ESEA Title I 2011 Allocations by School District
The interactive ranking table presented below shows data for each district including estimates of the population ages 5-17 years in families below poverty, counts of children participating in certain Federal programs and grant allocations by type: Basic, Concentration, Targeted, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (Title I, Part A—Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Education Agencies). Detailed descriptions of columns and subject matter are provided below the ranking table. Use the ranking table to rank/compare attributes of interest.
October 4, 2011. These allocations reflect the most recent appropriations, including the reduction specified in the continuing resolution. Approximately one-fourth of these amounts went to States on July 1. The remainder became available on October 1. The total funding is $14.153 billion.
Comparing Allocation Formula Estimates to Census 2010 Data. Title I funds are allocated based in part on 2009 population estimates prepared by the Census Bureau (sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education). See additional information. Compare the 2009 estimates for the population 5-17 years of age (in the ranking table below) to the Census 2010 population 5-17 years of age (and/or by single year of age) using the Census 2010 school district single year of age ranking table. For example, the ranking table on this page shows the Houston ISD, TX 2009 estimate for population ages 5-17 years as 266,882, whereas the single year of age ranking table shows the Census 2010 4/1/2010 population 5-17 years of age as 217,784. Compare the data for your districts of interest. Use the single year of age ranking table to see how your districts of interest will change between now and 2015 based on current patterns (independent of Title I issues).
ESEA Title I 2011 Allocations -- Interactive Ranking Table
Click column header to sort; click again to sort other direction.
Use scroll bar at right of table to scroll vertically. Use mouseover to view extended description.
See related Ranking Tables Main Page
var printpop = window.open(
,'dependent,location=no,toolbar=yes, menubar=yes, resizable=yes,scrollbars=yes,width=600,height=400'
var tmp = printpop.document;
var buttonp = new AW.UI.Button;
buttonp.onControlClicked = printPage;
//---------------------- copyright (c) 2010. Proximity. All Rights Reserved.
Ranking Table Usage Notes
Optionally sort on selected column or view only districts in one state then sort ...
Click on a column header to sort on that column; click column header again to sort in other direction.
Click ShowAll button to show all areas and restore full set of data view.
Click State to view metros in a selected state (click ShowAll between selections).
Find by Name: key in partial area name in text box to right of Find-in-Name button
then click button to locate all matches (case sensitive).
See related ranking tables.
Column header descriptions:
Metro -- Core-Based Statistical Area Code
CD -- Congressional District (State FIPS Code + CD)
Students -- Enrollment (UG, PK-12) 2009-10 based on U.S. Dept. Ed Common Core of Data
... preliminary data ... some districts showing as zero where data not yet available.
Population -- Total Resident Population
Pop5-17 -- Population Ages 5-17 years
$Pop5-17 -- $Total Title I Allocation per Population Ages 5-17 years
Pop5-17Pov -- Population Ages 5-17 years in families living in poverty
$Pop5-17Pov -- $Total Title I Allocation per Population Ages 5-17 years in families living in poverty
TANF - count in families with incomes above poverty level,
but who receive local assistance through Part A of Title IV Social Security Act Temporary Aid to Needy Families
Neglected - count 5-17 in institutions for neglected children that local governments administer
Delinquent - count 5-17 in institutions for delinquent children that local governments administer
Foster - count 5-17 in foster homes in which the foster parents receive payments from a state or county for the childrens support
$Basic - $Basic grant allocation
Bf - Basic grant allocation flag (see below: hold-harmless provisions)
$Concentration - $Concentration grant allocation
Cf - Concentration grant allocation flag (see below: hold-harmless provisions)
$Targeted - $Targeted grant allocation
Tf - Targeted grant allocation flag (see below: hold-harmless provisions)
$EdFin - $Education Finance Incentive Grants allocation
Ef - EdFin grant allocation flag (see below: hold-harmless provisions)
The sum of all four types of grants/allocations described below, and shown in the above table is $14.153 billion. The per capita item $Pop5-17 is computed as the sum of all four allocations divided by Pop5-17. The per capita item $Pop5-17Pov is computed as the sum of all four allocations divided by Pop5-17Pov. Value of -1 in the per capita columns reflects zero population for this category.
All area allocation records are retained in the ranking table even though many have zero values and are not for school districts (e.g., balance of county, subpart D, etc.).
Grants to Local Education Agencies (LEAs)
Basic, Concentration, Targeted, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (Title I, Part A—Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Education Agencies) constitute the core of Title I funding.
Basic Grants are the primary vehicle for Title I funding and are the easiest grants for which LEAs can qualify.
Concentration Grants provide additional funds to LEAs with especially large populations of low-income and disadvantaged children.
Targeted Grants provide additional funds to LEAs according to a weighting system, which ensures that the greatest proportion of funding goes to LEAs with the greatest number of low-income and disadvantaged children.
Education Finance Incentive Grants (EFIG) are made to states to provide LEAs with additional funding for low-income and disadvantaged children, the exact amount of which varies depending on measures of state equity and effort in funding public education.
The amount of funding that is allocated to an LEA or state, once all Title I’s provisions are considered, is its allocation amount. This amount is almost always different than the authorization amount because Congress does not appropriate funds equal to the total of all local and state authorized amounts.
Flag columns in the ranking table indicate when a LEA allocation was subject to a hold-harmless rule. The idea of a "hold-harmless" provision is that an LEA should not incur a loss of more than 15 percent of its preceding year’s Title I funds because of a drop in its eligibility count for a given fiscal year. The following provisions apply to the Basic, Concentration, Target, and EFIG Grants.
An LEA with an eligibility count less than 15 percent of the 5-to 17-year-old population is guaranteed a grant amount that is 85 percent of the LEA’s prior year amount.
An LEA with an eligibility count at least 15 percent but less than 30 percent of the 5-to 17-year-old population is guaranteed a grant amount that is 90 percent of the LEA’s prior year amount.
An LEA with an eligibility count at or above 30 percent of the 5-to 17-year-old population
Established in 1965 as a "War on Poverty" Program
Title I now funds programs intended to improve learning for students at risk of educational failure. Such students include "low-achieving children in our Nation’s highest-poverty schools, children with limited English proficiency, children of migrant workers, children with disabilities, Indian children, children who are neglected or delinquent, and young children and their parents who are in need of family-literacy services." Title I funds are intended to provide instruction and instructional support for these disadvantaged children so that they can master challenging curricula and meet state standards in core academic subjects.
The law does not stipulate how Title I funds are to be spent. Instead, Title I is an example of flexible funding that local and state educational agencies may use as they deem best. Title I funds are commonly used to support extended-day kindergarten programs; learning laboratories in mathematics, science, and computers; special after-school and summer programs to extend and reinforce the regular school curriculum; and other services to extend and accelerate academic progress. In addition, some Title I funds are also used to pay for additional teachers, professional development, and computers. The U.S. Department of Education is responsible for the allocation of Title I funds to local education agencies (LEAs), states, U.S. territories, and other educational agencies. Each year the department’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) determines the distribution of Title I funds, or the allocations of the various Title I grants. Once NCES has calculated all allocations, the department sends instructions for the distribution of Title I funds along with the actual funding to each of the states, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (which, for administrative purposes, are referred to as "state" governments and to the Outlying Territories: American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands (which are referred to as "territorial" governments). Upon receipt, the states and territories distribute their Title I funds to those educational agencies that NCES’s instructions designate as entitled to receive Title I funding.
For more information, see http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/annualreports/pdf/titleI20071030.pdf.
Proximity develops geodemographic-economic data and analytical tools and helps organizations knit together and use diverse data in a decision-making and analytical framework. We develop custom demographic/economic estimates and projections, develop geographic and geocoded address files, and assist with impact and geospatial analyses. Wide-ranging organizations use our tools (software, data, methodologies) to analyze their own data integrated with other data. Contact Proximity (888-364-7656) with questions about data covered in this section or to discuss custom estimates, projections or analyses for your areas of interest.