How the supplement-not-supplant requirement can work against the policy goals of Title I
A Case for Using Title I, Part A, Education Funds More Effectively and Efficiently

How the Supplement-Not-Supplant Requirement Can Work Against the Policy Goals of Title I

Download PDF

Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, a federal program to provide additional assistance to academically struggling students in high-poverty areas, has long contained a provision called the “supplement-not-supplant” requirement. This provision was designed to ensure Title I funds were spent on extra educational services for at-risk students, but in practice, the rule as it is currently enforced can prevent school districts and schools from spending federal money on effective educational strategies. Complying with the supplement-notsupplant rule also carries an enormous administrative burden.

Spending Title I funds effectively on academically struggling and at-risk students can be difficult because the federal government currently tests for supplement-not-supplant violations on a cost-by-cost basis. In other words, school districts and schools must prove that each individual cost charged to Title I supports an activity the district or school would not have otherwise carried out with state or local funds. Any cost a school district or school would have paid for in the absence of Title I is not considered to be extra.

Federal administrative rules instruct auditors and other oversight personnel to presume that activities mandated by law, previously supported with state or local funds, or benefiting all students are, by default, not extra. As a result, it is difficult
for school districts and schools to:
• Implement comprehensive programs with Title I funds (please see page 13 for an example)
• Implement innovative programs with Title I funds (please see page 16 for an example)
• Manage administrative responsibilities in a way that minimizes burden (please see page 14 for more information)

This works against Title I’s goals of ensuring all students have access to a highquality education, and targeting resources effectively to make a difference where needs are greatest.

Title I was designed to be a flexible program, giving school districts and schools latitude to spend Title I funds on a broad array of educational services as long as they are consistent with the program’s purposes. The supplement-not-supplantrule as it is currently enforced, however, substantially limits how school districts and schools may spend their Title I funds, restricting the ways in which Title I can support at-risk students.

This paper briefly describes the origins of Title I’s supplement-not-supplant requirement and provides examples of how the rule affects state and local implementation of Title I programs. This paper also offers three options for reforming the rule:

• Replace the current “cost-by-cost test” with a test that focuses on the amount of state and local funding Title I schools receive to ensure such funds are allocated neutrally without regard to the Title I funds available to the school.

• Allow the U.S. Department of Education, and perhaps state educational agencies, to waive the supplement-not-supplant requirement as needed to promote effective and efficient educational strategies for at-risk students.

• Eliminate the supplement-not-supplant test altogether.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which the supplement-not-supplant requirement works against the goals of Title I and to offer suggestions for alternatives that better promote the responsible use of Title I funds.

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine

What's new on AEI

AEI Election Watch 2014: What will happen and why it matters
image A nation divided by marriage
image Teaching reform
image Socialist party pushing $20 minimum wage defends $13-an-hour job listing
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 27
    MON
  • 28
    TUE
  • 29
    WED
  • 30
    THU
  • 31
    FRI
Monday, October 27, 2014 | 10:00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
State income taxes and the Supreme Court: Maryland Comptroller v. Wynne

Please join AEI for a panel discussion exploring these and other questions about this crucial case.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014 | 9:30 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
For richer, for poorer: How family structures economic success in America

Join Lerman, Wilcox, and a group of distinguished scholars and commentators for the release of Lerman and Wilcox’s report, which examines the relationships among and policy implications of marriage, family structure, and economic success in America.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014 | 5:30 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
The 7 deadly virtues: 18 conservative writers on why the virtuous life is funny as hell

Please join AEI for a book forum moderated by Last and featuring five of these leading conservative voices. By the time the forum is over, attendees may be on their way to discovering an entirely different — and better — moral universe.

Thursday, October 30, 2014 | 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
A nuclear deal with Iran? Weighing the possibilities

Join us, as experts discuss their predictions for whether the United States will strike a nuclear deal with Iran ahead of the November 24 deadline, and the repercussions of the possible outcomes.

Thursday, October 30, 2014 | 5:00 p.m. – 6:15 p.m.
The forgotten depression — 1921: The crash that cured itself

Please join Author James Grant and AEI senior economists for a discussion about Grant's book, "The Forgotten Depression: 1921: The Crash That Cured Itself" (Simon & Schuster, 2014).

No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled today.
No events scheduled this day.