Number of Low-Performing Schools by State in Three Categories (CSI, TSI, and ATSI), School Year 2018-19

 Complete report

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) gives state education agencies more flexibility than previous federal law to determine which schools in their state are low-performing. These determinations matter because school districts must use evidence-based strategies to improve these low-performing schools, and states must provide technical assistance and grant funding help districts and schools with school improvement. The evidence-based requirements of ESSA have presented a new set of responsibilities for both districts and states so the more low-performing schools identified, the greater the demands are on districts and states.

Under ESSA, states now identify three categories of low-performing schools: Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools, which have very low overall performance or poor high school graduation rates, and Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) schools and Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI), which have been identified due to underperforming subgroups of students. (See the box at end of this paper for fuller descriptions of these categories). 

In March and April of 2019, the Center on Education Policy at the George Washington University collected data on the number of CSI, TSI, and ATSI schools from state education agency web sites. In late April, we reached out to state education agencies to verify the numbers we found. This was no easy task so it is important to note that four states (AL, AK, HI, OH) did not respond to our request for verification; one state (OK) indicated that its list of schools would be available in late May; one state (ME) reported that they are in the process of submitting an amendment to their state ESSA plan and has not yet identified schools; and one state (Vermont) will make determinations in late 2019. 

The report shows state-by-state data on the total number of public schools; the numbers and percentages of CSI, TSI, and ATSI schools; and the total number and percentage of identified schools. 

When viewing the numbers in the table, please keep in mind these key points:

•                • _CSI schools must include the lowest--performing Title I schools1 (not the lowest-performing 5% of all public schools) AND public high schools that fail to graduate at least two-thirds of their students. Therefore, the number of CSI schools as a percentage of public schools may be more or less than 5%.

1 Title I schools are those that receive federal funds for educating children from low-income families through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended by ESSA. 

•                • _Some states have not yet identified TSI schools because ESSA states that these schools must have one or more subgroups of students that are consistently underperforming. Therefore, states that applied their ESSA accountability systems for the first time in SY 2018-19 do not have

•                • _A number of states have not publicly identified ATSI schools (schools in which the performance of any one subgroup of students on its own would lead to the school being identified as a CSI school).

•                • _The total number of public schools in the first column of the table often represents the number of public schools for which accountability determinations could be made, as opposed to all public schools in the state. For example, some states have very small rural schools where the number of students is too small to render a valid accountability determination, so they were not included in the total number of public schools.

Several observations can be drawn from the table:

•                • _Under ESSA, some states have identified very large proportions of their schools as low-performing or as having low-performing subgroups of students. For example, Rhode Island has reported information on all three categories and has identified 99% of its schools. States that have identified more than half of their schools include Florida (69%), Louisiana (68%), North Carolina (66%), Idaho (55%), Texas (53%), and Arizona (51%). Among this group of states, only Rhode Island and Idaho have published data on all three categories of schools. The numbers for Arizona, Florida, and Louisiana are only for CSI and TSI schools. North Carolina and Texas numbers represent CSI and ATSI schools.

•                • _Thirteen states have identified 10% or less of their schools as low-performing or as having low-performing subgroups of students under ESSA. These include Maryland (3%), Massachusetts (3%), Nebraska (3%), Virginia (4%), Alabama (5%), Connecticut (5%), Delaware (8%), Michigan (8%), New York (8%), North Dakota (8%), Pennsylvania (10%) and South Dakota (10%). Four of these states—Alabama, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Nebraska—have identified just one category, CSI schools. The percentages for Connecticut, Delaware, New York, North Dakota, and South Dakota represent both CSI and TSI schools.

•                • _ESSA requires that ATSI schools that do not show improvement after a certain number of years (set by the state) will become CSI schools and must take the required improvement steps for the CSI category. This could overwhelm the capacity of both states and school districts to serve a potentially large number of schools. One caveat, though, is that ESSA is set to expire at the end of 2020. If the Congress and White House act to reauthorize ESSA, then ATSI schools may not have enough time to reach the point when they become CSI schools.