Administration’s Proposal to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Comparison to Current Law

Rebecca R. Skinner
Specialist in Education Policy


Cassandria Dortch
Analyst in Education Policy

Jeffrey J. Kuenzi
Specialist in Education Policy

Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Policy

On March 13, 2010, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) released A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (hereafter referred to as the Blueprint). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), particularly its Title I-A program for Education for the Disadvantaged, is the primary source of federal aid to K-12 education. The ESEA was initially enacted in 1965 (P.L. 89-10), and was most recently amended and reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB; P.L. 107-110).

The Blueprint indicates that it builds on reforms already being implemented, which are supported through funding initiatives that were included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA; P.L. 111-5). The Blueprint outlines five areas of key priorities:

1. College- and Career-Ready Students includes a focus on improving standards for all students, supporting the development of better assessments, and providing students with a well-rounded education.

2. Great Teachers and Leaders in Every School focuses on effective teachers and principals, the distribution of effective teachers and leaders, and teacher and leader preparation and recruitment.

3. Equity and Opportunity for All Students includes a focus on rigorous and fair accountability, meeting the needs of diverse learners, and resource equity.

4. Raise the Bar and Reward Excellence focuses on achieving these goals through continuing Race to the Top, supporting public school choice, and promoting a “culture of career readiness and success.”

5. Promote Innovation and Continuous Improvement includes a focus on “fostering innovation and accelerating success,” supporting local innovations, and supporting student success.

This report examines ED’s ESEA reauthorization proposal and, where appropriate, draws comparisons between the proposal and current law. The report is organized around the broad themes used to organize the detailed discussion of ED’s reauthorization proposal, beginning with College- and Career-Ready Students and ending with Additional Cross-Cutting Priorities. Comparisons between the proposal and the ESEA are drawn only for proposals included in the Blueprint. As this report mirrors the Blueprint discussion, it in many ways also reflects the level of detail provided by ED on any given element in the Blueprint. In general, the discussions in this report of the individual elements of the proposal vary substantially in length and detail depending on the amount of detail ED provided about a particular element in the Blueprint. In some instances, other relevant data sources, such as the FY2011 budget request, were used to provide additional information and analysis of a particular part of the proposal.

The analysis of the Blueprint is followed by several tables. These tables present information on the similarities and differences between key proposals included in the Blueprint and current law; the consolidation of programs proposed by the Administration’s FY2011 budget request; the funding for ESEA programs not subject to consolidation under the FY2011 budget request; and ESEA programs slated for elimination under the FY2011 budget request.


Date of Report: January 14, 2013
Number of Pages: 82
Order Number: R41355
Price: $29.95

To Order:

R41355.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

The Rural Education Achievement Program: Title VI-B of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

Jeffrey J. Kuenzi
Specialist in Education Policy

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, P.L. 107-110) established the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) under Title VI, Part B of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Congress created this program to address the unique needs of rural schools that disadvantage them relative to nonrural schools.

To be eligible for REAP funds, a local education agency (LEA) must be designated rural and must meet one of three additional requirements involving enrollment size, population density, and poverty status. Currently, REAP provides awards to nearly 6,000 LEAs, out of a total of about 14,000 nationwide. REAP authorizes formula grants through two subprograms: the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program provides grants directly to LEAs and the Rural Low- Income School (RLIS) program provides grants to states, which then award subgrants to LEAs.

The amount of funds received by eligible LEAs is determined differently by the SRSA and RLIS programs. Under the SRSA program formula, an initial amount is calculated for each eligible LEA based on enrollment; these amounts are then reduced based on offsetting amounts received from other ESEA programs. Under RLIS, formula grants are awarded to states based on the state’s share of eligible students; states then subgrant funds to LEAs either on a formula or competitive basis.

REAP funds may be used for a wide range of activities authorized throughout the ESEA, including Titles I-A, II-A, II-D, III, IV-A, IV-B, and V-A. In addition, the so-called REAP-Flex provision (ESEA, Sec. 6211) allows SRSA-eligible LEAs to use ESEA funds for certain activities not authorized by the program through which the LEA received such funds. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study found that a large majority of LEAs use REAP funds to meet the NCLB highly qualified teacher requirement as well as the district’s technology needs.

The authorization for REAP, along with the rest of the ESEA, expired at the end of FY2008. However, these programs continue to operate as long as appropriations are provided. Congress is expected to consider whether to amend and extend the ESEA programs, including REAP. This report will conclude with a discussion of reauthorization issues related to REAP that may arise as Congress takes up the ESEA.


Date of Report: January 14, 2013
Number of Pages: 20
Order Number: R40853
Price: $29.95

To Order:

R40853.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Paraprofessional Quality and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Background and Issues in Brief

Jeffrey J. Kuenzi
Specialist in Education Policy

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) established minimum qualifications for paraprofessionals (also known as instructional aides) employed in Title I, Part A-funded schools. NCLB required that paraprofessionals must complete two years of college, obtain an associate’s degree, or demonstrate content knowledge and an ability to assist in classroom instruction. Prior to the NCLB, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) required only that paraprofessionals possess a high school diploma.

These requirements, as enacted through NCLB, apply to all paraprofessionals employed in a Title I-A Schoolwide (Sec. 1114) program without regard to whether the position is funded with federal, state, or local funds. In Title I-A programs known as Targeted Assistance (Sec. 1115), only those paraprofessionals paid with Title I-A funds must meet the requirements (not those paid with state or local funds). A report by the Education Department (ED) reveals that paraprofessionals accounted for about one-third of instructional staff in Title I-A funded schools and districts.

NCLB authorized most ESEA programs through FY2007. The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) provided an automatic one-year extension of these programs through FY2008. While most ESEA programs no longer have an explicit authorization, the programs continue to receive annual appropriations and paraprofessional quality requirements continue to be in place. LEAs in states that have received an ESEA flexibility waiver are not restricted in the use of Title I-A funds for failing to meet NCLB teacher quality and student achievement accountability requirements; however, all LEAs still must comply with the law’s paraprofessional quality requirements.

This report describes the paraprofessional quality provisions, guidance provided by ED regarding implementation, and available information on how states have responded to some of these requirements. The report concludes with some issues that may arise as Congress considers reauthorization of the ESEA.


Date of Report: January 14, 2013
Number of Pages: 9
Order Number: RS22545
Price: $19.95

To Order:



RS22545.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Education-Related Regulatory Flexibilities, Waivers, and Federal Assistance in Response to Disasters and National Emergencies

Cassandria Dortch, Coordinator
Analyst in Education Policy

Rebecca R. Skinner
Specialist in Education Policy

David P. Smole
Specialist in Education Policy

The 21st century has seen the operation of elementary, secondary, and postsecondary educational institutions and the education of the students they enroll disrupted by natural disasters, such as hurricanes and floods, and by national emergencies, such as the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This report is intended to inform Congress of existing statutory and regulatory provisions that may aid in responding to future disasters and national emergencies that may affect the provision of or access to education and highlight the actions of previous Congresses to provide additional recovery assistance.

The majority of federal aid for disaster management is made available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act; P.L. 93-288). Under the Stafford Act, public school districts, charter schools, private nonprofit educational institutions, public institutions of higher education (IHEs), and federally recognized Indian tribal governments are eligible to receive assistance for activities such as debris removal, infrastructure and equipment repair and replacement, hazard mitigation, and temporary facilities. The Stafford Act also authorizes federal agency heads to waive administrative, but not statutory, requirements to expedite assistance.

In addition to the assistance available through the Stafford Act, assistance is available through numerous provisions in education laws. At the elementary and secondary level, there are several existing provisions that may be helpful in providing assistance in response to a disaster. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) grants the Secretary of Education authority to issue waivers of any statutory or regulatory requirement of the ESEA for a state educational agency (SEA), local educational agency (LEA), Indian tribe, or school that receives funds under an ESEA program and requests a waiver. In response to recent disasters, waivers have been granted to address funding flexibility issues and accountability requirements. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) grants the Secretary of Education authority to waive state maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements and requirements to supplement, not supplant, federal funds under certain circumstances. The Secretary is not, however, able to waive all statutory and regulatory requirements with respect to the acts. For example, under the ESEA the Secretary may not waive civil rights requirements or prohibitions against the use of funds for religious worship or instruction. Under IDEA, for example, the Secretary may not grant waivers from the right to a free appropriate public education.

At the postsecondary level, various provisions exist to ensure continuity of operations and continuity of federal funding following a disaster. Under the Higher Education Act (HEA), the Secretary of Education has authority to waive several of the requirements for aid recipients, IHEs, and financial institutions when a disaster has been declared. In particular, waivers have been provided from various requirements related to the disbursement, repayment, and administration of federal student aid. Under Title 38 of the U.S. Code, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) may extend payment of veterans educational assistance benefits to cover periods when enrollment is interrupted.

In response to the Gulf Coast hurricanes, Congress enacted legislation that provided short-term programs or temporary allowances in order to aid recovery from 2005 to 2009. Additional funds were appropriated to help affected institutions restart, replace equipment, or renovate. Funds were appropriated to support the recruitment, retention, and compensation of elementary and secondary school staff. Funds were also appropriated to provide grants to postsecondary students and
support the enrollment of students displaced or made homeless by the disaster. Congress allowed the Secretary of Education to waive or modify the statutory and regulatory requirements of some programs on a temporary basis to ensure funds were targeted to affected populations and institutions at the postsecondary level and to ease the associated financial and accountability burden at the elementary and secondary levels.

As of the date of this report, Congress had not enacted legislation to specifically support education as a result of and in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, which primarily affected areas of the mid-Atlantic and northeast in October 2012.

Date of Report: January 2, 2013
Number of Pages: 34
Order Number: R42881
Price: $29.95

To Order:


R42881.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

School and Campus Safety Programs and Requirements in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Higher Education Act

Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Policy

In the United States, more than 75 million students are enrolled in elementary and secondary schools and institutions of higher education (IHEs). Safeguarding their security while they pursue an education is a paramount concern of federal, state, and local governments, as well as the school districts, schools, and institutions that enroll these students. The December 14, 2012, shooting deaths of 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, have heightened Congressional concerns about school security.

Both the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA; P.L. 107-110), and the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) contain requirements regarding crime and student safety. The ESEA also includes specific grant programs that support efforts to prevent school violence.

The ESEA authorizes the federal government’s major programs to assist disadvantaged students, address teacher quality issues, provide support to limited English proficient and immigrant students, prevent school violence and drug abuse, and provide support for public school choice in elementary and secondary schools. While the prevention of school violence is not the primary focus of the ESEA, several ESEA programs could potentially contribute to this effort, most notably ESEA Title IV, Part A, the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act (SDFSCA). In addition, the ESEA contains specific provisions related to students attending unsafe schools— the Unsafe School Choice Option.

The HEA authorizes the federal government’s major student aid programs that support postsecondary education attendance, as well as other significant programs such as those providing aid to special groups of IHEs and support services to enable disadvantaged students to complete secondary school and enter and complete college. While the HEA does not authorize specific programs to address campus crime and security issues, Section 485(f) of Title IV of the HEA contains statutory requirements related to campus crime and security, known collectively as the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (the Clery Act). Institutions must comply with these requirements to participate in the federal student aid programs and other programs authorized by Title IV (e.g., Pell Grants).

This report discusses these provisions and programs as they apply to elementary and secondary schools and IHEs. It begins with a description of programs and requirements included in the ESEA, which is followed by a discussion of relevant requirements included in the HEA.


Date of Report: December 19, 2012
Number of Pages: 18
Order Number: RL33980
Price: $29.95

To Order:

RL33980.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.