Pre-K funding goes to both community based organizations and school districts.

Want to Research Further?

1. State Pre-K Funding: http://nieer.org/yearbook.
2. Federal, State, and Private Pre-K Funding: http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/pre-k-funding.
3. Special Education/Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
   • Office of Special Education Programs: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/index.html.
   • Special Education – Grants to States Home Page: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/osepgts/index.html.
   • Special Education, Parts B and C State Allocation Tables: http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/2012apps.html.
   • Special Education State Contacts: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/monitor/state-contact-list.html.
   • IDEA, Title I, Part B, Section 619: Preschool Grants: http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cstatute%2CI%2CB%2C619%2C.
   • IDEA, Title I, Part C, Sections 631-644: Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities: http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cstatute%2CI%2CC%2C.
   • State and Local Funding Formulas: http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CTopicalArea%2C9%2C.
4. Title I
   • Title I Home Page: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.html.
   • Title I State and District Award Amounts: http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/titlei/fy11/index.html.
   • Non-Regulatory Guidance, “Serving Preschool Children Through Title I”: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/preschoolguidance2012.pdf.
   • Title I Law: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg2.html#sec1112, in particular, Sections 1112(b)(1)(E)(i), 1112(b)(1)(K), 1114(b)(1)(B)(iii)(I)(bb), 1114(b)(1)(G), 1114 (c), 1115(b)(1)(B), 1115(b)(2)(B), and 1115(c)(1)(D).
5. Head Start
   • Office of Head Start: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs.
   • Head Start Funding Opportunities: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/funding.
6. Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge
   1. Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Home Page: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-earlylearningchallenge/index.html.
   2. Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Applicant Info: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-earlylearningchallenge/applicant.html.
   3. Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Awards: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-earlylearningchallenge/awards.html.
7. Promise Neighborhoods
   1. Promise Neighborhoods Home Page: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/index.html.
   2. Promise Neighborhoods Applicant Info: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/applicant.html.
   3. Promise Neighborhoods Awards: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/awards.html.
8. Child Care and Development Fund: http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/acf/childcare.html.

Though Pre-Kindergarten education has in the past sometimes languished as the stepchild of K-12 education, its importance is now being realized, resulting in resources increasing for early learning and programs growing.

 

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Education Trends, Special Education

Tags: early learning, IDEA, title i, toddler

School Improvement Grant - Intervention for Failing Schools

• June 29, 2010 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

What is the School Improvement Grant?

“School Improvement Grants…are used to improve student achievement in Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring so as to enable those schools to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) and exit improvement status.” 
(www.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html)

How much money is available?  

FY 2009 School Improvement Grant appropriation: $546 million

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: $3 billion

Total: $3.546 billion

Who is eligible to apply? 

Formula grant states, who make sub-grants to school districts.

What is the timing of the grant? 

Application available: December 3, 2009

Application deadline (for states): February 8, 2010

Awarding and disbursement of School Improvement Grant funds 

“FY 2009 school improvement funds are available for obligation by SEAs and LEAs through September 30, 2011. In its application for these funds, an SEA may request a waiver of the period of availability to permit the SEA and its LEAs to obligate the funds through September 30, 2013.”   (www.ed.gov/programs/sif/applicant.html, click on “Application” link and go to page i)

Amount of LEA awards

LEA subgrants can range from $50,000 to $2 million. 

(www.ed.gov/programs/sif/faqs.doc  and www.ed.gov/programs/sif/guidance20100120.doc)

School Improvement Grant Requirements

“The secretary would require states to identify three tiers of schools:

• Tier I - The lowest-achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in a state, or the five lowest-performing Title I schools, whichever number is greater.
• Tier II – Equally low-achieving secondary schools that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds. The secretary proposes targeting some of these extremely low-achieving high schools and their feeder middle schools….
• Tier III – The remaining Title I schools in improvement, corrective action or restructuring that are not Tier I schools in the state.

[Recent legislation has allowed SEAs to use School Improvement Funds to serve “newly eligible” schools: certain low-achieving schools that are not Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.  For more information, go to: www.ed.gov/programs/sif/guidance20100120.doc, pages 11-12.]

In its application to the state, each school district would be required to demonstrate its commitment to raising student achievement by implementing, in each Tier I and Tier II school, one of the following rigorous interventions:

• Turnaround Model – This would include among other actions, replacing the principal and at least 50 percent of the school’s staff, adopting a new governance structure and implementing a new or revised instructional program.
• Restart Model – School districts would close failing schools and reopen them under the management of a charter school operator, a charter management organization or an educational management organization selected through a rigorous review process. A restart school would be required to admit, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend.
• School Closure – The district would close a failing school and enroll the students who attended that school in other high-achieving schools in the district.
• Transformational Model – Districts would address four specific areas: 1) developing teacher and school leader effectiveness, which includes replacing the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the transformational model, 2) implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies, 3) extending learning and teacher planning time and creating community-oriented schools, and 4) providing operating flexibility and sustained support.

Districts should choose the strategy that works best for each school. To ensure districts are choosing a variety of strategies, any district with nine or more schools in school improvement will not be allowed to use any single strategy in more than half of its schools.”   (http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/08/08262009.html)

How do Fast ForWord® and Reading Assistant™ products fit with the School Improvement Grant?

Improve student achievement

To date, students in almost 6,000 schools have achieved improvements in language or reading skills with the Fast ForWord reading intervention software products. Numerous independent studies as well as detailed research and outcomes data consistently confirm the effectiveness of the products. After using the Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant products, students have shown gains in achievement on a variety of standardized tests and state assessments. For example, Fast ForWord participants in Everett Publics Schools in Everett, Massachusetts, made significant gains in reading achievement following Fast ForWord product use during the 2007-2008 school year. Sixty-six percent of the students improved their MCAS Reading score in 2008 with an average improvement of 4.6 points. Scientific Learning has over 200 school based effectiveness and case reports documenting the substantial gains in achievement made by students after using the Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant products.

Help Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring so as to enable those schools to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) and exit improvement status  

With a background of over 30 years of neuroscience research and over 10 years of school site studies of effectiveness, Scientific Learning’s products have been shown to be proven intervention strategies for all schools, including those that are the lowest performing. The Fast ForWord Language and Fast ForWord Literacy series, with their cutting edge, neuroscience designed adaptivity and acoustically modified and enhanced sound, have been used successfully by students in low-performing schools in order to improve their cognitive, oral language, and reading skills. And both software series provide intensive support in a short period of time, from 4-16 weeks, depending on the scientifically validated protocol used.

Four Models of turning around schools:  

• Turnaround model: Implementing a new or revised instructional program – Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant fit well as part of a new or revised instructional program to use neuroscience based and proven learning techniques to turn around schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.
• ReStart Model: Schools closed and re-starting will need scientifically based and proven educational tools like Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant in order to start anew and provide their struggling students with the cognitive, oral language, and reading skills that they need to succeed in all subject areas.
• School Closure: Schools assimilating struggling students from closed schools will find that they need intervention products like Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant in order to help these students achieve grade level proficiency and assure that the school achieves or continues to achieve AYP.
• Transformational Model: Implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies – Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant fit well as part of or as a supplement to any comprehensive instructional reform strategy, and indeed, the effects of the products are comprehensive, affecting student performance in all subject areas. Extending learning...time - Scientific Learning’s software can be implemented easily during extended hours.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Fast ForWord, Reading Assistant, Scientific Learning Research

Tags: academic problems, academic success, achievement gap, ayp, below grade level, cognitive skills, elementary learning, elementary school learning, high school learning, improving reading skills, increased test scores, intervention, Massachusetts, MCAS, oral language skills, response to intervention tier i, response to intervention tier ii, rti tier i, rti tier ii, school leader effectiveness, struggling readers, struggling students, teacher effectiveness, title i

Investing in Innovation (i3) Grantwriting Tips

• April 28, 2010 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

Are you applying for Investing in Innovation (i3) funds and in need of some last minute help?  I've received many questions about the difference between "demonstrated success" and "evidence of effect", so I've explained the difference in this short video. 

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Fast ForWord, Reading Assistant

Tags: funding, grants, i3, innovation, investing in innovation, video

What is the Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund?

• March 26, 2010 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

What is the Investing in Innovation Fund (i3)?

The Investing in Innovation Fund, known as i3, is a grant program developed by the US Department of Education as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act with $650,000,000 in funding. The purpose of the i3 program is to:

 

Refer to the i3 RFP (Request For Proposal), also called the Application Packet, for more details on the i3 program and the application process.

The RFP, Frequently Asked Questions, a summary of the program and additional information can be found at: www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation

 

What is the timeline?

i3 has several key dates to note:

• April 1, 2010 – Intent to Apply – not required but strongly encouraged
• May 11, 2010 – Application due by 4:30 pm Eastern Time
• Late Spring/Early Summer – Proposals reviewed
• Early-Mid Summer – Matching funds must be secured by those projects to be awarded funding
• September 2010 – All funds awarded
• 2010 – 2015 – Funded projects may last 3 to 5 years

You are strongly encouraged to submit an intent to apply if you believe you meet the eligibility requirements and plan to submit a proposal for i3. This information will allow the Department of Education to create a more effective and efficient review process, and will allow for more adequate time for securing matching funds on the part of those projects identified for funding.

Who is eligible to receive i3 funds?

To apply for i3 funds, you must be one of the following:

• local educational agency (LEA)
• nonprofit organization in partnership with one or more LEAs 
• nonprofit organization in partnership with a consortium of schools

LEAs include public schools and public school districts. Private schools, colleges and universities are not LEAs, but may be included in i3 projects as partners.

Non-profit organizations can include colleges and universities, afterschool program providers, and others. (See the i3 glossary and RFP.)

 

Additional Eligibility Requirements

To be eligible for i3 funding, projects must:

• Maintain a Student Focus – “implement practices, strategies, or programs for high-need students”
• Demonstrate Historical Success – provide evidence demonstrating your past success
  • For an LEA applying on its own, the LEA must have “(a) closed achievement gaps or significantly increased achievement for all groups of students, and (b) achieved significant improvement in other areas,” such as “graduation rates or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and principals, as demonstrated with meaningful data.”
  • For partnerships involving a non-profit organization, the nonprofit must have “a record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, or retention through their record of work with an LEA or schools,” whether or not the LEA and school partners have a history of success.
  • Note: Without this history of success you will not be eligible to apply.
• Address an Absolute Priority – address one of the four absolute priorities listed on page 5 of the Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF)
• Partner with the Private Sector and Meet the Matching Requirement – secure matching funds from the private sector equal to 20% of the funds sought prior to program start date, or request a reduced matching level (to be granted in rare situations)
• Provide Evidence – meet the evidence requirement of the type of grant for which you are applying; see types of grants below and evidence requirements in the Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF)

Checklists for eligibility and definitions of the above can be found on the i3 website.

 

What will be funded under i3?

i3 is looking to fund projects based on several priorities within three types of projects, as described in detail in the RFP. At least one absolute priority must be met by each proposed project. It is anticipated that most projects involving Scientific Learning products and services will be Validation-type projects.

Types of Projects (Proposals must identify one of the following types):

• Scale Up - project designed to “scale up” practices, strategies, or programs for which there is strong evidence that the project will have a statistically significant effect in meeting the i3 goals. Scale-up projects are limited to $50 million/project and should scale up to a state, regional or national level.
• Validation - project that shows promise, but for which there is currently only moderate evidence that it will have a statistically significant effect in meeting i3 goals. Validation projects may reach $30 million/project and should scale up to a state or regional level.
• Development - project with high-potential and relatively untested practices, strategies, or programs whose efficacy should be systematically studied. Development projects range up to $5 million and should be able to further develop and scale up.

Points = the basis for evaluating each proposal. Think of a rubric in a classroom – points are given for each criteria met. Those with the highest points will receive funding.

Absolute Priorities (At least one required):

• Innovations that Support Effective Teachers and Principals
• Innovations that Improve the Use of Data
• Innovations that Complement the Implementation of High Standards and High Quality Assessments
• Innovations that Turn Around Persistently Low-performing Schools

Competitive Preference Priorities (Extra points awarded for each):

• Improve Early Learning Outcomes (particularly K-3)
• Support College Access and Success
• Address the Unique Needs of Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students
• Serve Schools in Rural LEAs

Examples of possible i3 projects from Scientific Learning:

• Scale-up – Successful use of Fast ForWord® in a group of districts or state is “scaled-up” by implementing its use nationally
• Validation – Promising success with Reading Assistant™ in a district is expanded to a larger region or state-wide to demonstrate broader effectiveness
• Development – A school collecting data on use of Fast ForWord expands its use district-wide and implements a stronger program to document effectiveness

Learn more:

Find out how Scientific Learning products fit with the i3 Fund.

See our Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF) for detailed information on eligibility requirements, preparing your i3 application, and getting help with your i3 application.

 

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Fast ForWord, Reading Assistant

Tags: academic success, achievement gap, i3, innovation, investing in innovation, teacher impact