Summary
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), most recently comprehensively amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95), is the primary source of federal aid to support elementary and secondary education. The Title I-A program is the largest grant program authorized under the ESEA and was funded at $18.4 billion for FY2023. It is designed to provide supplementary educational and related services to low-achieving and other students attending elementary and secondary schools with relatively high concentrations of students from low-income families.
Under current law, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) determines Title I-A allocations to local educational agencies (LEAs) based on four separate funding formulas: Basic Grants, Concentration Grants, Targeted Grants, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (EFIG). State grants are the total of the allocations for all LEAs in the state under all four formulas. The four Title I-A formulas have somewhat distinct allocation patterns, providing varying shares of allocated funds to different types of LEAs and states. Thus, for some states, certain formulas are more favorable than others.
This report provides FY2023 state grant amounts under each of the four formulas used to determine Title I-A grants. Overall, California received the largest FY2023 Title I-A grant amount ($2.1 billion, or 11.60% of total Title I-A grants to states). Vermont received the smallest FY2023 Title I-A grant amount ($42.8 million, or 0.24% of total Title I-A grants to states).
Introduction
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), most recently comprehensively amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95), is the primary source of federal aid to support elementary and secondary education. Title I-A1 is the largest program in the ESEA, funded at $18.4 billion for FY2023. Title I-A is designed to provide supplementary educational and related services to low-achieving and other students attending elementary and secondary schools with relatively high concentrations of students from low-income families. The U.S. Department of Education (ED) determines Title I-A allocations to local educational agencies (LEAs) based on four separate funding formulas: Basic Grants, Concentration Grants, Targeted Grants, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (EFIG). Grants to states2 are the total of the allocations for all LEAs in the state under all four formulas.
This report provides FY20233 state grant amounts under each of the four formulas used to determine Title I-A grants.4 For a general overview of the Title I-A formulas, see CRS Report R44164, ESEA Title I-A Formulas: In Brief. For a more detailed discussion of the Title I-A formulas, see CRS Report R48165, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as Amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): An Analytical Review of the Allocation Formulas.
Methodology for Determining Title I-A Grants
Under Title I-A, ED allocates funds to LEAs via state educational agencies (SEAs) using the four Title I-A formulas.5 Annual appropriations acts specify portions of each year's Title I-A appropriation to be allocated under each of the formulas. In FY2023, the Department of Education Appropriations Act, 20236 provided $18.4 billion for the Title I-A program and designated 35.13% ($6.5 billion) of Title I-A appropriations for the Basic Grant formula, 7.41% ($1.4 billion) for the Concentration Grant formula, 28.73% ($5.3 billion) for the Targeted Grant formula, and 28.73% ($5.3 billion) for the EFIG formula.7 After reserving funds for the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Indian Education, and the outlying areas as required under Title I-A, $18.2 billion was available for FY2023 Title I-A grants to LEAs.8 Once states allocate funds received from ED to LEAs, the amounts allocated under the four formulas are combined and used jointly by each LEA.
For each formula, grants are calculated using a formula child count, a formula child rate, and an expenditure factor. The EFIG formula has two additional factors that are used to calculate grant amounts.9
Formula child counts used to determine Title I-A grants for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico include children who are ages 5-17 and meet at least one of the following criteria: (1) living in families in poverty, according to estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau's Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) program;10 (2) living in institutions for neglected or delinquent children or in foster homes; or (3) living in families with income above the federal poverty level receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) payments.11 To obtain the percentage of children in an LEA that are formula children (also referred to as the formula child rate), the formula child count is divided by the total number of children ages 5-17 living in the LEA's geographic boundaries. The data on the total number of children also are based on SAIPE estimates. In FY2023, children in poor families accounted for 97.15% of the total formula child count, aligning with the first criterion listed above. Each element of the formula child count and formula child rate factors is updated annually.
In general, LEAs must have a minimum number of formula children and/or a minimum formula child rate to be eligible to receive a grant under a specific Title I-A formula. Some LEAs may qualify for a grant under only one of the formulas, while others may be eligible to receive grants under multiple formulas.
For LEAs in a given state, the expenditure factor for all four Title I-A formulas is equal to state average per pupil expenditures (APPE) for public elementary and secondary education, subject to a minimum and a maximum percentage of the national average, further multiplied by 0.40. State APPE is subject to a minimum of 80% and a maximum of 120% of the national APPE for Basic Grants, Concentration Grants, and Targeted Grants. That is, if a state's APPE is less than 80% of the national APPE, the state's APPE is automatically raised to 80% of the national APPE. If a state's APPE is more than 120% of the national APPE, the state's APPE is automatically reduced to 120% of the national APPE. For EFIG, the minimum and maximum thresholds for state APPE relative to national APPE are 85% and 115%, respectively. After adjustments, should they be needed, a state's APPE is multiplied by 0.40 as specified in statute.
After calculating LEA grant amounts, ED provides these amounts to each state. States need to make adjustments to these LEA grant amounts to account for LEAs for which ED is unable to estimate Title I-A grant amounts, such as charter schools that operate as independent LEAs or newly formed LEAs.12 In addition, each state must reserve Title I-A funds for school improvement and may also reserve Title I-A funds for administration and direct student services. Thus, the LEA grant amounts calculated by ED will likely be higher than what an LEA will actually receive after state adjustments and reservations are made.
Figure 1 depicts the composition of each state's Title I-A grant based on the share of total state funds received under each of the formulas. The figure also provides the amount of funding each state received under each of the formulas. The data in Figure 1 are also presented in Table A-1.
State grant amounts can also be examined based on each state's share of the amount of funds available overall and under each of the formulas relative to other states. Table 1 provides each state's grant amount and relative percentage share of funds allocated under each of the Title I-A formulas for FY2023. The latter was determined for each state by dividing the state's grant amount under that formula by the total amount of funding allocated to states for a given Title I-A formula. Total Title I-A grants, calculated by summing the state level grant for each of the four formulas, also are shown in Table 1, along with each state's relative percentage shares of total Title I-A grants.
In general, grant amounts for states vary across the Title I-A formulas due to the different allocation amounts for the formulas provided through the appropriations process and the characteristics of the formulas themselves. For example, with respect to appropriations for each of the formulas, the Basic Grant formula receives a greater share of overall Title I-A appropriations than the Concentration Grant formula, so states receive higher grant amounts and a greater share of their total Title I-A funds under the Basic Grant formula than under the Concentration Grant formula (Figure 1). With respect to formula characteristics,13 the amount of funding received under each formula is related, in part, to an LEA's, and by extension a state's, number or percentage of formula children. For example, while Florida and Nevada had similar percentages of formula children and identical expenditure factors in FY2023, Florida had a larger population of children included in the formula calculations than Nevada and, therefore, received a higher grant amount and larger share of Title I-A funds in FY2023 (Table 1).
It is also possible for states to have similar numbers of formula children but have different expenditure factors, contributing to a lower Title I-A grant amount for the state with the lower expenditure factor. For example, Virginia and Indiana had similar numbers of formula children in FY2023, but Virginia had a higher expenditure factor. This difference contributed to Virginia receiving a Title I-A grant that was $45.9 million (16.03%) higher than the grant amount provided to Indiana (Table 1).
Different Title I-A formulas also have different eligibility requirements for LEAs to receive a grant (e.g., minimum number of formula children, minimum formula child rate), which affects which LEAs receive funds under a particular Title I-A grant formula, thereby affecting the total amount of funding received by a state under a specific Title I-A formula. In addition, the Targeted Grant and EFIG formulas use weighted formula child counts14 in determining LEA grant amounts. These differences can also affect total state grant amounts.
Overall, California received the largest total Title I-A grant amount ($2.1 billion) and, as a result, the largest percentage share (11.60%) of Title I-A grants. Vermont received the smallest total Title I-A grant amount ($42.8 million) and, as a result, the smallest percentage share (0.24%) of Title I-A grants (Table 1).
Within a state, the relative percentage share of funds received from each formula may vary by formula, as certain formulas are more favorable to states with certain characteristics. For example, in addition to the formula features discussed above, EFIG is generally more favorable to states with comparatively equal levels of spending per pupil among their LEAs.15 If a state's share of a given Title I-A formula exceeds its share of overall Title I-A funds, this is generally an indication that this particular formula was more favorable to the state than formulas for which the state's share of funds is below its overall share of Title I-A funds for the fiscal year being examined. For example, in FY2023 Florida received a higher percentage share of Concentration Grants and Targeted Grants than its overall share of Title I-A funds, indicating that the Concentration Grant and Targeted Grant formulas were more favorable to Florida than the Basic Grant or EFIG formulas. Utah, on the other hand, received a higher percentage share of Basic Grants and EFIG than its overall share of Title I-A funds in FY2023, indicating that the Basic Grant and EFIG formulas are more favorable to Utah than the Concentration Grant or Targeted Grant formulas may be (Table 1).
Another factor affecting state grant amounts is the state minimum grant provision included in each of the four Title I-A formulas. The minimum grant provisions applicable to each of the Title I-A formulas provide states with different minimum shares of the funds allocated under the respective formulas. The highest minimum state grant shares are provided under Targeted Grants and EFIG and lower minimum state grant shares are provided under Basic Grants and Concentration Grants. This is evident in the shares of each Title I-A formula grant provided to the states that received a minimum grant under all four formulas in FY2023 (Alaska, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming).16 Each of these states received a higher share of the total available funds under the Targeted Grant and EFIG formulas than under the Basic Grant or Concentration Grant formulas. As a state may receive a state minimum grant amount under any or all of the formulas, Table 1 indicates which states received a minimum grant under each of the Title I-A formulas.
| Figure 1 . FY2023 Title I-A State Grants by Amount and Share of Grant Provided Under Each Formula |
(figure is interactive in the HTML version of this report)
| STATE | TOTAL ALLOCATION ($thousands) |
% OF STATE'S TOTAL ALLOCATION |
|---|---|---|
| All States | $18,179,602 | |
| Alabama | $303,246 | |
| Alaska | $53,818 | |
| Arizona | $356,281 | |
| Arkansas | $177,372 | |
| California | $2,108,516 | |
| Colorado | $187,782 | |
| Connecticut | $156,414 | |
| Delaware | $58,187 | |
| District of Columbia | $61,296 | |
| Florida | $1,037,800 | |
| Georgia | $674,982 | |
| Hawaii | $73,084 | |
| Idaho | $62,701 | |
| Illinois | $766,836 | |
| Indiana | $286,422 | |
| Iowa | $114,425 | |
| Kansas | $120,784 | |
| Kentucky | $276,219 | |
| Louisiana | $404,062 | |
| Maine | $62,310 | |
| Maryland | $354,313 | |
| Massachusetts | $290,494 | |
| Michigan | $530,826 | |
| Minnesota | $188,504 | |
| Mississippi | $233,873 | |
| Missouri | $273,962 | |
| Montana | $57,694 | |
| Nebraska | $80,473 | |
| Nevada | $173,053 | |
| New Hampshire | $52,870 | |
| New Jersey | $465,623 | |
| New Mexico | $140,631 | |
| New York | $1,454,590 | |
| North Carolina | $523,159 | |
| North Dakota | $49,280 | |
| Ohio | $654,440 | |
| Oklahoma | $224,659 | |
| Oregon | $164,133 | |
| Pennsylvania | $762,332 | |
| Puerto Rico | $447,701 | |
| Rhode Island | $61,608 | |
| South Carolina | $285,173 | |
| South Dakota | $57,246 | |
| Tennessee | $346,346 | |
| Texas | $1,813,228 | |
| Utah | $78,722 | |
| Vermont | $42,812 | |
| Virginia | $332,344 | |
| Washington | $304,013 | |
| West Virginia | $105,342 | |
| Wisconsin | $242,679 | |
| Wyoming | $44,940 |
Source: Figure prepared by CRS based on unpublished data provided by the U.S. Department of Education (ED), Budget Service. FY2023 Title I-A grant amounts were calculated by ED using the most current data available. Percentage shares of state grant FY2023 allocation amounts from each formula were calculated by CRS.
Notes: The percentages represented by the bars for each state show the share of a state's total Title I-A funding being provided under each of the four Title I-A formulas. Thus, across states the same percentage of funds being provided by a particular Title I-A formula may not correspond to an identical dollar amount of funds being provided by that formula to the relevant states. Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Percentages were calculated based on unrounded numbers. Amounts shown in the figure only reflect Title I-A funds provided to states. These amounts are determined after funds have been reserved from the total Title I-A appropriation ($18.4 billion) for the Census Bureau, Bureau of Indian Education, and outlying areas. For the purposes of Title I-A, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are considered states. See Table A-1 for further detail on amounts and shares of state grants provided under each formula.
Table 1. FY2023 Title I-A State Grants, and Percentage Shares of Funds Received Under Each Title I-A Formula Relative to All States
(dollars in thousands)
|
State |
Basic Grants |
Concentration Grants |
Targeted Grants |
EFIG |
Total Title I-A Grants |
|||||
|
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total Amount Available for State Grants |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total Amount Available for State Grants |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total Amount Available for State Grants |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total Amount Available for State Grants |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total Amount Available for State Grants |
|
|
Total, All States |
$6,383,403 |
100% |
$1,347,316 |
100% |
$5,224,442 |
100% |
$5,224,442 |
100% |
$18,179,602 |
100% |
|
Alabama |
$105,031 |
1.65% |
$25,648 |
1.90% |
$83,237 |
1.59% |
$89,330 |
1.71% |
$303,246 |
1.67% |
|
Alaska |
$17,744a |
0.28% |
$2,391a |
0.18% |
$16,894a |
0.32% |
$16,789a |
0.32% |
$53,818 |
0.30% |
|
Arizona |
$129,354 |
2.03% |
$26,280 |
1.95% |
$99,588 |
1.91% |
$101,059 |
1.93% |
$356,281 |
1.96% |
|
Arkansas |
$63,737 |
1.00% |
$14,575 |
1.08% |
$44,143 |
0.84% |
$54,917 |
1.05% |
$177,372 |
0.98% |
|
California |
$752,709 |
11.79% |
$153,941 |
11.43% |
$628,315 |
12.03% |
$573,552 |
10.98% |
$2,108,516 |
11.60% |
|
Colorado |
$70,744 |
1.11% |
$11,389 |
0.85% |
$51,069 |
0.98% |
$54,581 |
1.04% |
$187,782 |
1.03% |
|
Connecticut |
$60,036 |
0.94% |
$10,895 |
0.81% |
$36,595 |
0.70% |
$48,889 |
0.94% |
$156,414 |
0.86% |
|
Delaware |
$18,238 |
0.29% |
$3,378a |
0.25% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$58,187 |
0.32% |
|
District of Columbia |
$18,271 |
0.29% |
$4,785 |
0.36% |
$19,954 |
0.38% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$61,296 |
0.34% |
|
Florida |
$328,837 |
5.15% |
$83,403 |
6.19% |
$343,721 |
6.58% |
$281,840 |
5.39% |
$1,037,800 |
5.71% |
|
Georgia |
$231,331 |
3.62% |
$55,087 |
4.09% |
$203,554 |
3.90% |
$185,010 |
3.54% |
$674,982 |
3.71% |
|
Hawaii |
$23,495 |
0.37% |
$5,030 |
0.37% |
$22,274 |
0.43% |
$22,285 |
0.43% |
$73,084 |
0.40% |
|
Idaho |
$23,236 |
0.36% |
$2,894a |
0.21% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$62,701 |
0.34% |
|
Illinois |
$277,233 |
4.34% |
$54,680 |
4.06% |
$222,887 |
4.27% |
$212,036 |
4.06% |
$766,836 |
4.22% |
|
Indiana |
$107,412 |
1.68% |
$20,904 |
1.55% |
$72,218 |
1.38% |
$85,889 |
1.64% |
$286,422 |
1.58% |
|
Iowa |
$44,168 |
0.69% |
$6,811 |
0.51% |
$24,911 |
0.48% |
$38,535 |
0.74% |
$114,425 |
0.63% |
|
Kansas |
$46,133 |
0.72% |
$8,389 |
0.62% |
$28,963 |
0.55% |
$37,298 |
0.71% |
$120,784 |
0.66% |
|
Kentucky |
$96,741 |
1.52% |
$23,187 |
1.72% |
$73,835 |
1.41% |
$82,456 |
1.58% |
$276,219 |
1.52% |
|
Louisiana |
$135,500 |
2.12% |
$34,565 |
2.57% |
$121,465 |
2.32% |
$112,533 |
2.15% |
$404,062 |
2.22% |
|
Maine |
$21,954 |
0.34% |
$3,785 |
0.28% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$62,310 |
0.34% |
|
Maryland |
$114,901 |
1.80% |
$25,178 |
1.87% |
$111,465 |
2.13% |
$102,769 |
1.97% |
$354,313 |
1.95% |
|
Massachusetts |
$110,397 |
1.73% |
$18,929 |
1.40% |
$73,856 |
1.41% |
$87,311 |
1.67% |
$290,494 |
1.60% |
|
Michigan |
$190,743 |
2.99% |
$38,381 |
2.85% |
$140,297 |
2.69% |
$161,405 |
3.09% |
$530,826 |
2.92% |
|
Minnesota |
$74,230 |
1.16% |
$9,197 |
0.68% |
$44,624 |
0.85% |
$60,454 |
1.16% |
$188,504 |
1.04% |
|
Mississippi |
$81,845 |
1.28% |
$19,831 |
1.47% |
$65,226 |
1.25% |
$66,971 |
1.28% |
$233,873 |
1.29% |
|
Missouri |
$103,491 |
1.62% |
$21,334 |
1.58% |
$68,518 |
1.31% |
$80,619 |
1.54% |
$273,962 |
1.51% |
|
Montana |
$17,744a |
0.28% |
$3,378a |
0.25% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$57,694 |
0.32% |
|
Nebraska |
$30,120 |
0.47% |
$4,259 |
0.32% |
$20,783 |
0.40% |
$25,312 |
0.48% |
$80,473 |
0.44% |
|
Nevada |
$52,142 |
0.82% |
$13,216 |
0.98% |
$62,455 |
1.20% |
$45,240 |
0.87% |
$173,053 |
0.95% |
|
New Hampshire |
$17,744a |
0.28% |
$2,528a |
0.19% |
$15,904a |
0.30% |
$16,695a |
0.32% |
$52,870 |
0.29% |
|
New Jersey |
$173,999 |
2.73% |
$31,168 |
2.31% |
$118,377 |
2.27% |
$142,079 |
2.72% |
$465,623 |
2.56% |
|
New Mexico |
$47,688 |
0.75% |
$12,158 |
0.90% |
$39,447 |
0.76% |
$41,338 |
0.79% |
$140,631 |
0.77% |
|
New York |
$481,058 |
7.54% |
$108,725 |
8.07% |
$480,883 |
9.20% |
$383,923 |
7.35% |
$1,454,590 |
8.00% |
|
North Carolina |
$180,798 |
2.83% |
$44,181 |
3.28% |
$149,000 |
2.85% |
$149,180 |
2.86% |
$523,159 |
2.88% |
|
North Dakota |
$16,411a |
0.26% |
$2,143a |
0.16% |
$15,363a |
0.29% |
$15,362a |
0.29% |
$49,280 |
0.27% |
|
Ohio |
$235,832 |
3.69% |
$48,188 |
3.58% |
$171,378 |
3.28% |
$199,043 |
3.81% |
$654,440 |
3.60% |
|
Oklahoma |
$81,323 |
1.27% |
$17,854 |
1.33% |
$59,298 |
1.14% |
$66,184 |
1.27% |
$224,659 |
1.24% |
|
Oregon |
$62,477 |
0.98% |
$10,265 |
0.76% |
$39,215 |
0.75% |
$52,176 |
1.00% |
$164,133 |
0.90% |
|
Pennsylvania |
$277,296 |
4.34% |
$53,823 |
3.99% |
$214,174 |
4.10% |
$217,040 |
4.15% |
$762,332 |
4.19% |
|
Puerto Rico |
$152,616 |
2.39% |
$39,681 |
2.95% |
$126,248 |
2.42% |
$129,155 |
2.47% |
$447,701 |
2.46% |
|
Rhode Island |
$21,385 |
0.34% |
$3,652 |
0.27% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$61,608 |
0.34% |
|
South Carolina |
$99,300 |
1.56% |
$24,087 |
1.79% |
$78,110 |
1.50% |
$83,676 |
1.60% |
$285,173 |
1.57% |
|
South Dakota |
$17,744a |
0.28% |
$2,931a |
0.22% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$18,286a |
0.35% |
$57,246 |
0.31% |
|
Tennessee |
$121,294 |
1.90% |
$27,954 |
2.07% |
$96,690 |
1.85% |
$100,409 |
1.92% |
$346,346 |
1.91% |
|
Texas |
$621,205 |
9.73% |
$142,110 |
10.55% |
$532,781 |
10.20% |
$517,132 |
9.90% |
$1,813,228 |
9.97% |
|
Utah |
$31,227 |
0.49% |
$3,156a |
0.23% |
$18,544 |
0.35% |
$25,795 |
0.49% |
$78,722 |
0.43% |
|
Vermont |
$14,068a |
0.22% |
$2,029a |
0.15% |
$13,321a |
0.25% |
$13,394a |
0.26% |
$42,812 |
0.24% |
|
Virginia |
$123,798 |
1.94% |
$23,623 |
1.75% |
$91,812 |
1.76% |
$93,111 |
1.78% |
$332,344 |
1.83% |
|
Washington |
$116,640 |
1.83% |
$17,301 |
1.28% |
$71,613 |
1.37% |
$98,459 |
1.88% |
$304,013 |
1.67% |
|
West Virginia |
$37,825 |
0.59% |
$8,956 |
0.66% |
$25,494 |
0.49% |
$33,066 |
0.63% |
$105,342 |
0.58% |
|
Wisconsin |
$89,283 |
1.40% |
$13,134 |
0.97% |
$62,165 |
1.19% |
$78,097 |
1.49% |
$242,679 |
1.33% |
|
Wyoming |
$14,873a |
0.23% |
$1,947a |
0.14% |
$14,066a |
0.27% |
$14,055a |
0.27% |
$44,940 |
0.25% |
Source: Table prepared by CRS based on unpublished data provided by the U.S. Department of Education (ED), Budget Service. FY2023 Title I-A grant amounts were calculated by ED using the most current data available. Percentage shares of FY2023 allocation amounts were calculated by CRS.
Notes: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Percentages were calculated based on unrounded numbers. Amounts shown in the table only reflect Title I-A funds provided to states. These amounts are determined after funds have been reserved from the total Title I-A appropriation ($18.4 billion) for the Census Bureau, Bureau of Indian Education, and outlying areas. For the purposes of Title I-A, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are considered states.
a. The state received only a minimum state grant under this Title I-A formula.
Appendix. Comparison of FY2023 Title I-A State Grants by Amount and Share of State Grant Provided Under Each Formula
Table A-1. FY2023 Title I-A State Grants by Amount and
Share of State Grant Provided Under Each Formula
(dollars in thousands)
|
State |
Basic Grants |
Concentration Grants |
Targeted Grants |
EFIG |
Total Title I-A Grants |
|||||
|
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total State Grant |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total State Grant |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total State Grant |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total State Grant |
Grant Amount |
Percentage Share of Total State Grant |
|
|
Total, All States |
$6,383,403 |
35.11% |
$1,347,316 |
7.41% |
$5,224,442 |
28.74% |
$5,224,442 |
28.74% |
$18,179,602 |
100.00% |
|
Alabama |
$105,031 |
34.64% |
$25,648 |
8.46% |
$83,237 |
27.45% |
$89,330 |
29.46% |
$303,246 |
100.00% |
|
Alaska |
$17,744a |
32.97% |
$2,391a |
4.44% |
$16,894a |
31.39% |
$16,789a |
31.20% |
$53,818 |
100.00% |
|
Arizona |
$129,354 |
36.31% |
$26,280 |
7.38% |
$99,588 |
27.95% |
$101,059 |
28.36% |
$356,281 |
100.00% |
|
Arkansas |
$63,737 |
35.93% |
$14,575 |
8.22% |
$44,143 |
24.89% |
$54,917 |
30.96% |
$177,372 |
100.00% |
|
California |
$752,709 |
35.70% |
$153,941 |
7.30% |
$628,315 |
29.80% |
$573,552 |
27.20% |
$2,108,516 |
100.00% |
|
Colorado |
$70,744 |
37.67% |
$11,389 |
6.06% |
$51,069 |
27.20% |
$54,581 |
29.07% |
$187,782 |
100.00% |
|
Connecticut |
$60,036 |
38.38% |
$10,895 |
6.97% |
$36,595 |
23.40% |
$48,889 |
31.26% |
$156,414 |
100.00% |
|
Delaware |
$18,238 |
31.34% |
$3,378a |
5.81% |
$18,286a |
31.43% |
$18,286a |
31.43% |
$58,187 |
100.00% |
|
District of Columbia |
$18,271 |
29.81% |
$4,785 |
7.81% |
$19,954 |
32.55% |
$18,286a |
29.83% |
$61,296 |
100.00% |
|
Florida |
$328,837 |
31.69% |
$83,403 |
8.04% |
$343,721 |
33.12% |
$281,840 |
27.16% |
$1,037,800 |
100.00% |
|
Georgia |
$231,331 |
34.27% |
$55,087 |
8.16% |
$203,554 |
30.16% |
$185,010 |
27.41% |
$674,982 |
100.00% |
|
Hawaii |
$23,495 |
32.15% |
$5,030 |
6.88% |
$22,274 |
30.48% |
$22,285 |
30.49% |
$73,084 |
100.00% |
|
Idaho |
$23,236 |
37.06% |
$2,894a |
4.62% |
$18,286a |
29.16% |
$18,286a |
29.16% |
$62,701 |
100.00% |
|
Illinois |
$277,233 |
36.15% |
$54,680 |
7.13% |
$222,887 |
29.07% |
$212,036 |
27.65% |
$766,836 |
100.00% |
|
Indiana |
$107,412 |
37.50% |
$20,904 |
7.30% |
$72,218 |
25.21% |
$85,889 |
29.99% |
$286,422 |
100.00% |
|
Iowa |
$44,168 |
38.60% |
$6,811 |
5.95% |
$24,911 |
21.77% |
$38,535 |
33.68% |
$114,425 |
100.00% |
|
Kansas |
$46,133 |
38.19% |
$8,389 |
6.95% |
$28,963 |
23.98% |
$37,298 |
30.88% |
$120,784 |
100.00% |
|
Kentucky |
$96,741 |
35.02% |
$23,187 |
8.39% |
$73,835 |
26.73% |
$82,456 |
29.85% |
$276,219 |
100.00% |
|
Louisiana |
$135,500 |
33.53% |
$34,565 |
8.55% |
$121,465 |
30.06% |
$112,533 |
27.85% |
$404,062 |
100.00% |
|
Maine |
$21,954 |
35.23% |
$3,785 |
6.07% |
$18,286a |
29.35% |
$18,286a |
29.35% |
$62,310 |
100.00% |
|
Maryland |
$114,901 |
32.43% |
$25,178 |
7.11% |
$111,465 |
31.46% |
$102,769 |
29.01% |
$354,313 |
100.00% |
|
Massachusetts |
$110,397 |
38.00% |
$18,929 |
6.52% |
$73,856 |
25.42% |
$87,311 |
30.06% |
$290,494 |
100.00% |
|
Michigan |
$190,743 |
35.93% |
$38,381 |
7.23% |
$140,297 |
26.43% |
$161,405 |
30.41% |
$530,826 |
100.00% |
|
Minnesota |
$74,230 |
39.38% |
$9,197 |
4.88% |
$44,624 |
23.67% |
$60,454 |
32.07% |
$188,504 |
100.00% |
|
Mississippi |
$81,845 |
35.00% |
$19,831 |
8.48% |
$65,226 |
27.89% |
$66,971 |
28.64% |
$233,873 |
100.00% |
|
Missouri |
$103,491 |
37.78% |
$21,334 |
7.79% |
$68,518 |
25.01% |
$80,619 |
29.43% |
$273,962 |
100.00% |
|
Montana |
$17,744a |
30.76% |
$3,378a |
5.86% |
$18,286a |
31.69% |
$18,286a |
31.69% |
$57,694 |
100.00% |
|
Nebraska |
$30,120 |
37.43% |
$4,259 |
5.29% |
$20,783 |
25.83% |
$25,312 |
31.45% |
$80,473 |
100.00% |
|
Nevada |
$52,142 |
30.13% |
$13,216 |
7.64% |
$62,455 |
36.09% |
$45,240 |
26.14% |
$173,053 |
100.00% |
|
New Hampshire |
$17,744a |
33.56% |
$2,528a |
4.78% |
$15,904a |
30.08% |
$16,695a |
31.58% |
$52,870 |
100.00% |
|
New Jersey |
$173,999 |
37.37% |
$31,168 |
6.69% |
$118,377 |
25.42% |
$142,079 |
30.51% |
$465,623 |
100.00% |
|
New Mexico |
$47,688 |
33.91% |
$12,158 |
8.65% |
$39,447 |
28.05% |
$41,338 |
29.39% |
$140,631 |
100.00% |
|
New York |
$481,058 |
33.07% |
$108,725 |
7.47% |
$480,883 |
33.06% |
$383,923 |
26.39% |
$1,454,590 |
100.00% |
|
North Carolina |
$180,798 |
34.56% |
$44,181 |
8.45% |
$149,000 |
28.48% |
$149,180 |
28.52% |
$523,159 |
100.00% |
|
North Dakota |
$16,411a |
33.30% |
$2,143a |
4.35% |
$15,363a |
31.18% |
$15,362a |
31.17% |
$49,280 |
100.00% |
|
Ohio |
$235,832 |
36.04% |
$48,188 |
7.36% |
$171,378 |
26.19% |
$199,043 |
30.41% |
$654,440 |
100.00% |
|
Oklahoma |
$81,323 |
36.20% |
$17,854 |
7.95% |
$59,298 |
26.39% |
$66,184 |
29.46% |
$224,659 |
100.00% |
|
Oregon |
$62,477 |
38.06% |
$10,265 |
6.25% |
$39,215 |
23.89% |
$52,176 |
31.79% |
$164,133 |
100.00% |
|
Pennsylvania |
$277,296 |
36.37% |
$53,823 |
7.06% |
$214,174 |
28.09% |
$217,040 |
28.47% |
$762,332 |
100.00% |
|
Puerto Rico |
$152,616 |
34.09% |
$39,681 |
8.86% |
$126,248 |
28.20% |
$129,155 |
28.85% |
$447,701 |
100.00% |
|
Rhode Island |
$21,385 |
34.71% |
$3,652 |
5.93% |
$18,286a |
29.68% |
$18,286a |
29.68% |
$61,608 |
100.00% |
|
South Carolina |
$99,300 |
34.82% |
$24,087 |
8.45% |
$78,110 |
27.39% |
$83,676 |
29.34% |
$285,173 |
100.00% |
|
South Dakota |
$17,744a |
31.00% |
$2,931a |
5.12% |
$18,286a |
31.94% |
$18,286a |
31.94% |
$57,246 |
100.00% |
|
Tennessee |
$121,294 |
35.02% |
$27,954 |
8.07% |
$96,690 |
27.92% |
$100,409 |
28.99% |
$346,346 |
100.00% |
|
Texas |
$621,205 |
34.26% |
$142,110 |
7.84% |
$532,781 |
29.38% |
$517,132 |
28.52% |
$1,813,228 |
100.00% |
|
Utah |
$31,227 |
39.67% |
$3,156a |
4.01% |
$18,544 |
23.56% |
$25,795 |
32.77% |
$78,722 |
100.00% |
|
Vermont |
$14,068a |
32.86% |
$2,029a |
4.74% |
$13,321a |
31.12% |
$13,394a |
31.29% |
$42,812 |
100.00% |
|
Virginia |
$123,798 |
37.25% |
$23,623 |
7.11% |
$91,812 |
27.63% |
$93,111 |
28.02% |
$332,344 |
100.00% |
|
Washington |
$116,640 |
38.37% |
$17,301 |
5.69% |
$71,613 |
23.56% |
$98,459 |
32.39% |
$304,013 |
100.00% |
|
West Virginia |
$37,825 |
35.91% |
$8,956 |
8.50% |
$25,494 |
24.20% |
$33,066 |
31.39% |
$105,342 |
100.00% |
|
Wisconsin |
$89,283 |
36.79% |
$13,134 |
5.41% |
$62,165 |
25.62% |
$78,097 |
32.18% |
$242,679 |
100.00% |
|
Wyoming |
$14,873a |
33.10% |
$1,947a |
4.33% |
$14,066a |
31.30% |
$14,055a |
31.27% |
$44,940 |
100.00% |
Source: Table prepared by CRS based on unpublished data provided by the U.S. Department of Education (ED), Budget Service. FY2023 Title I-A grant amounts were calculated by ED using the most current data available. Percentage shares of FY2023 allocation amounts were calculated by CRS.
Notes: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Percentages were calculated based on unrounded numbers. Amounts shown in the table only reflect Title I-A funds provided to states. These amounts are determined after funds have been reserved from the total Title I-A appropriation ($18.4 billion) for the Census Bureau, Bureau of Indian Education, and outlying areas. For the purposes of Title I-A, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are considered states.
a. The state received only a minimum state grant under this Title I-A formula.
The interactive graphic in this report was created by CRS Visual Information Specialist Amber Wilhelm.
| 1. |
Title I-A is officially titled "Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies" in the ESEA, but it is commonly referred to as Title I-A. |
| 2. |
For the purposes of Title I-A, the term states includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. |
| 3. |
A CRS report on FY2024 Title I-A grants will be forthcoming when FY2025 appropriations data are available from ED. |
| 4. |
This report continues a series of annual reports on Title I-A state grants. Similar analyses are available for FY2015 through FY2022: CRS Report R47598, FY2022 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R47111, FY2021 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R47078, FY2020 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R46269, FY2019 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R45662, FY2018 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R44873, FY2017 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R44486, FY2016 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); CRS Report R44097, FY2015 State Grants Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). |
| 5. |
The analysis presented in this report is based on unpublished data provided to CRS by ED on November 15, 2023. As such, CRS is unable to present the specific underlying data used to determine Title I-A grants for a given state. |
| 6. |
Division H, Title III of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328). |
| 7. |
Individual grant formula appropriations may not add to $18.4 billion due to rounding. |
| 8. |
From the appropriation for Basic Grants, $5 million was reserved for the U.S. Census Bureau to provide the data needed to determine Title I-A grant amounts. The amount reserved for this purpose is specified annually in the Department of Education appropriations act. From the remaining funds, a statutorily determined 1.1% was reserved from the appropriations for each of the four formulas for the Bureau of Indian Education and the outlying areas. For the purposes of Title I-A, the outlying areas include American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. |
| 9. |
The two factors are the equity and effort factors. For more information about these factors, see CRS Report R48165, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as Amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): An Analytical Review of the Allocation Formulas. |
| 10. |
SAIPE produces single-year estimates of income and poverty for all U.S. states and counties as well as estimates of school-age children in poverty for all 13,000+ school districts. |
| 11. |
For a description of the TANF program, see CRS In Focus IF10036, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant. |
| 12. |
For example, during the 2021-2022 school year, there were 4,149 independent charter districts in the United States (ED, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2022, Table 214.30, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_214.30.asp). Independent charter districts are not included in the SAIPE dataset used by ED to calculate Title I-A grants, so ED is unable to calculate grant amounts for these LEAs. |
| 13. |
For more information about the characteristics of the Title I-A formulas and how they affect grant amounts, see CRS Report R45141, Analysis of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I-A Allocation Formulas: Factors, Design Elements, and Allocation Patterns. |
| 14. |
Under the Targeted Grant and EFIG formulas, weights are applied to formula child counts on the basis of (1) each LEA's formula child rate (commonly referred to as percentage weighting), and (2) each LEA's number of formula children (commonly referred to as number weighting). Under both percentage weighting and number weighting, a weighted formula child count is produced. The higher of the two weighted formula child counts for a given LEA is then used in the formula for determining grants. For more information about the Title I-A formulas, see CRS Report R44461, Allocation of Funds Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. |
| 15. |
This is due to the equity factor used in the EFIG formula. For more information about this factor, see CRS Report R44461, Allocation of Funds Under Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. |
| 16. |
Each of the minimum grant provisions included in the four Title I-A formulas have multiple minimum grant calculation formulas. By law, the calculation option that produces the lowest grant is chosen for each state, resulting in states that benefit from the minimum state grant provisions receiving different shares of the same Title I-A formula appropriation. |