K-12 Education: Highlights of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-110)

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss

On January 8, 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, legislation to extend and revise the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), was signed into law as P.L. 107-110. This
legislation extensively amended and reauthorized most federal elementary and secondary
education aid programs.
Major features of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 include the following: (a) states were
required to implement standards-based assessments in reading and mathematics for pupils in each
of grades 3-8 by the end of the 2005-2006 school year, and at three grade levels in science by the
end of the 2007-2008 school year; (b) grants are provided to states for assessment development;
(c) all states are required to participate in National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) ^th^th
tests in 4 and 8 grade reading and mathematics every second year; (d) states must annually
apply adequate yearly progress (AYP) standards, incorporating a goal of all pupils reaching a
proficient or higher level of achievement by the end of the 2013-14 school year, to each public
school, local education agency (LEA), and the state overall; (e) a sequence of consequences,
including public school choice and supplemental services options, must be implemented for
schools and LEAs that fail to meet AYP standards for two or more consecutive years; (f) ESEA
Title I-A allocation formulas have been modified to increase targeting on high-poverty LEAs and
to move Puerto Rico toward parity with the states; (g) by the end of the 2005-06 school year, all
paraprofessionals paid with Title I-A funds were to have completed at least two years of higher
education or met a “rigorous standard of quality”; (h) several new programs aimed at improving
reading instruction have been initiated; (i) teacher programs have been consolidated into a state
grant authorizing a wide range of activities including teacher recruitment, professional
development, and hiring; (j) states and LEAs participating in Title I-A were to ensure that
teachers meet the act’s definition of “highly qualified” by the end of the 2005-2006 school year;
(k) almost all states and LEAs are authorized to transfer a portion of the funds they receive
among several programs; (l) federal support of public school choice has been expanded in several
respects; (m) several previous programs have been consolidated into a state grant supporting
integration of technology into K-12 education; (n) the Bilingual and Emergency Immigrant
Education Acts have been consolidated into a single formula grant, with previous limits on the ^st
share of grants for specific instructional approaches eliminated; and (o) the 21 Century
Community Learning Center program has been converted into a formula grant with increased
focus on after-school activities.
ESEA programs are authorized through FY2008, and the 110^th Congress is considering whether to
amend and extend the ESEA.

Introduc tion ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Major Provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), P.L. 107-110.......................3
Aggregate Structure and Funding Levels of the NCLB............................................................3
Assessments, Adequate Yearly Progress Standards, and Outcome Accountability
Under ESEA Title I, Part A....................................................................................................4
Teacher and Paraprofessional Programs and Qualification Requirements................................9
Reading Programs...................................................................................................................10
Special Flexibility Authorities..................................................................................................11
Education for Limited English Proficient Pupils....................................................................12
Other ESEA Title I Provisions................................................................................................14
Other ESEA and Related Programs.........................................................................................17
Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................25

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), signed into law on January 8, 2002 (H.R. 1, P.L.

107-110), extended and amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). ESEA ^th

programs are authorized through FY2008, and the 110 Congress is considering whether to
amend and extend the ESEA. This report outlines major highlights of the NCLB. Only the most
basic provisions of this act are briefly described in this report; other CRS reports provide more ¹
specific and substantial analyses of the major provisions of the NCLB.
Major features of the NCLB include the following: (a) states were required to implement
standards-based assessments in reading and mathematics for pupils in each of grades 3-8 by the
end of the 2005-2006 school year, and at three grade levels in science by the end of the 2007-²

2008 school year; (b) grants are provided to states for assessment development; (c) all states are ^th^th

required to participate in National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests in 4 and 8
grade reading and mathematics every second year; (d) states must annually apply adequate yearly
progress (AYP) standards, incorporating a goal of all pupils reaching a proficient or higher level
of achievement by the end of the 2013-14 school year, to each public school, local education
agency (LEA), and the state overall; (e) a sequence of consequences, including public school
choice and supplemental services options, must be implemented for schools and LEAs that fail to
meet AYP standards for two or more consecutive years; (f) ESEA Title I-A allocation formulas
have been modified to increase targeting on high-poverty LEAs and to move Puerto Rico toward
parity with the states; (g) by the end of the 2005-06 school year, all paraprofessionals paid with
Title I-A funds were to have completed at least two years of higher education or met a “rigorous
standard of quality”; (h) several new programs aimed at improving reading instruction have been
initiated; (i) teacher programs have been consolidated into a state grant authorizing a wide range
of activities including teacher recruitment, professional development, and hiring; (j) states and
LEAs participating in Title I-A were to ensure that teachers meet the act’s definition of “highly
qualified” by the end of the 2005-2006 school year; (k) almost all states and LEAs are authorized
to transfer a portion of the funds they receive among several programs; (l) federal support of
public school choice has been expanded in several respects; (m) several previous programs have
been consolidated into a state grant supporting integration of technology into K-12 education; (n)
the Bilingual and Emergency Immigrant Education Acts have been consolidated into a single
formula grant, with previous limits on the share of grants for specific instructional approaches ^st
eliminated; and (o) the 21 Century Community Learning Center program has been converted
into a formula grant with increased focus on after-school activities.
Major provisions that were in the House- or Senate-passed versions of H.R. 1 (107^th Congress)
but were not included in the final legislation include the Senate bill’s provisions for mandatory
funding at specified levels for Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B grants to
states, discipline provisions for children with disabilities, authorization for up to seven states to
eliminate a wide range of program requirements in return for increased accountability in terms of
pupil outcomes, and pest management in schools; and the provisions in both the House- and
Senate-passed versions for aggregate (i.e., not program-specific) performance bonuses or
sanctions, especially for states.

¹^{For c}^u^rre^{nt i}ⁿ^f^o^rm^a^{tion on}^the^s^e^re^{ports, se}^e^ht^tp://w^ww^.c^rs.g^ov^.
²^T^h^e^s^e^re^quire^m^e^{nts a}^r^e^{in a}^d^d^itio^{n to}^aⁿ^ong^oi^ng^{, pre}^v^io^{us re}^qu^ire^m^eⁿ^{t f}^o^{r a}^sse^ss^m^e^{nts in re}^a^d^ing^a^{nd m}^a^the^m^a^tic^{s a}^t
^t^h^{ree grad}^{e l}^e^vel^s^.

Major features of the NCLB, as well as brief references to relevant provisions of previous law, are
compared in the following table.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^Structur^{e of the}^ESEA:^{Prior to the NCLB amendme}^nts,^{the ESEA}^{consisted of 1}⁴^{titles. In}^{As amended by}^the^{NCLB, the}^E^{SEA consists of nine}^{titles and 45}
^num^{ber of}^{programs a}^nd^{general, ESEA p}^{rograms we}^{re aut}^{horized from FY199}^{5 th}^rough^{authorizations of appro}^{priations. Each a}^{uthorization is for the}^peri^od
^{titles, aggregate authorization}^FY1999,^{plus a one-yea}^{r automati}^{c exten}^{sion provided under}^the^FY2002^thro^{ugh FY2}⁰⁰^{7. For FY200}^{2, 1}⁶^{out of}^{45 a}^{uthorizations}
^{and app}^{ropriation levels,}^General^{Education Provisions Act}^{(GEPA). In ter}^{ms of f}^{unding, the}^re^{were for s}^uch^sums^{as may}^be^ne^{cessary; th}^{e remaining}²⁹
^{major consolidat}^{ions and}^{were 5}⁷^{line item ap}^propriations^{for ESEA activities in FY20}^{01, wh}^ich^{authorizations were for s}^{pecific a}^{mounts t}^{hat totaled $26.3}^billion.
^repeals^{totaled $18.6 billion. In additi}^{on, there we}^{re 2}⁴^ES^{EA activities}^{For the period FY20}^{03 t}^hroug^{h F}^Y200^{7, all but fou}^{r aut}^horizations
^{previously aut}^{horized that were}^{not fu}^{nded in FY20}^01.^{are for su}^{ch s}^{ums a}^s^may^{be ne}^ce^{ssary. The fou}^{r exce}^{ptions ha}^ve
^dol^{lar amounts s}^{pecified for each}^{year—(1) Title I, Part A Gran}^{ts t}^o
^{LEAs; (2) Title IV, Part B 21}^st^Ce^ntury^Community^Learning^Cent^ers
^{(CCLC); (3) Tit}^{le V, Part A Innovative Programs; and (4) the}^Fund^for
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{the Im}^proveme^{nt of Ed}^{ucation (FIE). For K-12 education activities}^{outside of the ESEA, s}^{uch a}^s^Edu^{cation for Homeless Children an}^d
^g/w^{Youth or certain}^{Indian edu}^{cation activities operated by t}^{he Bu}^re^{au of}
^s^.or^{Indian Affairs (BIA), the}^{NCLB in}^{cludes an additional six authorizations}
^le^ak^{of approp}^riations.
^://wiki^{The FY200}^{2 a}^pprop^{riations enact}^{ed by P.L. 10}^7-11^{6 (Labor, Healt}^h^{and Huma}^{n Services, Ed}^{ucation a}^{nd Related Agencies App}^ropriations
^h^ttp^{Act) included 45 line items for}^ES^{EA activities, for a total ESEA}
^approp^{riation of $21.}^{9 billion. Th}^{e 45}^{ESEA line items did not}
^{completely correspond with t}^he^{45 a}^{uthorizations of app}^ropriations
^{for FY200}^{2. Also, the single line item for the}^{FIE included t}^he
^{designation of specific app}^{ropriations for 1}⁵^se^{parate activities, many}
^{of which were}^fu^{nded as se}^parate^{programs in}^FY20^01.
^{Major consolidati}^{ons and reorgan}^izati^{ons of ESEA a}^{uthority u}^nder^the
^{NCLB included}⁽¹⁾^{Title I of ESE}^{A, as amended by}^{NCLB, was}
^expa^{nded to include reading prog}^{rams, school library program}^{s, an}^d
^programs^{providing dropout assis}^tance;⁽²⁾^{Title II authorizes a}^br^oad
^{program of teac}^{her as}^{sistance, consolidating the former Eise}^nhowe^r
^{Professional Development and Class Size Reduction programs, plu}^s
^{math and s}^cience^{programs, and}^{grants for t}^ech^{nology activities;}⁽³⁾
^{Title III combines seve}^{ral bilingual education programs}^{and eme}^rge^ncy
^{immigrant education assistance}ⁱⁿ^{to a single state formula gra}^nt;⁽⁴⁾^st
^{Title IV authorizes both the}²¹^{CCLC and Safe and Dr}^ug-Free
^{Schools and Communities Act pr}^{ograms (although th}^{ese are}^retained

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{as separate}^program^s);⁽⁵⁾^Title^{V includes education block grant}^s^,
^charter^{schools, magnet sc}^hools,^{and the FI}^{E, which}^{provides aut}^h^ority
^for^{21 specific program-like}^activi^ties;⁽⁶⁾^{Title VI authorizes state}
^assessment^grants^{and r}^{ural educ}^{ation programs; and}⁽⁷⁾^{Title VII}
^{authorizes Native America}^{n p}^{rograms, Title VIII remains the}^Im^pa^ct
^{Aid authority, and Title IX contai}^{ns gene}^{ral provisions.}
^{With regard to major repeals, th}^{e NCLB re}^{pealed only one K-12}
^{program t}^{hat had a sizable ap}^pro^{priation in FY200}^{1—School Repair}
^{and Renovation, first fu}^{nded in FY200}^{1 at $}^1.2^billi^{on. It also repealed}
^{a num}^{ber of}^previously^unf^unded^{programs, including th}^{e former}^Title
^{XII, the School Facilit}^{ies Infrastr}^u^{cture I}^mproveme^{nt Act.}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^g/w^Assessment^s^Assessment^{s u}^{nder ES}^{EA Title I (which were}^{due to be}^implement^{ed in}^{In addition to previous assessme}^{nt re}^quireme^{nts, all states participating in}
^s^.or²⁰⁰^0-2⁰⁰^{1, although only a}^{minority of states met t}^{his deadline) were}^{ESEA Title I were re}^{quired to im}^{plement sta}^{ndards-based asse}^ssm^ents
^le^ak^{required to}^{be adopted in at least}^{the s}^{ubjects of mat}^{hematics a}^nd^{for pu}^{pils in}^each^{of grades 3-}^{8 in}^{reading and mat}^{hematics by}^the^{end of}
^{reading/language arts;}^{be aligned}^{with state conte}^{nt and}^pu^{pil perf}^ormance^{the 2}⁰⁰^5-20⁰⁶^{school year. States must also develop and impleme}^nt
^://wiki^{standards; be administered a}ⁿⁿ^u^a^{lly to students in at least one of g}^{rades 3-}^{5, 6-9, and}^10-1^{2; include all pu}^{pils in the g}^{rades being a}^{ssessed w}^h^o^have^assessment^{s at th}^{ree grade levels}ⁱⁿ^science^{by t}^{he end of t}^he²⁰⁰⁷^-200⁸^{school year.}
^h^ttp^{attended schools in the L}^{EA for a}^t^{least one year; involve multiple}
^approac^{hes; assess}^higher^{order t}^{hinking skills; and produce}^results^{Annual gra}^{nts to states}^{for asses}^s^{ment development}^{are a}^{uthorized, and}^{states could delay administration (but not developme}^{nt) of the e}^x^p^anded
^{disaggregated by gender, racial an}^{d ethnic grou}^{ps, E}^{nglish proficien}^cy^assessment^{s (above) one yea}^{r for}^{each yea}^{r that}^{minimum amou}^nt^{s are}
^{status, migrant stat}^{us, disability status, and economic disadvantage.}^{not app}^{ropriated for this}^pu^rpos^{e (the minimum}^amount^has^been
^approp^{riated for each of FY2}⁰⁰^2-^06).
^{Pupils who have}^bee^{n in U.S. schools for at least three years}^must^be
^{tested (for reading) in E}^{nglish, an}^{d states must a}ⁿⁿ^{ually assess t}^he^English
^{language p}^{roficiency of their limited English p}^{roficient (LEP) p}^upils.
^Assessment^{s must}^{be of “ade}^quat^{e technical q}^{uality for each}^pu^rpo^se
^required^under^{[this] Act,” and g}^{rants are}^aut^{horized for the}
^{development of en}^{hanced a}^ssess^{ments. The Depa}^rtment^{is to con}^tract
^{with an indepe}^{ndent orga}^{nization for a study of t}^{he asse}^ssme^{nts a}^nd
^{accountability policies used by sta}^{tes to meet Title I req}^uirements.
^{All participating states are re}^quir^{ed to participate in National Asse}^ssment^th^th
^{of Educational Progress (NAEP) t}^{ests in 4}^and⁸^grade^{reading a}^nd

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{mathematics to be administe}^red^{every two years, with}^{costs paid}^{by the}
^{federal governme}^{nt. In addition, the statutory}^{provisions aut}^horizing
^{NAEP were a}^{mended to en}^hanc^e^{consistency with}^the^NCLB
^requirem^{ents, and to: provide th}^{at pu}^{pils in home sc}^{hools may not be}
^{required to}^{participate in NA}^{EP t}^{ests; prohibit t}^{he us}^{e of NA}^EP
^assessment^{s by ag}^{ents of t}^{he fede}^{ral government}^{to influence}^state^or
^{LEA instr}^{uctional programs}^{or as}^sessments;^{provide for review of}
^{complaints about}^{NAEP tests; a}ⁿ^d^{specify that}^{at least two memb}^{ers of}
^{the National Assessme}^nt^Govern^{ing Board must be}^pare^{nts w}^{ho a}^{re not}
^{employed by any}^{educational age}^ncy.
^{Adequate Yearly}^{States were to select AYP standa}^{rds and ap}^{ply these}^{to participati}^{ng LEAs}^{Previous req}^uirements^{for state-}^{developed AYP standards have b}^een
^{Progress (AYP)}^{and schools; there was}^{no re}^quir^{ement for AYP sta}^{ndards for stat}^es^substa^{ntially expanded in s}^{cope a}^{nd specificity. Such sta}^{ndards no}^{w have}
^standards^{overall. Scho}^{ols and LEAs could limit the ap}^{plication of these stand}^{ards to}^{to be ap}^{plied specifically to economically d}^{isadvantaged pupils, lim}^ited
^{the spe}^{cific pu}^{pils served by}^{Title I. The pre}^{vious statutory}^provisions^{English p}^{roficient (LEP) p}^{upils, pu}^{pils with disabilit}^{ies, and pupils in}^major
^{regarding AYP standards were}^re^{latively broad and vague. There}^{was no}^{racial and ethnic grou}^{ps, as well a}^s^{all pupils, in each}^pu^{blic school,}^LEA,
^{explicit require}^ment^{for a spe}^{cific focus on a}^ny^{high need or ot}^her^pupil^{and states overall. They have to i}^{ncorporate a goal of all pupils rea}^{ching a}
^{group; and}^{no req}^uireme^{nt that t}^{he standards i}^{ncorporate a goal of all}^{proficient or adv}^{anced level of ac}^hievement^{by t}^{he end of t}^he²⁰¹^3-14
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{pupils reac}^{hing a}^{proficient level}^{of achievement}^{by a}^{ny s}^{pecific fut}^ure^{date. In practice, th}^{ere was wide}^{variation among states in t}^{he nat}^{ure a}^nd^{school year.}
^g/w^appare^{nt rigor of th}^{eir standards.}^{In gen}^{eral, a “uniform}^{bar” a}^p^p^{roach mu}^{st be}^{employed: states are}^{to set}
^s^.or^{a thres}^{hold percentage}^{(of pu}^{pils at proficient or advanc}^{ed levels) each}
^le^ak^{year that is a}^{pplicable to all pupil}^subgro^{ups. The “}^uniform^{bar” m}^ust^{generally be inc}^{reased once ev}^er^{y three}^{years, although}^{in the}^initial
^://wiki^{period it must be in}^{creased afte}^r^{two years. The minimum level fo}^{r the}^“uniform^{bar” in t}^{he initial period is to be based on t}^{he gr}^{eater of}^the
^h^ttp^perce^{ntage (of p}^{upils at proficien}^{t or advanced levels) for the low}^est-
^{achieving p}^{upil group}^or^{the t}^hres^{hold percentage}^{for the lowest-}
^performing^{quintile of sc}^{hools statewide in the base}^{year (2}⁰⁰^1-2⁰^02).
^{Averaging of scores over}^2-3^yea^{rs is allowed. Under a “safe har}^b^or”
^{provision, a school that does not meet the sta}^{ndard AYP req}^uirem^ents
^{may still be deemed to meet AYP if it experien}^{ces a}^10%^reduction^{in the}
^{gap betwee}ⁿ¹⁰^{0% a}^{nd the}^base^{year for p}^{upil grou}^{ps that}^{fail to meet}
^{the “u}^{niform ba}^r.”
^{For a school to meet AYP standards, 95%+}^{of relevant}^pu^{pils must}^be
^assessed.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^Outcome^{States were re}^{quired to identify}^{LEAs, and L}^{EAs to identify sc}^hool^{s, which}^{While participating states are}^req^{uired to establish and a}^{pply AYP}
^{accountability unde}^r^{failed to meet AYP standards for 2 consec}^{utive years. Suc}^{h sc}^{hools and}^{standards to all public sc}^{hools and LEAs, a variety of actions m}^ust^be
^{ESEA Title I (see also}^{LEAs were}^{to receive tec}^{hnical a}^{ssistance. After t}^{he third yea}^{r following}^{taken only with re}^spect^{to pu}^{blic schools and LEAs}^{receiving gra}^nt^{s under}
^{“School choice”}^{identification, corrective actions}^—which^may^{include loss of f}^und^{s or}^{ESEA Title I-A. Schools that fail t}^o^{meet AYP standards for}²^cons^ecutive
^below)^{reconstitution of sc}^{hool staff—were to be take}^{n. However, most}^{years mu}^{st be}^{identified as needing improveme}^{nt; tech}^{nical assistance is}
^{corrective actions could not be t}^{aken u}^{ntil standards and as}^sessm^ents^{to be provided and p}^{ublic sc}^hool^{choice must}^{be offered to t}^{heir p}^upils
^{were fully implement}^{ed, and no s}^{pecific corrective action ne}^{ed be}^{taken at}^{by the}^ne^{xt sc}^{hool year (unless}^p^{rohibited by state law). LEAs a}^re
^{any time. States could reserve}^up^{to 0.5% of gra}^{nts for}^program^{generally req}^{uired only to offer p}^{ublic school choice options within the}
^improvement.^{same LEA;}^{however, if all public s}^{chools in the LEA}^{to which a}^{child might}
^{States were to identify especially success}^{ful “distinguished sc}^{hools” and}^transfe^{r have}^bee^{n identified as n}^{eeding improvement, th}^{en L}^EAs^“shall,^{to the exte}^{nt p}^{racticable,” establish cooperative agree}^ments^with^other
^{“distinguished educators,” were a}^{uthorized to use Title I fu}^{nds res}^erved^{LEAs to offer}^ex^{panded p}^{ublic sc}^{hool choice options.}
^{for program im}^provement^{to su}^p^{port suc}^{h sc}^{hools and educators. LEAs}
^{could also provide nonfinancial rewards to these sc}^{hools and educ}^ators.^{If a sc}^{hool fails to meet the state}^{AYP standard for}³^consec^{utive y}^ears,
^{The Secretary of}^{Education was a}^{uthorized to reduce administrativ}^{e funds}^{pupils from low-income families must b}^e^{offered t}^{he op}^portunity^to^{receive su}^ppleme^{ntal instructiona}^{l services from a}^{provider of thei}^r
^{to states which}^{failed to establish standards and as}^sessme^nts^unde^{r ESEA}^{choice. States are to identify and}^{provide lists of approved p}^{roviders of}
^{Title I.}^such^su^{pplemental inst}^{ructional s}^{ervices, which might i}^{nclude p}^{ublic or}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{In addition, FY2001 a}^pprop^riatio^{ns legislation required the}^{provision of}^{private sc}^{hools, non-profit organizations, or commercial firms, and}
^g/w^{public sc}^{hool choice options, wit}^{hin limits, to pupils attending sch}^ools^{monitor the q}^{uality of the ser}^{vices they}^{provide. The amount s}^pen^{t per}
^s^.or^{identified as needing improvemen}^t.^{child for sup}^{plemental services is}^{to be the lesse}^{r of the a}^{ctual cost}^{of the}^{services or the}^{LEA’s Title I-A gr}^{ant pe}^{r child counted in t}^he^national
^le^ak^allocat^{ion formula (approximately}^$1,4^{00 on a}^{verage for}^FY20^05).
^://wiki^{Transportation m}^{ust be}^{provided to pupils utilizing the p}^{ublic scho}^ol
^h^ttp^{choice option. LEAs are to}^{use u}^p^{to 20}^{% of th}^{eir Title I funds}^for^{transportation a}^{nd su}^ppleme^{ntal services costs, although t}^{he gra}^nt^{to any}
^{particular sc}^{hool identified for co}^{rrective action or rest}^ruct^uring^{may not}
^{be redu}^{ced by more}^tha^{n 1}^{5%. L}^{EAs are a}^{uthorized to use I}^nnova^tive
^{Programs grants}^{(ESEA Title V-A) to pay additional supplemental s}^ervices
^{costs. States are also authorized to use fu}^{nds th}^{ey rese}^{rve for}^pro^gram
^{improvement or administration}^u^{nder Title I-A, or funds available to}
^{them u}^{nder Title V-A, to pay additional supplemental services}^{costs. If}
^{insufficient f}^unds^{are available to pay the}^{costs of su}^ppleme^{ntal ser}^vices
^{for all elig}^{ible pupils whose families wish to exe}^{rcise this option, L}^EAs
^{may limit services to the lowest-achieving eligible pupils. The req}^uirement
^{to provide sup}^{plemental services}^{may be waived if no}^{ne of the}^ap^p^roved
^{providers offer s}^uch^{services in}^{or near a}^LEA.
^{One or more of a}^{specified serie}^{s of “corrective actions”}^mu^st^be^taken
^{with respe}^{ct to schools that fail t}^o^{meet AYP for}⁴^{consecutive ye}^ars;
^{these include}^{replacing releva}^{nt s}^{chool staff, implementing a ne}^w
^curriculu^{m, decreasing ma}^nagem^{ent aut}^{hority at the}^{school level,}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{appointing an}^{outside expe}^{rt to a}^{dvise the school, extending t}^{he s}^chool
^{day or year, or cha}^{nging the}^inter^{nal organizational structure of t}^h^e
^school.
^{Schools that fail to meet AYP standards for}⁵^conse^{cutive yea}^rs^m^ust^be
^“restruct^ured”^{by impleme}^nting^{one or more of the}^{following “alt}^ernative
^{governance” a}^{ctions: reopening a}^s^{a charte}^{r sc}^{hool, replacing all o}^r^most
^{school staff, state takeover of sc}^h^{ool operations (if permitted unde}^{r state}
^{law), or other “major restruct}^{uring” of school governa}^nce.
^{Procedures analogous to those f}^{or schools apply to LEAs}^that^{fail to}
^{meet AYP require}^{ments. Both a}ⁿ^{increased state}^{reservation (risin}^{g from}
^{0.5% c}^urre^{ntly to 4%}^{by FY2}⁰⁰⁴⁾^{and a sepa}^{rate aut}^{horization of funds}
^{are provided for sc}^{hool improvement gra}^nts.
^{ED is req}^{uired to establish a}^peer^{review process}^{to evaluate wh}^et^her
^{states have}^{met their}^{statewide AYP goals}^{. States that fail to meet their}
^{goals are to be listed in an an}^nual^{report to Congres}^{s, and tech}^nic^al
^{assistance is to be}^{provided to states that fail to meet their goals f}^{or 2}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{consecutive yea}^rs.
^g/w^{States are to provide academic achievement awa}^{rds to schools w}^hich
^s^.or^{significantly close achievement le}^{vel gaps among differe}^{nt grou}^ps^{of pu}^pils,
^le^ak^{or which e}^{xceed AYP standards f}^{or 2 or more con}^{secutive yea}^rs.

^://wiki
^h^ttp

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{School choice}^{Under the}^{ESEA, states a}^{nd LEA}^s^{were aut}^{horized, but not re}^quir^{ed, to}^{The ESEA, as ame}^{nded, provides for increased}^pu^{blic school choice}
^{provide the option of intradistric}^{t school choice to students atte}ⁿ^ding^opportu^{nities by contin}^{uing or a}^{mending p}^{revious grant}^progra^ms
^{schools that failed to meet Title I AYP requireme}^{nts. Under t}^{he F}^Y200¹^sup^{portive of the}^v^oluntary^provisi^{on of school choice (Innovative}
^approp^{riations legislati}^{on (P.L. 106-55}^{4), LEAs we}^{re re}^{quired to of}^fer^{programs, the P}^{ublic Charte}^{r Sch}^{ools program, and the Mag}^{net Sc}^hools
^{students atte}^{nding sc}^{hools identif}^{ied for school improvement intra}^district^{program); and}^{by aut}^{horizing discretionary grant}^{s u}^{nder t}^{he new}
^{public sc}^{hool choice. Add}^itional^ly^{, the ESEA a}^{uthorized the}^{use of}^{Title I}^{Voluntary Public School Choice programs. It also provides for the}
^funds^{for choice p}^{rograms limited to other Title I schools (although no}^mandatory^{provision of public sch}^{ool choice in instances whe}^{re sc}^h^ools
^{Title I funds could be}^{used for t}^r^a^{nsportation). The ESEA also aut}^h^orized^{fail to make AYP toward raising t}^{he p}^{roportion of student}^{s p}^{roficient on}
^{grants s}^u^p^{portive of school choice under}^the^{Magnet Sc}^{hools Assistance,}^{state academic assessme}^{nts. If a}^s^{chool fails to make AYP for 2}
^{Innovative Ed}^{ucation Program Str}^{ategies, and Public Charter Sc}^hools^{consecutive yea}^{rs, student}^{s atten}^{ding that school must}^{be offe}^red^the
^programs.^opportu^{nity to transfe}^{r to a s}^ucc^{essful sc}^{hool in the same L}^{EA; if t}^he
^{school fails for a third year, stude}^{nts mu}^{st contin}^{ue to be of}^{fered s}^chool
^{choice and also the opport}^{unity t}^o^{receive sup}^{plemental or t}^utorial
^{services. In s}^uch^instanc^{es, the lowest achieving c}^{hildren from low-}
^{income families must receive}^{priority. Transportation must}^be^pro^vided
^{to pupils exe}^{rcising p}^{ublic school choice options, and up}^{to 20}^{% of}^Title
^{I-A funds}^{may be}^used^{for suc}^{h tr}^{ansportation plu}^{s su}^ppleme^{ntal s}^ervices.
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{If a L}^{EA fails to make AYP for 4 c}^{onsecutive year}^{s, the state}^may^r^equire^{that stude}^{nts atte}^{nding schools in}^{that L}^{EA be of}^{fered th}^{e opport}^u^{nity to}
^g/w^transfe^{r to a suc}^cessf^{ul school in another L}^{EA, with tra}^nsportation
^s^.or^{provided by the}^{sending L}^{EA. Finally, the ESEA now re}^quires^stud^ents
^le^ak^{attending per}^{sistently dangerou}^s^{schools, or who become a victim of}
^{violent crime while at school, to}^{be allowed to transfer to a safe}^p^ublic
^://wiki^school.
^h^ttp^{Reports to pare}^nts^{Each s}^{chool and LEA}^participatin^{g in ESEA Title I was to be}^revie^wed^{Beginning in the}²⁰⁰²^-²⁰⁰³^scho^{ol year (with a one-year waiver}
^{and the}^pu^blic^annually.^When^sta^{ndards and ass}^{essment s}^{ystems we}^{re f}^{ully implemented,}^{authorized under}^exce^{ptional or uncont}^{rollable circumstances), p}^u^pil
^{regarding school}^{“individual performance}^{profiles” were to be}^pre^{pared and dissemi}^nated^assessment^res^{ults and certain}^{other data for individual pu}^{blic sch}^ools^,
^{system pe}^rforma^nce^{by L}^{EAs for eac}^{h pa}^{rticipating sc}^{hool. “Stat}^istical^{ly sound” achieve}^ment^{LEAs, and states}^{overall must be}^{reported to pare}^{nts a}^{nd the}^pu^blic.
^{data, disaggregated by pu}^{pil gender, race or eth}^{nicity, as well as LEP,}^{Report cards m}^{ust gene}^{rally include information on pu}^{pil performa}^nce
^{migrant, disability, and l}^ow-incom^{e status, were to}^{be re}^{ported for}^each^{disaggregated by race, eth}^{nicity, and gender, as well as disability, mi}^grant,
^{school, LEA, and the state overall}^.^{English p}^{roficiency, and economic}^{disadvantage status. The}^report^cards
^{must also include information on}^{pupil p}^{rogress toward meeting a}ⁿ^y
^{other educational indicators inclu}^{ded in the state’s AYP standards,}^plus
^{secondary sc}^{hool student gradua}^{tion rates, the n}^u^m^{ber a}^{nd identity of}
^{any sc}^{hools failing to meet AYP s}^{tandards, and aggregate infor}^{mation on}
^{the q}^{ualifications of teachers. Th}^{e report ca}^rds^may^{include additional}
^{information, such as}^{average class}^{size or the incidence of sc}^hool
^{violence. LEA and school report}^{cards are to be}^{disseminated to p}^arents
^{of pu}^{blic school pupils and to the}^pu^{blic at large. Preexisting repor}^{t cards}
^{may be modified to meet these}^r^equireme^nts.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Teacher p}^rograms^{Federal support wa}^{s p}^{rovided through the}^Eisen^{hower Professiona}^l^{ESEA Title II, Part A replaced th}^e^Eisenhower^{and CSR programs}^{with a}
^{Development (ESEA Title II) and}^{Class Size Reducti}^{on (CSR—annual}^{new state for}^{mula gra}^{nt progra}^m^.^{Authorized uses of f}^{unds we}^re
^approp^{riations legislati}^{on) programs. The former wa}^{s a form}^{ula gr}^ant^substa^{ntively ex}^{panded beyo}^{nd p}^{rofessional development and clas}^{s size}
^program^{primarily sup}^porting^pr^{ofessional development for K-12}^teachers.^{reduction, and include su}^{ch activi}^{ties as certification and ten}^{ure r}^e^form,
^{The latter was a form}^{ula grant}^pr^{ogram principally focused on}^red^{ucing class}^{merit pay, teache}^{r testing, and t}^r^{aining to integrate tech}^{nology into the}
^{sizes through t}^{he re}^cruitme^{nt an}^{d hiring of new tea}^cher^s.^curriculu^{m. National activities are separately a}^{uthorized and inclu}^{de such}
^{efforts as}^{national teacher a}^{nd pri}^{ncipal recr}^{uitment ca}^{mpaigns, s}^u^pport
^{for advanced certification, profes}^{sional development for early childhood}
^{educators, and a national pa}^{nel t}^o^{study teache}^{r mobility. The NCLB}
^{includes new}^{provisions to shield school employees (including teac}^hers,
^{administrators, and school board member}^{s) from legal liability for}^actions
^{taken in official capacity to maint}^{ain school discipline. In additi}^on,^teacher
^{quality accounta}^{bility requireme}ⁿ^{ts are newly a}^{pplied unde}^{r this}
^legislat^{ion (see below).}
^{Teacher and}^{Previously, the ESEA did not hav}^{e specific re}^quireme^{nts rega}^rding^teacher^{The NCLB re}^quires^LEAs^partici^{pating in ES}^{EA Title I, Part A to ensur}^e
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^parap^rofessional^{quality. Teacher aides/para}^profes^{sionals hired with ESEA Title I fu}^nds^{that, beginning}^{in the}²⁰⁰^2-03^sc^{hool year, teachers}^newly^{hired w}^ith
^g/w^{quality req}^uirement^s^{generally had to have ea}^{rned a}^{high school diploma or equivalency}^within^{Title I, Part A funds are “}^{highly q}^{ualified.” States participating in Ti}^{tle I-A}
^s^.or^{two years of being}^hired.^{were to establish}^{plans p}^{roviding that}^all^pu^{blic school teachers}^sta^tewide^{in core academic su}^{bjects will meet the}^{bill’s definit}^{ion of “highly}
^le^ak^{qualified” no later than t}^{he e}^{nd of the}²⁰^05-2⁰⁰^{6 sc}^{hool year. Furt}^her,
^://wiki^{LEAs re}^{ceiving Title I Part A fu}^{nds were to have}^{a plan to e}^nsu^{re t}^{hat all}^{teachers a}^{re highly}^{qualified by t}^h^e^{end of the}²⁰^05-²⁰⁰⁶^{school year.}
^h^ttp^{Under the}^{NCLB, each}^{LEA t}^hat^{receives Title I-A funding m}^{ust e}^nsur^e
^{that all aides or paraprofes}^sionals^{newly hired}^{with Tit}^{le I-A funds af}^ter
^{the date of enac}^{tment of P.L. 1}⁰⁷^-110^either^must^{have completed}^at
^{least two years of highe}^{r educati}^on,^or^{must ha}^{ve both}^{met a “rig}^orous
^{standard of q}^{uality,” and be able t}^o^{show throug}^{h a state or local}
^{academic assessment}^{that t}^hey^ha^{ve knowledge of reading, writing, and}
^{math (or reading readines}^{s, writing readiness, and mat}^{h r}^{eadiness) and}
^{the ability to help with inst}^{ruction in the}^{se su}^{bjects. Eac}^{h L}^{EA mu}^{st also}
^ensu^{re that, b}^y^the^{end of t}^{he 2}⁰^05-0^{6 sc}^{hool year,}^all^paraprofess^ionals
^{paid with Title I-A funds have}^me^{t those same}^req^{uirements. The}^s^e
^requirem^{ents do not a}^{pply to pa}^r^{aprofessionals providing tran}^{slation or}
^{parental involvement}^{services. Th}^{e NCLB also delineates the ty}^pes^of
^{responsibilities Title I-A paraprof}^{essionals can u}^ndertake.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Mathematics a}^nd^{The Eisen}^{hower Professional Development p}^{rogram (ESEA Title I}^{I) had a}^{The NCLB aut}^{horizes a Mat}^hema^{tics and Science Partne}^rship^prog^ram
^{science education}^funding^{reservation for}^{math a}^nd^{science p}^{rofessional development}^.^{(ESEA Title II, Part B). Elig}^{ible par}^tners^{hips that}^{include state ed}^uca^tional
^programs^{agencies, engineering, mat}^{h, or sc}^{ience departme}^{nts of}^{higher ed}^uc^ation
^{institutions, and high n}^{eed LEAs}^r^{eceive funds}^{for various activities,}
^{among them: p}^{rofessional development to imp}^{rove math}^{and scie}^nce
^{teachers’ s}^{ubject k}^{nowledge; math and scien}^{ce s}^{ummer work}^shop^s;
^recruitme^{nt of mat}^{h, science, or}^{engineering majors into teac}^hing;
^{development of math}^{and scienc}^e^curric^{ula; and distance learning}
^{programs for}^{math a}^{nd science}^t^eachers.
^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^Reading^{The Reading Excellence A}^{ct (REA}^{), authorized by Title II, Part C of}^{Reading First, authorized in Subp}^{art 1 of}^{ESEA Title I, Part B, replaced the REA. The}
^programs^{the ESEA,}^{provided competitive grants to states. Au}^{thorized uses}^{Reading First program aut}^{horizes both form}^{ula grants}^{and targete}^{d assistance}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{of REA fu}^{nds included profe}^{ssional training; providing sup}^plementa^l^{reading sup}^{port to K-3 st}^udents^{who needed ext}^{ra help}^{learning t}^o^{(competitive) grants to states. For FY200}^{2 a}^{nd FY20}^{03, 1}⁰⁰^%^{of fu}^{nds, after national}^{reservations, were to}^{be allocated as formula gra}^{nts to states, in p}^{roportion to the}
^g/w^{read; and su}^pporting^{family literacy efforts.}^num^{ber of c}^{hildren, aged 5-1}^{7, fr}^{om families with incomes below the povert}^{y line.}
^s^.or^{Beginning in FY20}^04,^{10% of}^fu^nd^{s in exces}^{s of the}^FY20^{03 a}^ppro^p^{riation, or $90 million,}
^le^ak^whichever^{is less, is to be reserv}^{ed for targeted assistance}^{state g}^{rants. Aut}^{horized uses of}
^{funds in}^{clude establishing s}^{cientifically based reading program}^{s for}^{children in grades K-3;}
^://wiki^{providing reading-related professi}^{onal training; providing assistance}^{in selecting or}^{administering screeni}^{ng, diagnosti}^{c, and classroom-based instruc}^{tional reading}
^h^ttp^assessment^{s; providing assistance}^{in selecting or developing effecti}^{ve instru}^ctional
^{materials; strengthe}^{ning coordina}^{tion among schools, early literacy programs, and}^family
^{literacy programs.}
^{Early Reading First, another}^new^{program a}^{uthorized in Sub}^part²^{of ESEA Title I, Part B,}
^{is a competitive grant}^{program w}^{ith awards not to exc}^{eed five yea}^{rs. LEAs eligible for}
^{Reading First grants, and p}^{ublic or private orga}^{nizations serving p}^r^{eschool-aged children,}
^{or combinations ther}^{eof, may ap}^{ply for these}^grant^{s. This progra}^{m fu}^{nds profe}^ssional
^{training and p}^{rovides presc}^hool-a^{ged children with more e}^xposu^re^{to high-quality}
^{language and literatur}^{e-rich e}^nvir^onments.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^School^{Library se}^{rvices and ma}^{terials was one of several a}^{uthorized uses}^{Improving Literac}^{y Throug}^{h Scho}^{ol Libraries, Subpart}^{4 of ES}^{EA Title I, Part B, authorizes}
^library^{of funds}^under^{ESEA Title VI, Part C—Local Innovative Edu}^cation^{formula grants}^{to states, in p}^{roportion to awards states receive}^un^{der ESEA Title I-A,}^if
^programs^programs.^approp^{riations exceed $}¹⁰⁰^milli^{on; otherwise the}^{program is to}^{operate as a com}^petitive
^{grant f}^{rom the Secreta}^{ry of}^Educ^{ation to elig}^{ible LEAs. (Through F}^Y200^{7, grants}^have
^{been awa}^{rded competitively.) Authorized uses of fu}^{nds include ac}^quiring^up-to-date
^{school library media resources, i}^{ncluding books; acq}^{uiring and}^{using advanced tec}^hnology;
^{facilitating Internet links a}^{nd othe}^{r resour}^{ce sha}^{ring net}^{works amo}^{ng schools and}
^{libraries; providing professional development for sc}^{hool library me}^{dia specialists; and}
^{providing students wit}^{h access}^{to school libraries during non}^{school hours.}
^{In addition, use of fu}^{nds by}^LEAs^{for library services}^{and mate}^{rials continues to}^{be one of}
^{several authorized activities unde}^{r Local Innovative Programs,}^{now contained in ESEA}
^{Title V}^,^{Part A-3.}
^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}
^g/w^Special^flexibility^{Ed-Flex (P.L. 106-25) a}^{uthorized participating states to waive a wi}^{de range of}^requirem^ents^{for ESEA a}^{nd certai}^{n other stat}^{e-administered progr}^{ams. ESEA}^{In addition to previous special fle}^{xibility authorities, Tit}^{le VI, Part}^{A-1 of the}^{revised ESEA allows most}^LEAs^{to transfer}^up^{to 50}^{% of th}^{eir gra}^{nts among}
^s^.or^provisions^{Title I-A schoolw}^{ide programs allowed many re}^quireme^{nts u}^nder^most^{four p}^{rograms—Teache}^{rs, Techn}^ology^{, Safe and Drug Free Sc}^hool^{s, and the}
^le^ak^{federal programs to}^{be waived in}^{schools where}^50%^{or more of}^{pupils were}^{Innovative Programs Block Gra}^nt^{—or into (but not f}^{rom) ESEA Title I, Part A.}
^{from low-income families.}^Small^,^{rural L}^{EAs were g}^{ranted a}^uthorit^{y to}^{LEAs t}^{hat have}^bee^{n identified as failing to meet state AYP require}^{ments are}
^://wiki^{combine fu}^nds^{under s}^{elected ESEA program}^{s. Finally, the former}^{ESEA Title}^{able to transfe}^{r only 3}^{0% of t}^heir^grants^under^these^program^{s, an}^{d only to}
^h^ttp^{XIV authorized the Secretar}^{y of}^{Education to waive many}^ESEA^r^equireme^nts^{activities intended to address the}^{failure to meet AYP standards.}^States^are
^{on a case-by-case}^basis.^{allowed t}^o^transfer^{up to}⁵⁰^{% of}^{their state activity f}^{unds among}^t^{he first fo}^ur
^{of these p}^rograms^{plus t}^{he 2}¹^st^C^{CLC program. Fu}^{nds that a}^{re tra}^nsfer^red
^{must b}^e^{used in}^{accordance wit}^h^{all of the require}^{ments of t}^he^pro^{gram to}
^{which th}^{ey are t}^rans^{ferred. (Not}^{e: The authority for}^{ED to grant}^Ed-Flex
^{authority to states e}^{xpired at t}^h^e^{end of FY20}^04.)
^{Under a State and Local Flexibility Demonstration Act (ESEA}^Title^{VI, Part A,}
^Subpart^{3), u}^p^{to seven}^{states, selected on a competitive basis, are}^authorized
^{to consolidate a}^{ll of their state administration and state activity fu}^{nds u}^nder
^{the Title I-A, Reading First, Even Start, Teachers, Technology, Safe and Drug}^st
^{Free Schools, 21}^{CCLC, and In}ⁿ^{ovative Programs Block Grant p}^r^{ograms. The}
^{consolidated funds can}^{be used}^f^{or any p}^u^r^{pose aut}^{horized under}^{any ES}^EA
^{program. The selected states}^are^{to enter into local performan}^{ce a}^greements
^{with 4-1}^{0 LEA}^{s (at least one-half}^{of which m}^{ust ha}^{ve sc}^{hool-age child poverty}
^{rates of 2}^{0% or more), whic}^{h ma}^{y consolidate funds u}^{nder t}^{he p}^r^{ovisions of}
^{the local flexibility authority described below. In addition, participating states}
^{may specify t}^he^pur^{poses for w}^hⁱ^ch^all^LEAs^{in the}^states^{use f}^und^{s they}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{receive u}^{nder the}^{ESEA Title V-A Innovative Programs}^{block grant.}^This
^{authority will be granted for}^{a pe}^{riod of five years; states will lose}^{the aut}^hority
^{if they fail to meet state AYP re}^q^uirements^{for 2}^consec^{utive year}^{s. (As of}
^November²⁰^07,^{no state pa}^{rticipates in t}^{his “State Flex” progra}^m.)
^Further,^{up to}⁸⁰^{LEAs (}^{no more than t}^hree^per^{state initially), plu}^{s the L}^EAs
^{that ente}^{r into agreeme}^{nts in}^stat^{es participating in t}^{he state}^flexibi^lity
^{demonstration above, are allowed to consolidate a}^{ll of their funds}^{under t}^he
^{Teachers, Tech}^{nology, Safe and Drug Free Schools, and In}^{novative Programs}
^{Block Grant p}^{rograms, and to us}^{e these f}^unds^{for any}^p^{urpose a}^u^t^horized
^{under a}^ny^{ESEA p}^{rogram. The au}^{thority is to be gran}^{ted for a p}^{eriod of five}
^{years; LEAs}^{will lose the authority if they fail to meet state AYP re}^quireme^nts
^{for 2 conse}^{cutive yea}^{rs. Under}^b^{oth the state a}^{nd local flexibility}
^{demonstration programs, sev}^{eral specified types of}^req^uirement^s^—including
^{those regarding civil rights, fiscal accountability, and private sc}^{hool pu}^{pil and}
^teacher^{participation—may not}^b^e^{waived. (As of November}²⁰⁰⁷^{, no LEA}
^{participates in t}^{his “Local Flex” p}^rogram.)
^{The previous}^{federal effort to inc}^{rease fu}^{nding and}^{flexibility for small rural}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{school districts wil}^{l be continued}^{and expa}^{nded to aut}^{horize fundin}^{g for poor}
^g/w^{rural sc}^{hool districts (see “Rural education” section, below). The Title I-A}
^s^.or^{schoolwide program eligibil}^{ity threshold is reduced to 40}^{%. Finally,}^the
^le^ak^{previous aut}^{hority for t}^{he U.S. Se}^{cretary of}^{Education to waive a v}^{ariety of}^{ESEA p}^{rogram re}^quireme^{nts on a}^case-by-case^{basis is exte}^{nded as}^{Title IX,}
^://wiki^{Part D.}
^h^ttp^Rural^{A Rural Education Ac}^hievement^{program was added to the}^ESEA^{by FY20}⁰¹^{The ESEA contai}^{ns a revised Ru}^r^{al Education Achieveme}^{nt p}^rogra^{m (ESEA}
^education^approp^{riations legislati}^{on. This program provided eligible LEAs (ru}^{ral districts}^{Title VI,}^{Part B) that encompas}^se^{s two separate}^programs—t^{he S}^{mall, Rural}
^{with small enrollment) with flexib}^{ility in the use of f}^{unds t}^{hey re}^{ceived under}^{School Achievement program, a}ⁿ^d^{the Rural and}^{Low-Income Sch}^{ool program.}
^{specific ESEA a}^{uthorities. The p}^r^{ogram also included a one-year authority}^{The first p}^{rogram is a revised ve}^r^{sion of the p}^{rogram aut}^{horized under p}^rior
^{(which was}^{not fu}^{nded) for separ}^{ate grants to t}^{hese L}^EAs.^{law. The second program, which}^{is new, identifies another set of d}^istricts
^{(defined by low-income student}^p^{opulation and ru}^{ral location) and authorizes}
^{the allocation of funds to states}^b^{ased on the e}^{nrollment in those}^districts.
^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Education for}^{The ESEA}^{provided competitive grants for t}^{he ed}^{ucation of LEP}^pu^pils^{The BEA and}^EIEP^programs^have^been^{consolidated into a single formula}
^{limited English}^{under t}^{he Bilingual Education Act}^{(BEA) and formula gra}^{nts for t}^h^e^{grant p}^{rogram (if ap}^{propriations f}^{or a given fiscal year rea}^{ch or e}^x^{ceed $6}⁵⁰
^{proficient (LEP)}^{education of recent}^immigrant^pu^{pils under t}^{he E}^merge^{ncy Im}^migrant^mill^{ion, as has occurred ea}^{ch yea}^{r begin}^{ning with FY2}⁰⁰^{2). Grants}^are
^pupils^{Education p}^{rogram (EI}^{EP). The u}^{se of BEA f}^{unds for}^{non-bilingual}^{distributed to states based on}^th^{e enrollment of L}^{EP (80%}^{of fu}^nd^{s) and}
^{instructional ap}^proaches^{was limited to 25% of g}^{rants. Additional a}^ssistance^{immigrant (20%)}^student^{s. State enrollment estimates for t}^hese^p^opulations

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{was authorized throug}^{h Foreign}^{Language A}^ssistance^{program (FL}^AP)^{can be}^taken^{from either}^{data ava}^{ilable through th}^{e Burea}^{u of t}^he^{Census or}
^{grants for two-way lang}^{uage p}^{rograms that}^{provide language in}^stru^{ction to}^{data collected and submitted by S}^{EAs, whicheve}^{r the}^Secretary^considers
^{native English s}^peaker^{s and L}^{EP p}^upils.^{most accurate. No state}^{is to rec}^{eive a grant less t}^han^$5^00,0^{00 a}^{nd the gra}^nt
^{to Puerto Rico may not exceed 0}^{.5% of the total available for state}
^{allotments. Continuation awards have be}^en^{provided to past recipi}^{ents of}
^{BEA instru}^{ctional services and}^pr^{ofessional development grants. A}^{6.5% set-}
^{aside provides additi}^{onal support}^{for a National Professional Development}
^{Project and continued f}^{unding of}^{the re}^{named National Clearingho}^{use for}
^{English La}^{nguage Ac}^{quisition and}^Language^Inst^ruction^programs.
^{Within-state distribution of fu}^{nds is based on th}^{e en}^{rollment of LE}^{P students}
^{only, regardless of students’ immigrant stat}^{us. However, states ca}ⁿ^reserve^up
^{to 15%}^{for grant}^{s to eligible entiti}^{es—one or more L}^{EAs, or one o}^r^more
^{LEAs in collaboration with an inst}^{itution of higher edu}^{cation, a community-}
^{based organization, or a SEA—containing sc}^{hools that have}^recentl^y
^experie^{nced large influ}^{xes of im}^{migrant children. SEAs ca}^{n re}^serv^{e 5% of}
^funds^{for state activities suc}^{h as}^p^{rofessional development, plannin}^g,
^{evaluation, administration, and technical assistance. The}^minimum^{grant to an}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{eligible entity (hereafter re}^ferred^{to simply as an L}^{EA) is $1}^0,00^0.
^g/w^{Participating LEAs a}^{nd SEAs are}^s^{ubject to several acco}^unta^{bility provisions}
^s^.or^{and reporting}^req^uirement^{s. At t}^{he end of ev}^{ery se}^{cond fiscal yea}^{r, LEAs}
^le^ak^{must s}^{ubmit to their S}^{EA a p}^rogr^{am evaluation that a}^{nalyzes the}^p^rogress^{made by st}^{udents in}^the^program^{as well as those who ha}^{ve move}^{d out of the}
^://wiki^{program. This evaluation mu}^{st re}^{port data on the}ⁿ^umbe^{r and}^pro^{portion of}^{LEP stude}^{nts pa}^{rticipating in th}^es^{e programs a}^{nd the}^su^bseq^uent^a^cademic
^h^ttp^{achievement of}^past^program^par^{ticipants. SEAs must}^{develop ann}^ual
^measura^{ble achieveme}^{nt objectives that re}^{flect: (1) the amou}^{nt of}^{time an}
^{individual child has been en}^rolled^{in a language inst}^ruction^progra^{m; (2) ann}^ual
^{increases in t}^he^num^{ber or}^perce^{ntage of children lear}^{ning E}^{nglish; and (3)}
^{the n}^umbe^{r or}^perce^{ntage of st}^u^{dents receiving waivers}^{for readi}^{ng or}
^{language arts as}^sessme^{nts. E}^xcep^{tions to these objectives can}^be^{made for}
^{LEAs t}^{hat ex}^perience^{significant i}^ncreases^{in the}^nu^mbe^{r of LEP a}ⁿ^d
^{immigrant children. SEAs that}^fin^{d LEAs failing to meet the}^{se objectives for 2}
^{consecutive yea}^{rs m}^{ust p}^{rovide the LEA}^{with tec}^{hnical assistance}^{to develop}
^{an improveme}^{nt plan. L}^{EAs fo}^un^{d to be failing for 4 conse}^{cutive y}^{ears can}^be
^{forced to modify their language i}^nstru^{ction program,}^{have their}^fu^nds
^{withdrawn, and/or relevant}^per^{sonnel re}^{placed by t}^{he SEA.}
^{The FLAP was exte}^{nded as one o}^f^{several aut}^{horized activities under the}
^{Fund for t}^{he Im}^proveme^{nt of Ed}^{ucation (see below).}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^Allocat^{ion of ESEA}^{In the}^{allocation of funds to LEAs}^{, the Title I-A statute aut}^{horized four}^{In the}^{allocation of Tit}^{le I-A fund}^{s, the NCLB}^{provides that a}ⁿ^am^ount
^{Title I-A funds to}^{different allocation formulas, and provided that all funds a}^{bove the}^FY1995^{equal to the FY2}⁰⁰^{1 ap}^prop^riatio^{n is to be allocated under eac}^{h of}^the
^{states and L}^EAs^{level were to be allocated under}^{the Targeted or Ed}^{ucation Financ}^e^{Basic and Concentration}^Grant^f^{ormulas, and any inc}^{reases a}^{re to be}
^Incentive^Gra^{nt (EFI}^{G) formulas.}^{However, until FY20}^{02, ap}^propri^ations^{allocated under the Targeted G}^r^a^{nt or EFI}^{G form}^{ula. A hold harmless rate}
^{acts prev}^{ented a}^{ny f}^{unds f}^{rom be}^{ing used for t}^{hese two form}^{ulas a}^{nd, in}^{of 85%-}^95%^{of pre}^{vious year g}^ran^{ts (the highe}^{r a L}^{EA’s child pover}^{ty rate,}
^{practice, all funds wer}^{e allocated under t}^{he Basic (8}^{4% of f}^{unds in}^FY2001)^{the highe}^{r is the}^{hold harmless}^p^{ercentage), pr}^{eviously applicable}^{only to}
^{and Concentration (}^16%^{of fu}^nds^{) Grant}^formulas.^{Basic and Targeted Gra}^{nts, now}^{applies to each of t}^{he fou}^{r Part A}
^allocat^{ion formulas. In pa}^{rticular, the Concent}^{ration Gra}^nt^{hold harmless}
^{provision applies to all LEAs, not just those whic}^{h cu}^rre^{ntly meet t}^he
^eligibi^{lity criteria for this formula, except}^{that if a}^LEA^{fails to meet such}
^{criteria for 4 s}^{uccessive y}^{ears, th}^{en the}^{hold harmless will no longer ap}^ply.
^{The relative share of}^fu^{nds allocated to Puerto Rico wil}^{l increase over}
^{time as a result of two ame}^ndme^{nts: (a) the minimum}^ex^penditure^factor
^{for Puerto Rico will be increased in stages to full parity with}^{the mi}^nimum
^{applicable to states b}^y^FY20^{07 (in}^FY200^{1 it was ap}^{proximately 7}⁵^%^{of the}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{minimum for states); a}^{nd (b) a ca}^{p on Targeted G}^rants^{to Puerto}^{Rico is}
^g/w^{marginally raised.}
^s^.or^{State minimum grant}^{s are in}^creas^{ed from up}^{to 0.25}^{% u}^{nder c}^urr^e^{nt law}
^le^ak^{to up to 0.3}^{5%, b}^{ut only with}^res^{pect to ap}^{propriated f}^{unds a}^bove^the
^FY2001^{level. The NCLB provide}^{s for the}^{use of}^{population data on}
^://wiki^{school-age children in poor families that is u}^{pdated an}^{nually, rathe}^{r than,}
^h^ttp^{as previously, every}^{second year}^{(annual u}^{pdates we}^{re ap}^{plied beginning}^{with FY200}^4).
^{Major changes}^{were made to t}^h^e^EFIG^{formula. First, in the allocation of}
^{funds to states, t}^{he po}^{pulation fa}^{ctor was cha}^{nged from total scho}^ol-age
^{children to the same}^count^{of po}^{or and other c}^{hildren used to cal}^culate
^{Basic Grants. Second, the state}^e^xpe^{nditure factor}^{used in t}^{he oth}^{er three}
^{Part A formulas is included in t}^h^e^EFIG^{formula, although with}^somewhat
^{more narrow}^{bounds (}^85%^and¹^{15% of}^the^{national average rat}^he^{r than}
^{80% a}^{nd 1}²⁰^{%). Third, the EFIG}^f^{ormula now has a}^{distinct intrast}^ate
^allocat^{ion formula, which is based}^{in concept}^{on the}^{Targeted Gra}^nt
^{formula exce}^{pt t}^{hat the deg}^{ree of targeting will vary in th}^{ree stage}^{s based}
^{on a measu}^{re of disparities in sp}^e^{nding per}^pu^{pil among each}^{state’s LEAs}
^{(the greater t}^{he disparities, the g}^{reater is the}^{degree of re}^{quired t}^argeting
^{within states).}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Title I migrant}^{The ESEA Title I Migrant}^Edu^{cation program (M}^{EP) has}^{provided f}^ormula^{The MEP}^{remains largely u}ⁿ^c^hang^{ed. As with Title I-A grants, the}
^programs^{grants to SEAs}^{for the developm}^{ent of p}^{rograms targeted to migr}^ant^{minimum ex}^penditu^{re factor}^for^{Puerto Rico is being increased in}^stages,
^{students. G}^rants^have^been^distributed^{based on eac}^{h states’ s}^har^{e of}^{but for}^{this p}^{rogram only to 8}⁵^%^{of the minimu}^{m ap}^{plicable to states (in}
^{migratory children en}^{rolled in school multiplied by a state expe}^nd^iture^FY2001^{it was ap}^{proximately 7}⁵^%^{of the minim}^{um for s}^tates).
^factor.
^{Under the}^{MEP, a migratory c}^{hild has b}^{een defined a}^s^{a pe}^rson^bet^ween
^{the ages of}^{3 and}^{21 w}^{ho is, or whose pare}^{nt or s}^{pouse is, a migra}^tory
^{agricultural or dairy worker a}^nd^{who has moved f}^{rom one sc}^{hool district}
^{(or administrative area) to another to obtain tempora}^{ry or seaso}^nal
^{employment in t}^{he pa}^{st 3}⁶^mont^{hs. Children who trav}^{el more tha}^{n 2}⁰
^{miles within a school district with land area larger t}^han^15,0⁰⁰^sq^u^are
^{miles to engage in seasonal fishin}^{g activity may also qualify as migr}^atory
^{students. The e}^{nrollment estimat}^{es used in t}^{he form}^{ula were}^base^{d on the}
^num^{ber of f}^{ull-time students a}^nd^{the full-time equivalent}^nu^mber^{of part-}
^{time students, as deter}^{mined by t}^{he most acc}^{urate infor}^{mation ava}^{ilable to}
^{the U.S. Secretary of Education.}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{Title I neglected and}^{delinquent programs}^{The ESEA Title I neglected a}^{nd delinquent (}^{N&D) program}^has^pr^ovided^{grants to SEAs (Su}^bpar^{t 1) a}^{nd L}^{EAs (Sub}^part^{2) for educational a}^nd^{The N&D p}^{rogram remain}^{s large}^{ly unc}^{hanged. As with Title I-A gr}^ants,^{the minimum}^ex^penditure^factor^{for Puerto Rico is being increase}^{d in}
^g/w^{related services to neglected and}^{delinquent c}^{hildren and yout}^{h. Formula}^{stages, but for}^{this p}^{rogram only}^{to 85% of t}^{he minimu}^{m ap}^{plicable to}
^s^.or^grants^{have b}^een^{based on t}^{he n}^u^{mber of}^{neglected and delinqu}^ent^{states (in FY20}^{01 it was a}^p^p^{roximately 75%}^{of the}^{minimum for}^s^tates).
^le^ak^{children and yout}^{h in t}^{he state a}ⁿ^d^{a state ex}^penditure^{factor. Loc}^al^{The Secretary is a}^{uthorized to re}^{serve u}^p^{to 2.5}^{% of Su}^bpart^{1 f}^uⁿ^{ds for}
^{program f}^unds^{may be}^distribute^{d on either a form}^{ula or competi}^{tive basis}^{technical assistance}^{and develop}^{ment of tec}^hniq^{ues to evaluate}^p^rogram
^://wiki^{to LEAs with conc}^{entrations of el}^{igible children and youth. Local p}^rograms^{effectiveness.}

^h^ttp^{may serve}^{not only youth}^{in instit}^{utions for the}^delinque^{nt or com}^munity^{day programs, b}^{ut also youth at-r}^{isk of dropping out of sc}^hool.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^Comprehe^nsive^{The Compreh}^{ensive School Reform program}^{(CSRP) has provided grants}^{The CSRP is explicitly authorized}^{, with relatively few substa}^{ntial ch}^anges,
^{School Reform}^{to public elementar}^{y or secondar}^{y schools, to help pay t}^{he initial costs of}^{as ESEA Title I, Part F. (While onl}^{y the forme}^{r ES}^{EA Title I portion of the}
^program^{implementing comp}^rehe^{nsive str}^{ategies for educational reform. The CSRP}^{program is ex}^{plicitly authorized under the}^{NCLB, P.L. 107-}¹¹^{6 p}^rovided
^{was linked to authorizations in Ti}^{tle I, Section 1502, a}^{nd Title X, P}^{art A, of}^{an additional $75 million appropr}^{iation for FY2002}^{for CSRP grant}^{s as}
^{the ESEA, althoug}^{h most of t}^{he p}^{rovisions governing the}^program^were^{formerly made u}^nder^{ESEA Title X-A.)}
^{included in the FY19}⁹⁸^Departm^{ent of Ed}^{ucation App}^ropriations^{Act. The}^{There is no longer a}^{ny ex}^{plicit reference}^{to specific sc}^{hool reform models;}
^FY1998^ap^{propriations legislation}^{listed specific educational strategies}^{however, several c}^{haracteristics}^{which eligible comprehe}^{nsive sc}^h^ool
^{which sc}^{hools might seek CSRP grants to implemen}^{t, although a}^ppl^icants^{reform models must e}^{xhibit ar}^e^{described (e.g., “provides high qu}^{ality and}
^{could propose alternative strat}^eg^{ies, including local}^{ly developed programs,}^{continuous teac}^her^{and staf}^{f p}^{rofessional development”). A priority is}
^{which met s}^{pecified general c}^riteria.^{placed on assisting schools that}^h^{ave failed to meet AYP standards under}
^{CSRP grants were allocated by formula to SEAs, which t}^hen^select^ed^{Title I-A. Assisted schoo}^{l reforms must}^be^{based on “scientifically based}
^{grantee L}^{EAs a}^{nd schools on a c}^{ompetitive basis. Funds for t}^{he Title I}^researc^{h and ef}^{fective p}^{ractices.” Up to 3% of}^app^{ropriations may}^be
^{portion of the CSRP were allocated to states in proportion to t}^{heir Title I-}^{reserved for}^{national quality initiatives, including public-private ef}^{forts to}
^{A Basic Grants, w}^{hile the Title X-A portion was allocated to state}^{s in}^{help states, L}^{EAs, and sc}^{hools make informed decisions in evaluating and}
^{proportion to their}^{population ag}^{ed 5-17. SEAs}^{could use u}^p^{to 5}^%^of^{selecting compre}^{hensive sc}^{hool reforms.}
^{grants for administration, evaluati}^{on, and technical assistan}^{ce. Gra}ⁿ^{ts to}
^{individual schools were to be at least $5}^0,00^{0 p}^{er year, r}^enewa^{ble for up}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{to three year}^{s. Schools participating in the}^{CSRP have bee}^{n s}^u^p^{ported by a}
^g/w^{series of tech}^{nical assistance p}^{roviders, and also have received tec}^hnical
^s^.or^sup^{port from orga}^{nizations which develop and disseminate t}^he^{instructional program}^{s they}^adopt.
^le^ak
^{Dropout programs}^{The previous Title V, Part C of the ESEA}^aut^{horized grants to LE}^{As and}^{The Dropout Preve}^{ntion progra}^{m, ESEA Title I-H, authorizes gra}^{nts to}
^://wiki^{educational partne}^rships^{for drop}^{out preve}^{ntion activities. However, no}^{SEAs and L}^{EAs for activities that}^{help p}^revent^{school dropout and}
^h^ttp^funding^{had bee}^{n p}^{rovided for this or predeces}^{sor aut}^{hority since}^FY1995.^encourage^reent^{ry. The p}^rocedur^{es for allocating funds va}^{ry depe}ⁿ^{ding on}^{the an}^{nual ap}^prop^{riation level. If approp}^{riations are below $}^{75 million (as}
^{has bee}^{n t}^{he case}^{for each}^{of FY200}^2-0^{6), grants a}^{re awarded}
^{competitively to SEAs and LEAs}^{directly by ED. If a}^ppro^{priations exceed}
^$75^{million but are below $}²⁵⁰^mill^{ion, ED would make competitive}
^{grants to SEAs, whic}^{h would the}^{n make com}^{petitive subg}^{rants to}^LEAs.
^Finally,^{if appropriations e}^{xceed $}²⁵⁰^{million, grants would be made by}
^{formula to states (in p}^{roportion t}^o^{Title I-A grants), with competitive}
^subgra^{nts to L}^{EAs. The}^program^{targets grant}^{s to schools that se}^r^ve
^{grades 6-1}^{2 and}^{have a}ⁿⁿ^{ual dropout rates t}^{hat ar}^{e above t}^{he sta}^te
^{average as well as middle schools}^{that feed st}^{udents i}^{nto suc}^{h high}
^{dropout high sc}^{hools. In addition,}^10%^{of ap}^{propriations for Part}^H^{are to}
^{be used at}^the^{national level for such activities as evaluation, tech}^nical
^{assistance, and esta}^{blishment of a}^{national clearinghouse on e}^ffecti^ve
^practices.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
²¹^st^CCLC/Afte^r-school^{This program was originally auth}^{orized as Part I of Title X of the ESEA.}^{The program}^{was rea}^{uthorized in ESEA Title IV, Part B. The}
^programs^{The 21}^st^{CCLC p}^{rovided competitive grants to LEAs}^{for academic}^and^{reauthorized program}^{is stru}^ctur^{ed as a formula gra}^{nt p}^{rogram to}
^{other after-sc}^{hool programs. Local grantees were}^{selected directly by ED.}^{states, in proportion to the}^awar^{ds states received u}^{nder Title I-A}
^Grant^recipients^{could receive an}^{award for u}^p^{to th}^{ree years}^and^were^{for the}^{preceding fiscal year. SEA}^{s must awa}^{rd at least 9}^{5% of t}^heir
^{required to include at least}^four^{out of a broad arra}^{y of potential}^activities^{state allotment to eligible}^{local e}^{ntities (defined as LEAs, CBOs,}
^{to serve the local commu}^nity.^{other p}^{ublic or private e}^{ntities, or consortia of one or more of t}^h^e
^{above) for a pe}^{riod of three to five years. This is a cha}^{nge f}^{rom th}^e
^{program as originally authorized, which only pe}^{rmitted schools or}
^{consortia of schools (or LEAs op}^{erating on their}^be^{half), to be}^st
^{directly awarded 21}^{CCLC gra}ⁿ^{ts. Funds may}^{be u}^{sed for be}^fore
^{and after sc}^{hool activities that advance st}^{udent academic}
^achievement.
^{Educational tech}^nology^{ESEA Title III aut}^{horized a state f}^{ormula grant (Tech}^{nology Literacy}^{The En}^han^{cing Ed}^{ucation Throug}^{h Tech}^{nology Act of 200}^{1 (ES}^EA
^{Challenge Fund) plus}^{several com}^{petitive/discretionary grant}^progr^ams^{Title II, Part D) consol}^{idated several technology programs}
^(e.g.^{, Technology Innovation Challenge Gra}^{nts) to ex}^{pand acces}^{s t}^{o, and}^{authorized under}^{prior law, including the Tech}^{nology Innovation}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{effective use}^{of, educational tech}^nology.^{Challenge Gra}^{nts and t}^{he Tech}ⁿ^{ology Literacy Challenge Fund.}
^g/w^{This new aut}^{hority awards f}^unds^{by form}^{ula to states and, in tu}^rn,
^s^.or^{to LEAs and eligible local entities}^{(half of these f}^unds^{are to be}^{awarded to LEAs b}^y^form^{ula). At least 25%}^{of an L}^{EA’s f}^unding
^le^ak^{must b}^e^used^{for profe}^{ssional development in t}^{he integration of}
^://wiki^{advanced tech}^{nologies into curricula and instr}^{uction. Other}^{authorized activities for LEAs incl}^{ude increasing a}^{ccess to}
^h^ttp^{technology; using tec}^{hnology to connect sc}^{hools and teacher}^{s with}
^parent^{s and st}^udents;^pre^{paring t}^{eachers to se}^{rve as te}^ch^nology
^{leaders in their sc}^{hools; and acqu}^{iring, expanding, implementing,}
^{repairing, and maintaining te}^ch^{nology. State activit}^{ies include}
^{distance learning, p}^{ublic-private initiatives for technology}
^{acquisition, and development of p}^erformance^measu^reme^{nts to}
^{determine effective}^{ness of ed}^ucat^{ional technology programs.}
^{Among the othe}^{r tec}^{hnology pro}^{visions authorized in the NC}^LB
^{are the}^follow^{ing: continuation of a separate}^aut^{horization for the}
^{Ready-to-Learn Televisi}^{on progra}^{m; inclusion of the Star Sc}^hools
^{program, Ready to Teach p}^{rogram (formerly Mat}^{hline), and the}
^{Community Tech}^{nology Centers}^{in the Fu}^{nd for t}^{he Im}^proveme^nt
^{of Education (see b}^{elow); and transfer of t}^{he Pre}^paring
^{Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology to the Highe}^{r Edu}^cation
^Act.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{School safety}^{ESEA Title IV authorized state formula grant}^{s and com}^{petitive gra}^{nts for}^{The NCLB ame}^{nded and exte}^nde^{d the Safe and Dr}^{ug-Free Schools}
^{school safety and anti-drug a}^b^u^s^e^programs.^{and Communities Act (SDFSCA)}^{as Part A of Title IV—21}^st
^Century^{Schools. State and local}^{grants are}^fu^{nded for p}^{rograms t}^o
^preve^{nt stude}^{nt violence in and a}^{round sc}^{hools and the illegal use}
^{of alcohol, t}^{obacco, and drugs. Af}^{ter fu}^{nds rese}^{rved for outlying}
^{areas, Indian yout}^{h, and native}^H^{awaiian youth are distrib}^{uted, the}
^{remaining f}^{unds are}^{distributed t}^o^{the states}^{by a form}^{ula of 5}^0%
^{based on sc}^{hool-age population and 50}^{% ba}^{sed on ESEA}^{Title I-A}
^{Concentration G}^rants^{for the}^pr^{eceding fiscal year. National}
^{programs ar}^{e aut}^{horized to continue aid to recr}^{uit, hire, and train}
^{drug p}^{revention a}^{nd school safet}^{y program coordinators in s}^chools
^{with notable drug a}^{nd violence p}^{roblems. Up to $2}^milli^{on is to be}
^{reserved for e}^{valuating the}^{national impact of the}^{program, a}^nd
^{funds a}^{re aut}^{horized to continue}^{the Safe Schools/Healthy Student}^s
^{initiative, which is jo}^{intly funded}^{with the Depa}^rtment^{of Health}
^{and Huma}^{n Services (H}^{HS), and the Depart}^{ment of}^{Justice. Gra}^nts
^{are per}^{mitted for LEAs a}^{nd com}^{munity-based g}^{roups to as}^sist
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^local^{ities most directly affected by hate crimes.}
^g/w^{Funding for sev}^{eral new activities}^{is authorized under}^national
^s^.or^{programs, su}^{ch as: esta}^{blishing a}^{national center for}^{school safety}^{to be jointly supported}^by^{ED an}^{d the Departm}^{ent of J}^{ustice for}
^le^ak^emergency^res^{ponses, sc}^{hool hotlines, consultations, and other}
^://wiki^{school safety activities; providing competitive grants e}^{nabling L}^EAs^{to develop and implement p}^rogra^{ms to reduce alcohol abu}^{se in}
^h^ttp^{secondary sc}^{hools; and awarding grants to eligible entities to assist}
^{in creating and}^sup^{porting me}^nto^{ring program}^{s for c}^{hildren with}
^{greatest need.}
^{Statutory provisions of the}^Gu^{n F}^{ree Schools Act are incorporated}
^{into the SDFSCA requiring states}^{to have a law to ex}^{pel for one}
^{year any}^student^bringi^{ng a weap}^{on to school. In another}^provision
^{of the NCLB, a st}^{udent w}^{ho atte}^{nds a pe}^{rsistently dange}^rous
^{public elementa}^{ry or seco}^{ndary s}^{chool (as determined by a state i}ⁿ
^{consultation with the}^{relevant L}^E^{A) or who becomes a victim of a}
^{violent crime (determined by stat}^{e law) while on school property i}^s
^{allowed t}^o^{transfer to a sa}^{fe sc}^hool,^{including a pu}^{blic charte}^r
^{school, within the same local sch}^{ool d}^istrict.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Impact Aid}^{Impact Aid (ESEA Title VIII) com}^pensates^LEAs^{for th}^{e “su}^bstantia^{l and}^{Unlike most other ESEA}^program^{s, Impact Aid had b}^een^revised
^{continuing fina}^{ncial bu}^{rden” re}^sul^{ting from federal activities. These}^{and reaut}^{horized during the}¹⁰⁶^th^{Congress (i.e., previous to the}
^{activities include federal ownersh}^{ip of certain lands as w}^{ell as the}^{NCLB) by Title XVIII (the I}^mpact^{Aid Reauthorization Act of 200}⁰⁾
^{enrollment in LEA}^{s of children of}^pare^{nts who work a}^{nd/or live on federal}^{of P.L. 106-3}^{98 (Floyd D. Spence}^{National Defense Aut}^horization
^{land; for example, children of}^par^{ents in t}^{he military and children living on}^{Act for Fiscal Year 20}^{01). P.L. 10}^7-11^{0 made tec}^{hnical cha}^{nges in}
^{Indian lands.}^{sections dealing with federal lands, basic sup}^port^payment^{s, and}
^{Section 800}^{7(b) aut}^{horized faciliti}^{es modernization grants f}^{rom 60}^{% of}^{state equalization. In addition, the act modified provisions dealing}^{with grants to address}^{facilities emergencies a}^{nd modernization}
^funds^{provided for Section 80}^07.^{Eligible LEAs had to have}^{little or}^no^{needs (unde}^{r Section 80}⁰⁷⁽^{b)—discussed below). Finally P}^{.L. 107-}
^{capacity to issue}^{bonds or be}^{defined as a ‘heavily impacted’ LEA}^u^nder¹¹⁰^aut^{horized the act th}^rough^FY200^7.
^{Section 800}^{3(b)(2), and had to}^qu^{alify for funds}^under^{Section 80}⁰²
^{(related to payments for}^federal^{ownership of land)—i.e., those with}^{Section 800}^{7(b) was significantly}^{modified to authorize:}^(a)
^{assessed pro}^{perty value}^pe^{r stud}^{ent below the}^{state average, or}^h^aving^{emergency, a}^{nd (b) modernization grant}^{s from}⁶⁰^{% of fu}^nds
^{children living on Indian land or c}^{hildren of military parents}^compr^ising^at^{provided for Section 800}^{7 to q}^u^a^{lifying LEAs (and u}^{nder ce}^rtain
^{least 50%}^{of their total enrollmen}^{t, and having a sc}^{hool facility emergency.}^circumstan^{ces to individual schools) and sets out p}^{riorities for suc}^h
^{grants as}^follows:^Fi^rst^{, emergency grants}^{for LEA}^{s with “a sc}^hool
^{facility emergency ... that poses a}^{health or safety}^{hazard,” that a}^re
^{eligible for construction grant}^ass^{istance u}^{nder Section 8}⁰⁰^{7(a), and}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{that either}^{have “}^{no practical ca}^p^{acity to issue bonds,” have}
^g/w^{“minimal capacity,” or qualify for}^payment^{s for ce}^{rtain heavily}
^s^.or^{impacted LEAs.}^Second^{, emerge}^nc^{y grants}^{for LEA}^{s with somew}^hat^{more borrowing aut}^{hority and so}^{mewhat less federal impa}^{ct (i.e.,}
^le^ak^{at least either 4}^{0% of e}^nrollment^{composed of children living on}
^://wiki^{Indian lands or c}^{hildren of pare}^nt^{s in the military).}^Third^,^{modernization grants for L}^{EAs th}^{at receive Im}^{pact Aid assistance}
^h^ttp^{and meet either}^{the “}^{no capacity,}^{”or “limited capacity” criterion o}^r
^{receive heavily impacted}^payment^{s and have}^{“facility needs res}^ulting
^{from the}^prese^{nce of t}^{he Federal}^Governm^{ent, su}^{ch as}^the
^{enrollment of federally connecte}^{d children, the p}^resen^{ce of tax-}
^{exempt Fede}^{ral proper}^{ty, or an i}^{ncrease in}^{enrollment due}^{to the}
^expa^{nsion of Federal activities, housing privatization, or the}
^{acquisition of Federal property.”}^And^fourth^{, modernizati}^{on grants}
^{for LEAs m}^{eeting the}^{same c}^riter^{ia as those u}^{nder the}^second
^{priority for emerge}^{ncy gra}^{nts (ab}^{ove). In additi}^{on to these eligibilit}^y
^requirem^{ents, a gra}^{nt m}^ust^{be m}^{atched by local contrib}^{utions and}
^{must not e}^{xceed $}⁴^{million during any fou}^r-year^{period. Certain}
^{uses of gra}^{nt f}^{unds a}^{re p}^{rohibited; for example, for athletic}
^facilities^.

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Innovative p}^{rograms (block}^{Prior to the NCLB, the I}^nnovativ^{e Education Program Strategies}^p^rogram^{As amended by}^{NCLB, ESEA Title IV, Part A, authorizes the}
^grant)^{was authorized u}^{nder ESEA}^{Title VI, with many p}^{rovisions similar to the}^{Innovative Programs}^{program, w}^{hich is informally refe}^{rred to as}
^{new I}^{nnovative Programs a}^uthori^{ty. Formula grants we}^{re allocated}^to^{the “Ed}^{ucation Block Grant.” Program p}^urposes^{include su}^pport^of
^{states, based on total population}^{aged 5-17, e}^{xcept t}^hat^{no state r}^eceived^{educational reform, implementation of reform a}^{nd improveme}^nt
^{less than one-}^{half of 1%}^{of the to}^{tal. At least 85% of the}^{state gra}ⁿ^t^was^programs^{based on scientifically b}^{ased researc}^{h, sup}^{port of}
^{required to}^{be distributed to L}^E^{As, using form}^{ulas developed by t}^{he states}^{educational innovation and impro}^{vement, assistance}^{to meet the}
^{which incor}^{porated specified gen}^{eral factors. The maxim}^{um state}^{educational needs of all students,}^{and assistance to imp}^rove
^{administration allocat}^{ion was 25}^{% of the}¹⁵^{% state-level reservati}^{on. LEA}^{educational performa}^nce.
^{uses of f}^{unds we}^{re limited to nine targeted assistance a}^ctivities.^{The formula for allocating fu}^{nds t}^o^{states, and the}^{provisions for}
^{state-developed formulas for allo}^{cation to LEAs, were esse}^ntially
^unc^{hanged f}^{rom pre}^{vious law. Each state m}^{ust allocate at least 85}^%
^{of its grant to LEA}^{s, exce}^{pt that}^{each state m}^{ust distrib}^{ute to LEA}^s
¹⁰⁰^{% of an}^{y amou}^{nt received in}^{excess of its FY2}⁰⁰^{2 state gra}^nt.
^{Remaining funds}^{may b}^e^{used at}^t^{he state level to meet t}^he
^pur^{poses of this}^{program, ex}^cept^{no more tha}^{n 1}^{5% of t}^he
^{remaining f}^{unds may}^be^{used for}^{state administration.}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{LEAs m}^{ust u}^{se their g}^rants^{to me}^{et locally determined educational}^{needs, as selected from a list of 2}⁷^{innovative education as}^sistance
^g/w^{activities specifically authorized under the}^{program. L}^{EA s}^pending
^s^.or^{must b}^e^{tied to high academic ac}^{hievement sta}^{ndards. Students}
^le^ak^{enrolled in private schools are eligible to participate in the}^ben^efits
^{of this program o}ⁿ^{an e}^quitable^b^{asis. State applications must}
^://wiki^{provide for, among other re}^quire^{ments, an a}ⁿⁿ^{ual report}
^h^ttp^{summarizing stude}^{nt ac}^hievemen^{t improvement.}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Technical assistance}^{Provision of technical assistance t}^o^{SEAs, LEAs, and sc}^{hools by}^{Several programs form}^{erly aut}^{horized by the}^{ESEA were}
^Comprehe^{nsive Regional Assistance Cente}^{rs, a National Diffusion}^transfe^{rred b}^y^the^{NCLB (withou}^{t major amendment) to th}^e
^{Network, Eisen}^{hower Regional Mathematics a}^{nd Science Ed}^ucation^{Educational Research, Developm}^{ent, Dissemination, and}
^{Consortia, and Technology-Base}^{d Technical Assistance}^providers^was^Improveme^{nt Act of}¹⁹^{94 (}^{ERDDIA—Title IX of the P.L. 103-2}²^7).
^{authorized under}^{ESEA Title XIII,}^{Parts A thro}^{ugh D. Tech}^nology-^Based^{These included Compre}^hensive^{Regional Assistance Centers (Par}^t
^{Technical Assistance was}^{not a gr}^{ant progra}^{m; rathe}^{r, it authorized the}^{K of ERDDIA); National Diffusio}^{n Network (Part}^{L); Eisen}^hower
^{Secretary to su}^{pport t}^{he adminis}^{tration and implementation of}^{ESEA. The}^{Regional Mathematics and Scienc}^{e Education Consortia (Part M);}
^{other thr}^{ee p}^{rograms aut}^{horized discretionary grants, a}^{nd two of these}^{and Technology-Based Technical Assistance (Part N). A new}^{Part J}
^{programs we}^{re f}^{unded in FY2}⁰⁰¹^—$28^{million for Comprehensiv}^e^{of ERDDIA, Certain Multiyear G}^r^{ants and Cont}^{racts, aut}^horized
^{Regional Assistance Centers, and}^$1^{5 million for Eisenhower Regional}^{the Secretary}^{to continue}^fu^nding^{for Compre}^{hensive Regional}
^{Mathematics a}^{nd Science Ed}^{ucation Consortia. In addition, the Regional}^{Assistance Cente}^{rs and}^Eisen^{hower Regional Mathematics and}
^{Technology in Education Consor}^{tia program was f}^{unded at}^$1^{0 m}^ill^{ion in}^{Science Education Consortia, as}^{well as the Regional Technology i}ⁿ
^{FY2001. The}^{National Diffusion}^{Network had}^{not bee}^{n fu}^{nded since}^{Education Consortia (formerly Se}^{ction 314}^{1 of}^{ESEA, bu}^{t not}
^FY1995.^{extended b}^y^{NCLB). To continue}^funding^unde^{r Part J, the}^se
^{programs m}^ust^have^been^fu^{nded throug}^{h multiyear gra}^{nts a}^nd^{contracts t}^{hat were in}^effect^the^{day before t}^{he enac}^{tment of t}^he
^{NCLB. Authority was e}^xtended^{on a year-to-year basis aft}^{er t}^he
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{multiyear grants}^{and cont}^racts^ha^{ve expired. Unlike the}^six-year^{authorizations for ESEA}^program^{s, ERDDIA Part J aut}^{horized such}
^g/w^{sums as}^{may be}^nece^ssary^{for eac}^{h year, indefinitely.}
^s^.or^{Education for I}^{ndians, Alaska}^{Title IX of the ESEA aut}^{horized formula grants}^{for su}^ppleme^{ntal e}^ducation^{In rea}^{uthorizing Title IX of ESEA, the NCLB}^{redesignates it as Title}
^le^ak^{Natives, and Native}^{programs to L}^{EAs and B}^ureau^of^{Indian Affairs (BIA) f}^{unded sc}^{hools, as}^{VII, creates a demonst}^{ration prog}^{ram allowing LEAs and BIA-}
^://wiki^Hawaiians^{well as discretionary grants to N}^{ative Hawaiian and Alaska Native}^{educational organizations, and to}^{a wider range of e}^{ntities for educ}^ational^{funded sc}^{hools receiving formula}^{grants to integrate}^{those f}^unds^{with other federal f}^{unds t}^hey^rec^{eive for Indian c}^{hildren, and}
^h^ttp^improvement^{for Indian c}^hildren^{and adults. The Education Ame}^nd^ments^{consolidates the Native Hawaiian, Alaska Native, and several}
^{of 19}^{78 (P.L. 95-5}^{61), Title XI, Part B, authorized standards, distribution}^additi^{onal Indian programs into f}^e^{wer program}^s.
^{formulas, administrative grants, a}^{nd other}^{programs for}^BIA-fu^nded^{The NCLB rea}^{uthorized P.L. 95-}⁵⁶¹^{and P.L. 10}^0-2^{97, ame}^nding
^{schools. The Tribally Control}^led^{Schools Act of 198}^{8 (P.L. 100-}²⁹⁷⁾^{the former}^{act to create}^{a new a}^{ccountability provision for BIA-}
^{authorized tribes and t}^{ribal scho}^{ol boards operating BIA-funded s}^chools^{funded sc}^{hools, requiring that}^ea^{ch sc}^{hool be accredited (or be a}
^{to receive BIA grants, instead of}^{contracts, for educational operati}^ons.^{candidate for accreditation) within two years, and s}^{etting various}
^{corrective actions the Sec}^retary^{of the I}^{nterior may take}^for
^{schools that are still unacc}^{redited after that}^{time. Accreditation}
^{may be}^{by tribal as w}^{ell as regional or state accrediting agencies, a}^s
^{long as the tribal acc}^{reditation is acknowledged by a state or}
^{regional agency. The amendme}^nt^{s also consolidated support}
^{services in th}^{e BIA education offi}^{ce, increase tribal influe}^{nce in}
^{various matters, and}^req^{uire re}^p^{orts to Congress on BIA s}^chool
^{construction needs.}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Education for Homeless}^{The McKinne}^{y-Vento Homeless}^{Assistance Act, P.L. 100-}^{77 as}^am^ended^{The NCLB ex}^{tends t}^{he Ed}^{ucation for Homeless C}^{hildren and}
^{Children and Youth}^{(McKinney-Vento), authorized th}^{e Education for}^{Homeless Children and}^{Youth program, leaving most of t}^{he major provisions of the}
^{Youth program}^u^{nder Subtitle B}^{of Title VII. F}^{ormula grants we}^re^{made to}^{program in}^{place. In}^{particular, th}^{e key progra}^{m policy states that}
^{states in p}^{roportion to ESEA Title I-A grants to L}^{EAs. States were}^“^homeles^snes^{s alone is n}^{ot sufficient reason}^{to separate}^student^{s fro}^m
^{required to}^{use f}^{unds according t}^o^{a state plan to en}^sure^that^hom^eless^{the mainstrea}^{m sc}^{hool environment.” The state gra}^{nt form}^{ula is}
^{children and yout}^{h ha}^{ve access}^t^o^{a free, app}^{ropriate education e}^{qual to}^{based on allocations made under}^{ESEA Title I, Part A grants to}
^{that provided to other c}^{hildren, and to remove existing}^barriers^to^{LEAs, exce}^{pt t}^{hat no state}^{shall r}^{eceive less than t}^{he g}^{reater of (a)}
^{enrollment and educational servi}^{ces for homeless c}^{hildren and yo}^uth.^$15^0,00^{0; (b) one-fou}^{rth of}^{1% o}^f^{the total ap}^{propriation; and (c)}
^{The previous}^{program discourag}^{ed but did not p}^{rohibit the}^{use of}^funds^{the amou}^{nt the}^{state received in}^FY2001.^Each^{state m}^{ust allocate}^{at least 75%}^{of its grant to L}^EAs,^{except t}^{hat it ca}^{n retain}^{up to}
^{for separate}^{schools or program}^s^{for the}^{homeless. The stateme}^nt^of^{50% if it is f}^{unded at t}^{he minimu}^{m state gra}^{nt level.}
^{policy said that “...}^homelessness^{alone should not be a}^{sufficient reason}^to
^{separate st}^udents^{from t}^{he mains}^{tream sc}^{hool environment ...” LE}^As^{With certain ex}^{ceptions for}^healt^{h and saf}^{ety emerg}^{encies, states}
^{were re}^{quired to use}^fu^{nds to pr}^{ovide services to homeless children and}^{are prohibited f}^{rom using}^fu^{nds f}^{or either a se}^{parate sc}^{hool or}
^{youth compa}^{rable to services}^pr^{ovided to}^{other children, and, “t}^{o the}^separate^{program within}^{a sc}^hool^{. However, a “grandfath}^{er” claus}^e
^{maximum e}^xtent^{possible,” throu}^{gh existing}^{programs a}^{nd mec}^han^isms^{allows the continuation of fu}^ndin^{g for separat}^{e sc}^{hools that were in}
^{that integrate}^{homeless and}^nonh^{omeless students. States were}^re^quired^{operation in FY20}^{00 in}^{four s}^peci^{fied counties}^{—San Joaqui}^n,
^{to distribute at least 95}^{% of t}^{heir grants to L}^{EAs, exce}^{pt t}^{hat the}^y^could^{Orange, and San}^{Diego Counties in California, and Maricopa}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{retain at the}^{state level up}^{to 10}⁰^%^{of the amo}^{unt t}^{hey re}^{ceived u}^nder^{County in Arizona. States and L}^E^{As must as}^sure^that^homeless
^g/w^{the p}^{rogram in FY19}^90.^{children and yout}^{h, including u}ⁿ^a^{ccompanied youth, ca}^{n en}^{roll and}
^s^.or^{obtain services com}^{parable to th}^{ose provided other children a}^nd^youth.
^le^ak
^{Fund for Im}^proveme^{nt of}^{ESEA Title X-A authorized both}^{grants for a}^{wide variety of “nati}^onally^{The FIE is rea}^{uthorized as ESEA}^{Title V}^,^{Part D. This Part retains a}
^://wiki^{Education (FIE)}^{significant” educational activities,}^{to be selected at the discretion o}^f^the^{broad authority for g}^rants^{at the}^{Secretary’s discretion, as well as}
^h^ttp^U.S.^{Secretary of Edu}^{cation, and grants for a}ⁿ^umbe^{r of sp}^ecificall^y^{authorized educational programs,}^such^{as an}^elementary^{school counseling}^{specific aut}^{hority for su}^{pport of}^s^{pecific educational activities in 21}^Subpart^{s, all under a single aut}^ho^{rization of appropriations.}

^{demonstration program a}^{nd a}^partners^{hips in}^charact^{er edu}^{cation pilot}
^{project. In addition, a number}^of^{grants for K-1}^{2 edu}^{cation activiti}^es
^{beyond those m}^{entioned in ES}^EA^{Title X-A have been f}^unded^und^{er this}
^{broad authority in a}ⁿⁿ^{ual ap}^prop^{riations acts.}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Prohibitions against +federal}^{Both the p}^{revious version of t}^he^{ESEA and se}^{veral other stat}^utes^—^{In addition to previous pro}^hibitio^{ns against fede}^{ral control of K-12}
^control^{particularly the De}^partme^{nt of}^E^{ducation Organization Act (DEO}^{A) and}^{education, the NCLB: (a) states t}^{hat the}^{federal governme}^{nt may}
^{the Ge}^{neral Ed}^{ucation Provisions Act (GEPA)—have}^prohi^{bited federal}^a^{not “mandate, direct, or control a State, loca}^{l educational agency,}
^{control of numero}^{us as}^{pects of}^{K-12 education}^policy.^{or school’s curriculum, p}^rogram^{of instruction, or allocation of}
^{State or local resources, or mand}^{ate a State or any s}^ubdivision
^{thereof to spe}^{nd an}^{y fu}^{nds or inc}^{ur an}^{y costs not}^{paid for u}^nder
^{this Act;” (b) provides that}^{ED m}^{ay not “endorse, ap}^{prove, or}
^{sanction any}^cur^{riculum designed}^{to be used in}^{an eleme}^ntary
^{school or secondary school”; (c) provides that no state}^{“shall be}
^{required to}^{have academic conte}^{nt or stude}^{nt academic}
^achievement^{standards a}^pproved^{or certified by the}^Federal
^Governme^{nt, in order to receive}^assistance^{under” t}^he^{ESEA; (d)}
^{prohibits the}^{use of a}^ny^{ESEA f}^uⁿ^{ds to “develop, pilot test, f}^ield
^{test, implement, administer, or di}^{stribute a}^{ny fede}^{rally sponsored}
^{national test in reading, mathema}^{tics, or any other s}^{ubject, u}^nless
^{specifically and explicitly authorized by law”; (e) prohibits th}^{e use}
^{of any ESEA}^fu^{nds for a}^{ny “}^pur^{pose relating to a mandatory}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}^{nationwide test or certification of teache}^{rs or education}^parap^{rofessionals, including any p}^{lanning, development,}
^g/w^{implementation, or administratio}^{n of suc}^{h test}^{or certification,” an}^d
^s^.or^{prohibits ED f}^{rom “withholding f}^{unds f}^{rom any State ed}^ucational
^le^ak^{agency or local educational agenc}^{y if the State educational agen}^cy
^{or local educational agency fails to adopt a specific method of}
^://wiki^{teacher or}^para^{professional certif}^{ication”; and (f) prohibits the}^{“development of a nationwide database of pe}^{rsonally identifiable}
^h^ttp^{information on individuals involve}^{d in studies or other collections}
^{of data under t}^{his Act” (other t}^h^{an the data}^{base on migra}^nt
^{children and yout}^{h aut}^{horized un}^{der the Migra}^{nt Ed}^ucation
^{program, ESEA Title I-C).}

^Provision^{Previous Law}^{No Child Left Behind Act}
^{Miscellaneous provisions}^{Not applicable}^{P.L. 107-1}¹⁰^{prohibits t}^{he p}^{rovision of Departme}^{nt of Ed}^ucation
^{financial assistance to any}^{state o}^r^{local educational agency or}
^{school which “has a}^{designated open for}^{um or a limited pu}^blic
^{forum,” and w}^{hich discriminates}^{against the Boy Scouts of Ame}^rica,
^{or “any other}^{youth g}^roup^{listed in Title 36 of the U}^{nited States}
^{Code (as a patriotic society),”}^{in providing equal access}^{to school}
^{premises or fa}^{cilities. At the same time, grantee agen}^{cies are}^not
^{required to s}^{ponsor Boy Scout tr}^{oops or other organizations}
^{affected by}^{this p}^rovision.
^{LEAs re}^{ceiving ESEA g}^rants^must^{provide to armed services}
^recruiters^{the sa}^{me access}^{to sec}^{ondary school students}^as
^{provided to postsecondary educa}^{tional institutions and prospectiv}^e
^employers.
^{Selected major provisions of}^{Not applicable}^{From the Senate-pas}^{sed version:}^{Mandatory f}^{unding at s}^pecified
^{the House- or Se}^nate-^{levels for Individuals with Disabili}^{ties Education Act (IDEA) Part B}
^{passed versions of}^{H.R. 1}^th^{grants to states; discipline p}^{rovisions for children with}^{disabilities;}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL31284}⁽¹⁰⁷^{Congress) t}^{hat wer}^e^not^{included in the}^final^{authorization for up}^{to seven}^stat^{es to eliminate a wide range of}^{program re}^quirem^{ents in}^retu^rn^f^{or increased accou}^{ntability in}
^g/w^legislat^ion^{terms of p}^{upil outcomes; and}^req^uirements^regarding^pest
^s^.or^management^{in sc}^hools.
^le^ak^{From both the}^{House- a}^{nd Senat}^{e-passed versions: Major}
^://wiki^performa^nce^bonuse^{s or san}^{ctions for}^states^.
^h^ttp^a.^{Both the DEOA a}^{nd other}^legisla^{tion have placed ex}^{plicit limits on}^{federal control or influence. The}^{DEOA p}^{rovides that}
^{Section 103 ... The establishme}^nt^{of the Depart}^{ment of}^{Education s}^{hall not increase t}^{he aut}^{hority of}^{the Federal Gover}^nment^ove^{r ed}^{ucation or diminish the}^responsi^b^ility
^{for education which}^{is reserv}^{ed to the States and local school systems and other}^instr^{umentalities of the States.}
^{(b) No provision of a progra}^{m administered by t}^{he Secretar}^{y or b}^y^{any othe}^{r officer of t}^{he Depar}^t^{ment s}^{hall be constr}^{ued to aut}^{horize the Secretary or a}^{ny s}^u^c^h^off^{icer to}
^{exercise a}^{ny direction, supe}^{rvision, or control over the c}^urric^ulum^{, program of instr}^{uction, administration, or personnel of a}ⁿ^{y educa}^{tional institution, school}^{or school}
^{system, over any}^{accrediting agen}^{cy or association or over the sele}^{ction or content of library}^resou^r^{ces, textbooks, or other i}^nst^ructi^{onal materials by any ed}^ucational
^{institution or school system, exc}^{ept to the e}^xtent^aut^{horized by law.}
^{Almost identical provisi}^{ons are c}^{ontained in the}^{GEPA. Furt}^{her, p}^{arallel language prohibiting federa}^{l control of education syst}^{ems w}^{as adopted in the I}^{mproving Am}^e^rica’s
^{Schools Act (IASA, P}^{.L. 103-3}^{82), the most re}^{cent legislation which compre}^he^{nsively amended and}^{extended th}^{e ESEA}^{before e}^nact^m^{ent of th}^{e NCLB. That ve}^rsion^{of the}
^{ESEA, now re}^{placed by t}^{he NCL}^{B, stated that nothing in t}^he^ESE^{A shall be constr}^{ued to aut}^{horize the federal gover}^nment^{to “man}^d^{ate, direct, or control” a state o}^r^LEA’s
^curriculu^{m or allocation of state and local resources, or to incur a}^{ny costs}^{not paid for by aid u}^nde^{r ESEA}^programs.
^{All of these provisions remain in}^{effect afte}^{r enact}^{ment of t}^he^NC^{LB (including the p}^{revious ES}^EA^{provision, which is continued}^{in t}^{he revised Act).}

^Wayⁿ^e^C^.^Rⁱ^ddl^{e, C}^oordiⁿ^a^t^o^r ^{Gail McCallio}ⁿ
^Sp^{ecialist i}ⁿ^Ed^u^catioⁿ^P^o^lic^y^Specialis^{t i}ⁿ^{Social P}^o^lic^y
^w^rⁱ^ddl^e@^cr^s^.^l^o^c.g^o^v^,^7-⁷³⁸²^gm^cca^l^lⁱ^on@^crs^.^l^o^c.g^o^v^,^7-⁷⁷⁵⁸
^Rⁱ^ch^{ard N.}^A^p^ling ^D^a^vⁱ^{d P.}^Sm^ol^e
^Sp^{ecialist i}ⁿ^Ed^u^catioⁿ^P^o^lic^y
^dsm^o^l^e^@^c^r^s^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁰⁶²⁴
^Je^f^f^r^e^y^J.^K^u^eⁿ^zⁱ ^Ro^ge^r^W^a^lke
^Sp^{ecialist i}ⁿ^Ed^u^catioⁿ^P^o^lic^y^Specialis^{t i}ⁿ^Am^erican^In^diaⁿ^P^o^licy
^j^kue^nzⁱ^@^c^r^s.^l^o^c^.^go^v^{, 7-}⁸⁶⁴⁵^r^w^al^k^e^@^c^r^s^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁸⁶⁴¹