Following Education’s announcement of grant recipients, states were  given access to 12.5 percent of their award. States Reported Taking a Variety of Actions and Investing Considerable Resources to Be Competitive for Race to the Top Grants

Officials in 6 of the states we interviewed—including 2 states that received  an RTT grant and 4 states that did not receive one—reported making  policy changes to reform their education systems in order to be more  competitive for RTT. While state officials told us that  they had to invest a significant amount of time and effort in applying for  RTT, several officials in both grantee and nongrantee states also noted that  their state benefited from the collaboration and comprehensive planning  that the RTT application process required. Grantees Plan to Implement a Variety of Reforms and Selected Nongrantees Will Continue Some Reforms but at a Slower Pace

		Grantee States Plan to Use the Largest Share of Their Funds to Increase Teacher Effectiveness

Education awarded over $3.9 billion in RTT grants to states that  implement reforms in four areas: (1) developing effective teachers and  leaders, (2) improving the lowest-achieving schools, (3) expanding student  data systems, and (4) enhancing standards and assessments. Nongrantee States Expect to Continue Implementing Some of Their Planned Reforms

In addition to our interviews with grantee states and review of their plans,  we interviewed officials in 8 selected states that applied for—but did not  receive—RTT grants to find out whether they plan to continue their  reform efforts. Officials from the 8 nongrantee states we interviewed  expect to implement some of their planned reforms, even though they did  not receive RTT grants; however, they told us that implementation would  be slower than if they had received an RTT award and would involve using  other funds:    Officials in 5 of the nongrantee states reported moving ahead with  plans to implement teacher evaluation systems, but at a different scale  or pace than stated in their RTT applications. States Reported Facing a Variety of Challenges That Have Led to Some Implementation Delays

Officials in 9 of the 12 grantee states reported facing a variety of  challenges—such as difficulty identifying and hiring qualified staff and  complying with state procedures for awarding contracts—that led to  several implementation delays. For example, officials from Ohio  said they had difficulty hiring qualified people for their state-level RTT  positions. As a result of these challenges, states have been slow to draw down their  RTT grant funds. Education Provided Extensive Support and Is Monitoring States’ Activities, but Its Efforts to Facilitate Information Sharing Are Somewhat Limited

		Education Provided Extensive Support and Guidance to States during Early Implementation

Education provided support to states as they have begun to implement their  reform plans. For example, Education assigned program officers to each  state to help determine how the department could support the grantee  states as they implement their RTT plans. Education has also provided additional  guidance on specific challenges. Information sharing among grantees is also important. Education provided us with additional information about its program  review process and clarified some information related to reasons that  states may have delayed spending their first year grants. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are  listed in appendix V.

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To address our first objective about actions states took to be competitive  for Race to the Top (RTT) grants, we reviewed proposed and final  requirements for the RTT grant competition, as well as documents from  the U. S. Department of Education (Education), including the grant  application template, scoring guidelines, and guidance materials. Recovery Act: Status of States’ and Localities’ Use of Funds and Efforts  to Ensure Accountability.
Why GAO Did This Study

In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Congress required the U.S. Department of Education (Education) to make education reform grants to states. Education subsequently established the Race to the Top (RTT) grant fund and awarded almost $4 billion to 12 states related to developing effective teachers and leaders, improving the lowest-achieving schools, expanding student data systems, and enhancing standards and assessments. This report, prepared in response to a mandate in the act, addresses (1) actions states took to be competitive for RTT grants; (2) how grantees plan to use their grants and whether selected nongrantees have chosen to move forward with their reform plans; (3) what challenges, if any, have affected early implementation of states' reform efforts; and (4) Education's efforts to support and oversee states' use of RTT funds. GAO analyzed RTT applications for 20 states, interviewed state officials, visited 4 grantee states, analyzed states' planned uses of grant funds, and interviewed Education officials.

What GAO Found

State officials GAO interviewed said their states took a variety of actions to be competitive for RTT grants. Of the 20 states GAO interviewed, officials in 6 said their states undertook reforms, such as amending laws related to teacher evaluations, to be competitive for RTT. However, officials from 14 states said their reforms resulted from prior or ongoing efforts and were not made to be more competitive for RTT. While officials in all 20 states told us that applying for RTT took a significant amount of time and effort, several of them also said their state benefited from the planning that the application process required. Grantees plan to use RTT grant funds to implement reforms in four areas. The largest percentage of state-level RTT funds will be used to increase the effectiveness of teachers and leaders. GAO interviewed officials in 8 nongrantee states who said they expect to continue implementing parts of their RTT plans, though at a slower pace than if they had received a grant. Most grantee states have faced a variety of challenges, such as difficulty hiring qualified personnel, that have delayed implementation. As a result, as of June 2011, about 12 percent of first-year grant funds were spent, and some projects were delayed several months. Some state officials said they expect to spend more funds soon and may seek Education's approval to reallocate some first-year grant funds into later years. Education has provided extensive support to grantee states and has begun monitoring. Education assigned a program officer to each state to assist with implementation and has developed ways for grantees to share information, such as hosting meetings on specific initiatives. Some officials from nongrantee states said they would find this information useful, but they were generally unaware of these resources or were unable to access them.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Secretary of Education (1) facilitate information sharing among grantees on additional promising practices and (2) provide nongrantee states with related information. Education agreed with the first recommendation and partially agreed with the second; GAO modified that recommendation to clarify how Education can provide that information to nongrantee states.