The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) makes children eligible to receive supplemental educational services. These children must be from low-income families and must be enrolled in Title I schools that have been identified for improvement. Getting this provision off the ground was no small feat, according to PSA case studies in a sample of districts.

The PSA study, under a subcontract with SRI International, looked at early implementation of the supplemental services provisions of NCLB through case studies of six states and nine school districts, focusing on ways that states and districts responded to the requirement to offer supplemental services. The study sample was selected to include states and districts that appeared to be relatively far along in the process, and so the sample not representative of implementation efforts nationwide.

Overall, the results showed states and districts trying to comply with the legislative requirement, but meeting mixed success:

• Administrators are striving to respond to the legislative requirement but the selection of service providers has been slow and uneven, and state administrators have not yet developed systems for monitoring provider performance.
  
  
• Most districts tried to inform parents of the availability of supplemental services but were challenged by high mobility rates among families. In addition, entering into contracts with providers was new territory to districts, as was managing outside service providers.
  
  
• Six of the nine districts targeted services for students based on their poverty level and achievement; two districts prioritized services for poor, low-achieving students without knowing how much money they had available or how many students their money would serve.
  
  
• The services offered by providers varied, with some offering detailed cognitive diagnosis and scripted lessons and others offering homework help. The extent to which providers coordinated with state or district standards was unclear. Most providers had not yet developed mechanisms for reporting student progress. Districts aimed to have clear accountability systems for provider performance in place the following year.
  
  
• Overall, parents said that they liked and trusted their children’s schools and teachers, even though the school had been identified for improvement. Most chose to apply for supplemental services rather than transfer their child to another school. Most often, they turned to teachers and schools for advice on supplemental services, with transportation being the deciding factor.

Data collection for the study consisted of telephone interviews with state administrators and site visits to the nine districts for interviews and focus groups with district and school staff and parents.

                                     Full Report