2006
2005
2004
This November 2021 report provides a summary of demographic data collected by the McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) Program. The report includes an examination of data collected for the 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 school years. Information on the number of students experiencing homelessness, their primary nighttime residence, subgroups of students, and race/ethnicity of students experiencing homelessness is included. To view this report please see Student Homelessness in America: School Years 2017-19 to 2019-20.
Archived editions of this report are available at https://nche.ed.gov/data-and-stats/.
To access data collected and published by the Department of Education, please see ED Data Express.
The specific file specifications relevant to the collection and submission of homeless student data are FS 118, FS 170 and FS 194. In addition, homeless students are a category set in the following files: Title I, Part A participation (FS 037), dropout and graduate/completer counts (FS 032 and 040), participation and achievement on State assessments in reading/language arts, mathematics and science (FS 175, 178, 179, 185, 188, 189), graduation rates (FS 150 and 151), and chronic absenteeism (FS 195). To access all file specifications for all EDFacts data files, please see the following page. For more information about the Department’s EDFacts Initiative, which includes data collection for EHCY, please see the following page.
LEA Homeless Student Enrollment Flat and Long Files
Since the 2013-2014 School Year, the Department has released LEA-level homeless student enrollment data with privacy protections applied. The files and documentation are available at the following page.
OESE periodically assesses States’ efforts in implementing Federal grant programs. By completing periodic assessments of SEA grant administration across multiple OESE programs, including EHCY, OESE is able to gather accurate information about States’ compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, as well as information about grant performance. OESE uses this information about State and local needs to provide high-quality, differentiated support to States.
Consolidated monitoring reports, monitoring protocols, and information about the consolidated monitoring process are available on the Office of School Support and Accountability’s (SSA) Performance Reports page. An SEA self-assessment tool and monitoring protocol for the EHCY program and other programs are also available on this . In searching for monitoring reports by State or program going back to 2007, please note that EHCY was included with reports for Title I, Parts A and D until 2014, only Title I, Part D in 2015, and only EHCY from 2016-2019.
November 6, 2001
Honorable Elizabeth Burmaster
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
P.O. Box 7841
125 South Webster Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53702
Dear Superintendent Burmaster:
I am writing to discuss the action plan entitled “Enhancing the Wisconsin Student Assessment System” that you submitted to my office on October 30. Because the plan addresses all of the changes needed to comply with the Title I assessment requirements, I agree to grant a two-year waiver of the timeline for completion of Wisconsin’s final assessment system. We understand that it will take some time to complete the revision of assessments to improve alignment with Wisconsin standards, and to complete the changes in policy and procedures needed to ensure an assessment and accountability system that includes all students; however, the revised assessment system must be fully implemented in the 2002-03 school year. I appreciate your cooperation in this endeavor.
The evaluation conducted by external peer reviewers and U.S. Department of Education staff found that, in order to fully meet the requirements of Section 1111(b)(3) and 1116(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Wisconsin must address the following tasks:
Page 2 – Honorable Elizabeth Burmaster
Our Title I office will monitor progress against the timeline you provided. Failure of Wisconsin to complete activities or products as scheduled in the first twelve months will make it necessary for this office to consider the other courses of action available to the Department. These actions include requiring Wisconsin to enter into a compliance agreement in order to remain eligible to receive Title I funds or initiating proceedings to withhold Title I funds from Wisconsin.
Our Title I office will be happy to work with you and your staff to achieve consistency between the Title I requirements and the Wisconsin assessment system. We wish you well in your efforts to improve school and student performance in your State.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed.D.
October 12, 2000
Honorable Inez Tenenbaum
State Superintendent of Education
State Department of Education
1429 Senate Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mrs. Tenenbaum:
It was a pleasure speaking with you about the outcome of the review of South Carolina’s final assessment system under the Title I requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We appreciate the effort required to prepare for the review and hope that the process provides useful feedback that will support your State’s efforts to monitor student progress toward challenging standards.
As we discussed, the evaluation conducted by external peer reviewers and U.S. Department of Education staff found that, except for the completion of the high school assessment, South Carolina’s assessment system meets the requirements of Section 1111(b)(3) and 1116(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. As we discussed, South Carolina’s timeline for completing the high school assessments in at least reading and math by Spring 2003 does not meet the Title I requirements for a complete assessment system by the 2000-2001 test administration.
You may request a waiver of this timeline to stay in compliance with Title I. In your request, please provide a detailed timeline and the steps South Carolina will take to complete the high school assessment. When completed, South Carolina will need to submit its high school performance standards, as well as evidence of: alignment of the high school assessment with the State’s content and performance standards, the technical quality of the high school assessment and the disaggregated reports for the high school assessment by the categories required by Title I.
As we discussed, you will provide additional information on the following aspects of the South Carolina system that will be, or already have been, addressed:
Please submit these items or your plan for completing these items by the 2000-2001 test administration to Mary Jean LeTendre, Director of Title I, within 30 days of receipt of this letter. We will work with you and your staff to support and monitor the implementation of your plan. When the required items have been completed, the assessment system will be fully approved.
If, over time, additional changes are made to South Carolina’s assessment system, you must submit information about those changes to the Department as required by section 1111(e)(2) of Title I.
Please note that the approval of South Carolina’s assessment system for Title I is not a determination that the system complies with federal civil rights requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Enclosed with this letter are detailed comments from the peer review team that evaluated South Carolina’s assessment documents. We hope this information will be useful to the South Carolina Department of Education in its efforts to implement a high quality assessment system.
Sincerely,
Michael Cohen
Enclosure
September 2, 2004
Honorable Sandy Garrett
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Oklahoma State Department of Education
Hodge Education Building
2500 North Lincoln Boulevard
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105-4599
Dear Superintendent Garrett:
I am pleased to approve Oklahoma’s assessment system under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994 (IASA). I appreciate your cooperation in making the changes in your assessment system to meet fully the IASA assessment requirements.
At the end of its timeline waiver, Oklahoma was to provide the Department documentation of a State assessment system that includes all students and measures higher order thinking, and a reporting/accountability system that reflects the achievement of all students and provides a valid representation of school performance relative to State standards. Peer reviewers external to the Department and Department staff have reviewed evidence of compliance submitted by Oklahoma. We have concluded that this evidence satisfies IASA assessment requirements for Title I.
We look forward to working with you as Oklahoma expands its assessment system to meet the new Title I requirements for standards and assessments under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). As Oklahoma prepares for the peer review of its standards and assessments under NCLB, I encourage you to review carefully the "Standards and Assessments Peer Review Guidance: Information and Examples for Meeting Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001." The purpose of this document is twofold: (1) to inform States about what would be useful evidence to demonstrate that they have met NCLB standards and assessments requirements; and (2) to guide teams of peer reviewers who will examine the evidence submitted by States and advise the Department as to whether a State has met the requirements. I have enclosed a copy of this document with this letter.
Please be aware that approval of Oklahoma’s assessment system for Title I is not a determination that the system complies with Federal civil rights requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Finally, please remember that if Oklahoma makes significant changes to its assessment system, the State must submit information about those changes to the Department for review and approval.
We have found it a pleasure working with your staff on this review. Congratulations on a fully approved assessment system under IASA. I wish you well in your continued efforts to improve student achievement in Oklahoma.
Sincerely,
Raymond Simon
Enclosure
November 6, 2001
Honorable Sandy Garrett
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Oklahoma State Department of Education
Hodge Education Building
2500 North Lincoln Boulevard
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105-4599
Dear Superintendent Garrett:
The purpose of this letter is to respond to Oklahoma’s plan and timeline for meeting the final assessment requirements of ESEA Title I as described in your letter of September 27, 2001 and Working Plan document sent to the Department on October 12, 2001. Oklahoma has requested that a two-year timeline waiver be granted to enable your State to complete its final assessment system.
We understand that it will take about two years for Oklahoma to
Because these plans will take additional time, I agree to grant a two-year waiver for completion of Oklahoma’s final assessment system. Oklahoma’s working plan shows that all of these will be complete by Summer 2003. After completion of the above actions and successful peer review, the Oklahoma assessment system can be approved.
Failure of the State to complete the activities as scheduled may make it necessary for this office to consider the other courses of action available to the Department. Potential actions include requiring Oklahoma to enter into a compliance agreement in order to remain eligible to receive Title I funds or initiating proceedings to withhold Title I funds from the State. However, with Oklahoma’s proved track record, I am confident none of those steps will be necessary.
I ask that Oklahoma provide quarterly updates regarding your progress in completing the remaining requirements. The actions included in Oklahoma’s plan must be completed no later than September 21, 2003. When all the action steps have been completed, please provide evidence of the completion to our Title I office. The evidence should include such items as policy guidance to local districts, technical reports, sample reports, or other documents that demonstrate the changes that have been made.
I am confident that Oklahoma will continue to advance State and local educational improvement efforts, improve student achievement, and maintain strong accountability for results. We wish you well in your efforts to improve school and student performance in your State.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed. D.
November 9, 2001
Honorable Michael J. Davis
Superintendent of Public Instruction
New Mexico Department of Education
Education Building
300 Don Gaspar
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501-2786
Dear Superintendent Davis:
I am writing to inform you that the U.S. Department of Education is granting a waiver of timeline to the New Mexico Department of Education in order to give your State additional time to meet the assessment requirements of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This waiver is for the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 school years and will expire on December 1, 2003.
The waiver is intended to allow New Mexico time to complete the following activities and to submit evidence of their completion to this Department:
This waiver will permit New Mexico to continue receiving Title I funds while conducting activities to further develop and implement your final assessment system. Before the waiver expires, you must provide the Department with evidence that the New Mexico Department of Education has completed the activities listed above.
Page 2 – Honorable Michael J. Davis
If, over time, changes are made to New Mexico’s assessment system, you must submit information about those changes to the Department as required by section 1111(e)(2) of Title I.
Please understand that this waiver of timeline for New Mexico’s assessment system for Title I is not a determination that the system complies with Federal civil rights requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
We look forward to New Mexico’s submission of evidence for full approval.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed.D
November 6, 2001
Honorable Vito A. Gagliardi
New Jersey Department of Education
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0500
Dear Commissioner Gagliardi:
I am writing to discuss the action plan for compliance with the assessment requirements of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, recently submitted by New Jersey (as revised November 1). Because this plan addresses all of the changes needed to ensure New Jersey’s compliance with the statute, I agree to grant a two-year waiver of the timeline for completion of New Jersey’s final assessment system. New Jersey has already made several of the changes required, but we understand that additional time is required to complete the changes in policy and procedures needed for full implementation of a complete assessment system that includes all students. The revised assessment system must be fully implemented in the 2002-03 school year.
I appreciate your cooperation in agreeing to make the changes in your assessment system that are necessary for New Jersey to meet the requirements of sections 1111(b)(3) and 1116(a) of the Act. Our Title I office will monitor progress against the timeline you provided. Failure of the State to complete activities or products as scheduled in the first twelve months will make it necessary for this office to consider the other courses of action available to the Department, including the possibility of initiating proceedings to withhold Title I funds from New Jersey.
Our Title I office will be happy to work with you and your staff to achieve consistency between the Title I requirements and the New Jersey assessment system. We wish you well in your efforts to improve school and student performance in your State.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed. D.
Assistant Secretary
Return to state-by-state listing
October 30, 2001
Honorable Glenn W. McGee
Superintendent of Education
Illinois Board of Education
100 North First Street
Springfield, Illinois 62777
Dear Superintendent McGee:
The purpose of this letter is to grant Illinois a waiver of timeline until December 31, 2002 for meeting the final assessment requirements of Title I as requested in your letter of June 29, 2001.
Illinois has completed most of the requirements for its grades 3, 5, and 8 assessments in reading, writing, and mathematics. This additional time will allow Illinois to complete its high school assessments, the Prairie State Achievement Examination (PSAE), in reading and mathematics for the eleventh grade. When these assessments are completed and administered in 2001, the State will need to submit documentation of its development of performance standards, inclusion policies, and participation rates for these assessments and reporting for individual students and schools and the use of results in the State’s accountability system. For the PSAE, you must also address alignment of content and performance standards with the assessments, including a description of your approach for ensuring alignment, and present a plan for addressing identified gaps or weaknesses, and evidence of technical quality of all components of the PSAE.
Failure of Illinois to complete the activities as scheduled may make it necessary for this office to consider the other courses of action available to the Department. Potential actions include requiring Illinois to enter into a compliance agreement in order to remain eligible to receive Title I funds or initiating proceedings to withhold Title I funds from the State. However, with Illinois’ proven track record, I am confident none of these steps will be necessary.
Page 2 – Honorable Glenn W. McGee
I ask that Illinois provide quarterly updates of progress in completing the remaining Title I assessment requirements. When all of the action steps for the final assessment system are completed, please provide evidence to the Department’s Title I office on or before December 31, 2002.
We will work with you and your staff to support and monitor the implementation of your timeline waiver. If you would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed. D.
November 13, 2001
Honorable Delaine A. Eastin
Superintendent of Public Instruction
California Department of Education
721 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Superintendent Eastin:
It was a pleasure meeting with your staff on September 28. We appreciate California???s continued efforts to meet the Title I assessment requirements. After reviewing the evidence and timelines submitted by California in May 2000 and additional evidence that we reviewed in September 2000, August, and October 2001, we have determined that several aspects of California???s assessment system do not meet the requirements of sections 1111(b) and 1116(a) of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965. However, on the basis of the additional information you provided, and upon your submission of an approvable timeline, I would be willing to grant California a timeline waiver in order to allow your State to complete the additional requirements.
As we discussed with your staff, California???s timeline for completing its final assessment system will exceed the 2000-2001 statutory deadline. To stay in compliance with the requirements of Title I, you must submit a request to waive the deadline. Please send this waiver request to me within 10 days of receipt of this letter.
In order to obtain full approval, California must complete the following tasks:
Page 2 ??? Honorable Delaine A. Eastin
Page 3 ??? Honorable Delaine A. Eastin
Enclosed with this letter are detailed comments from the peer review team that evaluated California???s assessment documents. We hope this information will be useful to the California Department of Education in its efforts to implement a high-quality assessment system. We will work with you and your staff to support and monitor the implementation of your timeline waiver. If you would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Susan B. Neuman, Ed.D
Enclosure