Grants to Improve Instruction

Grants to Improve Instruction
Name	Grants to Improve Instruction
Type	Educational grant program
Established	20th century
Administered by	Various federal agencies, state departments, foundations
Purpose	Support instructional quality, professional development, curriculum development, technology integration

Grants to Improve Instruction

Grants to Improve Instruction are competitive and formula funding initiatives intended to enhance instructional practice, professional development, curriculum design, and instructional technology in K–12 and higher education settings. Originating from a mix of federal statutes, state initiatives, and philanthropic programs, these grants intersect with policy instruments and program models from agencies and institutions across the United States and internationally. They mobilize resources from federal agencies, state departments, private foundations, and nonprofit intermediaries to support teachers, school leaders, and academic departments.

Overview

Programs modeled as Grants to Improve Instruction trace lineage to federal statutes and initiatives such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I, the Every Student Succeeds Act, and pilot programs authorized under the Higher Education Act and appropriation riders. Major funders include the United States Department of Education, state departments of education, the National Science Foundation, the Institute of Education Sciences, the Carnegie Corporation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Spencer Foundation. Grantees often include local education agencies, school districts, consortiums of institutions, charter school networks, teacher residency programs like those influenced by the New Teacher Project, and higher education departments aligned with standards from organizations such as the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation.

Eligibility and Application Process

Eligibility criteria typically require applicants to be recognized entities such as local education agencies, public schools, institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, and consortia that include state education agencies. Common procedural steps mirror federal Notice Inviting Applications with pre-application webinars, submission deadlines, competitive scoring rubrics, and budget justifications. Evaluation panels often include representatives from the Department of Education, state officials, program officers from NSF, peer reviewers from research centers like the American Institutes for Research, and advisory boards including members from the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Compliance obligations reference statutes, Office of Management and Budget circulars, and grant-making practices used by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

Types of Grants and Funding Mechanisms

Funding mechanisms range from formula grants and competitive discretionary grants to challenge grants, capacity-building grants, and continuation awards. Categories include professional development grants supporting teacher induction linked to models from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards; curriculum development grants aligned with standards bodies such as the Common Core State Standards Initiative; technology integration grants resembling programs promoted by the Federal Communications Commission E-Rate modernization discussions; and research-practice partnerships funded by IES or NSF. Multi-year awards and matching requirements reflect practices used by the Kresge Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, and state innovation funds administered by education departments in California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

Impact on Teaching and Student Outcomes

Empirical assessments often draw on randomized controlled trials conducted by organizations such as Mathematica Policy Research, the RAND Corporation, and the Brookings Institution. Outcomes reported include changes in instructional practice, teacher retention, student achievement on assessments like the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and college readiness indicators tracked by the College Board and ACT. Evidence synthesis reports from the What Works Clearinghouse and meta-analyses published in journals like Educational Researcher and Review of Educational Research evaluate effect sizes for interventions ranging from content-focused professional development to school-level instructional coaching inspired by models from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Administration, Accountability, and Evaluation

Administration typically involves grant officers, program specialists, fiscal officers, and monitoring visits coordinated by agencies including the Department of Education, state education agencies, and nonprofit intermediaries such as Teach For America’s alumni networks or regional education laboratories. Accountability mechanisms include performance measures, logic models, interim progress reports, audited financial statements, and evaluation contracts with research organizations like SRI International, WestEd, and Abt Associates. Legal and oversight frameworks reference audits by the Government Accountability Office, OMB guidance, and compliance requirements analogous to those in federal grant programs overseen by the Office of Inspector General.

Case Studies and Notable Programs

Notable examples include district-level instructional grants in Boston Public Schools, Los Angeles Unified School District pilot initiatives, the Chicago Public Schools instructional coaching partnerships, state grant competitions in Massachusetts and North Carolina, and higher education curriculum innovation projects at institutions such as Harvard University, Stanford University, and the University of Michigan. Philanthropic-backed initiatives include projects supported by the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation’s urban school grants, and collaborative networks formed by the Annenberg Foundation and Wallace Foundation. Evaluations of programs in Philadelphia, New York City, and Denver featured in reports by the RAND Corporation, MDRC, and American Institutes for Research illustrate diverse implementation models and mixed impacts on teacher practice and student outcomes.

Category:Educational funding Category:Educational programs in the United States