About Elementary & Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER)

Last updated 5 months ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.

The Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Funds represent a significant federal initiative designed to address the profound impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on elementary and secondary education across the United States. The pandemic created unprecedented challenges, disrupting traditional learning environments and necessitating substantial intervention to support students, educators, and school systems.

This funding marked a historic level of federal investment in K-12 education, aiming to stabilize and rejuvenate a sector facing immense strain. The overarching purpose of ESSER funds was to help schools safely reopen and maintain safe operations, to mitigate the detrimental effects of the pandemic on students’ educational progress and well-being, and to facilitate learning recovery.

Understanding ESSER Funds: The Three Tranches

The ESSER program was implemented through three distinct tranches of funding, each authorized by different legislative acts and with varying focuses and periods of availability.

ESSER I (CARES Act)

The first tranche was established under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, signed into law in March 2020. This initial package provided approximately $13.2-13.5 billion in national funding.

The primary focus was to address the immediate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on schools, enabling them to purchase essential personal protective equipment (PPE) and acquire devices necessary for remote learning. Funds could be used from March 13, 2020, to September 30, 2022, with some flexibility for carryover in certain cases.

ESSER II (CRRSA Act)

The second tranche was authorized by the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act, which became law in December 2020. This act allocated an additional $54.3 billion in national funding.

ESSER II aimed to provide further financial support to address the continuing impact of the pandemic on schools. Key priorities included mitigating learning loss due to school closures and addressing issues related to the digital divide. The availability period spanned from March 13, 2020, to September 30, 2023, with provisions for carryover.

ARP ESSER (ESSER III)

The third and largest tranche was established under the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act, signed into law in March 2021. This unprecedented package included approximately $122 billion in funding.

The primary goals were to help schools safely reopen and sustain safe in-person operations, and to address the significant impact of the pandemic on students’ academic progress and mental health. The legislation mandated that at least 20% of ARP ESSER funds be used to address learning loss through evidence-based interventions.

The period of availability is from March 13, 2020, to September 30, 2024, with the possibility of carryover until March 2026 with approved extensions.

The staggered release and increasing financial commitment across these three tranches illustrate the federal government’s evolving response to the pandemic’s educational consequences and the growing recognition of the long-term recovery needed.

Eligibility for ESSER Funds

Eligibility for ESSER funds was primarily directed towards State Educational Agencies (SEAs) and Local Educational Agencies (LEAs).

SEAs in the 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia were the direct applicants to the U.S. Department of Education. The Bureau of Indian Education and the Outlying Areas received separate funding allocations.

A key requirement was that SEAs had to subgrant at least 90% of their total ESSER allocation to LEAs. Eligible recipients included traditional school districts and charter schools that met the definition of an LEA under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

The allocation to LEAs was generally determined based on the amount of funding the LEA received under Title I, Part A of the ESEA in a designated fiscal year:

• ESSER I: typically based on FY 2019 Title I, Part A allocation
• ESSER II and ARP ESSER: usually based on FY 2020 Title I, Part A funding

Charter schools legally defined as LEAs were eligible to receive ESSER formula subgrants directly. New or significantly expanding charter school LEAs in 2020-2021 had specific eligibility considerations.

If an LEA did not receive a Title I, Part A subgrant in the relevant fiscal year, it was generally not eligible for a direct formula subgrant. However, the ESSER program allowed SEAs to reserve up to 10% of their total grant for various purposes, including addressing emergency needs.

While for-profit private schools were generally not eligible for direct funding, LEAs receiving ESSER funds had to provide equitable services to students and teachers in non-public (private) schools.

The reliance on the Title I, Part A funding formula suggests a deliberate effort to direct resources towards school districts serving a higher proportion of students from low-income backgrounds, aiming to mitigate educational inequities exacerbated by the pandemic.

ESSER Funding: Amounts and Distribution

Across the three tranches of funding, Congress allocated an estimated total of $190.5 billion for ESSER. The official COVID-19 relief data website of the U.S. Department of Education indicates a total of $189.5 billion within the broader Education Stabilization Fund.

The distribution to states was based on a formula that mirrored the allocation of Title I, Part A funds, meaning that states with a larger proportion of students from low-income families generally received a greater share of funding.

A key feature was the requirement that SEAs must subgrant at least 90% of their total allocation to LEAs through a formula-based distribution. The remaining portion (up to 10%) could be reserved by the SEA for statewide activities and administrative costs.

Within this SEA Reserve, specific set-asides were sometimes mandated, such as the ARP ESSER requirement that at least 7% of the SEA award be reserved for evidence-based interventions aimed at addressing learning loss.

Both the U.S. Department of Education and individual state education agencies often published detailed allocation tables specifying the amounts awarded to each state and breakdowns of allocations to individual LEAs.

The significant increase in funding from ESSER I to subsequent tranches reflects the growing federal commitment to supporting education throughout the pandemic. The focus on direct distribution to LEAs underscores an emphasis on empowering local educational agencies to address their unique needs at the community level.

Reporting Requirements for LEAs Receiving ESSER Funds

Accountability and transparency were central to the implementation of the ESSER program. All SEAs and LEAs that received funding were required to participate in the U.S. Department of Education’s annual reporting process. LEAs had to submit annual performance reports (APRs) to their respective SEAs, detailing how the funds were utilized.

These reports involved collecting various data:

• Fiscal information on expenditures and obligations
• Programmatic details about specific activities and interventions
• Data related to personnel, such as staffing levels

Reporting was generally conducted annually, although specific periods could vary depending on the particular grant and year. Some states imposed additional or more frequent requirements beyond federal mandates.

In some states, such as Pennsylvania, submission of the ESSER Funding Status Report was mandatory, and failure to comply could jeopardize eligibility for future funding.

To facilitate transparency and data collection, the Department of Education established the Education Stabilization Fund Transparency Portal. Grantees were required to log in to this portal to complete and submit annual reports.

LEAs typically reported detailed information on how funds were used across various allowable categories, including:

• Addressing learning loss
• Providing mental health support
• Investments in educational technology

For ARP ESSER recipients, there were additional reporting requirements related to Maintenance of Equity. These LEAs had to demonstrate they hadn’t disproportionately reduced state and local resources directed towards high-poverty schools.

ARP ESSER recipients were also required to:

• Develop and publicly post plans for safe return to in-person instruction and continuity of services (updated at least every six months)
• Create and post a plan outlining how they intended to use their funds

These comprehensive requirements highlight the federal government’s commitment to ensuring accountability and transparency in the utilization of substantial ESSER funds.

The Impact of ESSER Funds on Elementary and Secondary Education

ESSER Funds have had a wide-ranging impact on elementary and secondary education in the United States. Research suggests these funds have played a role in facilitating academic recovery for students who experienced learning disruptions during the pandemic.

Studies indicate that increased ESSER spending was associated with slight gains in math and reading test scores, and targeted investments in instructional interventions appeared to have a positive effect on student learning. However, academic progress has not yet fully returned to pre-pandemic levels for all students, particularly those in higher-poverty districts.

A key objective was to address the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on underserved student populations. While some academic recovery was observed among Black students and students from low-income backgrounds, pre-existing achievement gaps persisted and, in some cases, even widened. There is concern that the impending expiration of ESSER funds could disproportionately affect these vulnerable student groups.

ESSER funds have been instrumental in bolstering support for student well-being. Schools utilized these resources to enhance mental health services and provide crucial social-emotional support to students facing increased stress and anxiety. Many districts hired additional mental health professionals, including counselors, social workers, and nurses.

Beyond academic recovery and mental health support, ESSER funds enabled schools to:

• Invest in necessary technology and infrastructure upgrades
• Support staffing needs, including hiring additional personnel
• Prevent potential layoffs
• Expand learning opportunities through summer school programs, after-school activities, and tutoring services

While ESSER funds appear to have generated positive momentum in areas like learning recovery and student well-being, the full extent of their impact is still under investigation. The approaching “fiscal cliff” raises significant concerns about the sustainability of these gains, particularly for the most vulnerable student populations.

Criticisms and Concerns Regarding the ESSER Program

Despite the significant investment and positive impacts observed in some areas, the ESSER program has faced various criticisms and concerns.

One common concern revolves around the speed at which funds were distributed and subsequently spent by LEAs. Some districts encountered challenges in obligating their allocations by designated deadlines, potentially due to administrative hurdles and limitations in capacity to rapidly implement new programs.

Another significant area of criticism focuses on the effectiveness of spending, particularly in directly addressing learning loss and achieving intended educational outcomes. The broad flexibility afforded to LEAs resulted in diverse spending strategies, making it challenging to definitively assess the overall impact of the program.

A major concern is the anticipated “fiscal cliff” that many schools and districts are expected to face as ESSER funding expires. Many districts utilized these temporary funds to hire additional staff or implement programs that may be difficult to sustain once federal support ceases. This reliance on one-time funding for potentially recurring expenses has created anxieties about future budget deficits and potential cuts.

Concerns have also been raised regarding equity in how funds were ultimately spent. Some analyses suggest that within districts, wealthier schools may have disproportionately benefited from certain types of spending, such as staff recruitment. While higher-poverty districts generally received larger overall allocations due to the Title I funding formula, they might experience a steeper fiscal cliff due to greater dependence on these temporary funds.

Another criticism relates to the level of guidance provided by the federal government. Some argue there was insufficient specific guidance on how LEAs could most effectively spend funds to maximize positive outcomes, particularly in addressing learning loss. This broad flexibility, while intended to allow for localized responses, may have contributed to inconsistencies in spending priorities and effectiveness.

Finally, challenges in reporting and data collection have been noted. Gaining a comprehensive picture of how vast amounts of ESSER funds were spent has been difficult due to variations in reporting timelines and limitations in available data. The absence of standardized spending categories has further complicated efforts to compare the effectiveness of different approaches.

Innovative and Effective Uses of ESSER Funds

Despite criticisms, numerous schools and districts have demonstrated innovative and effective uses of their ESSER funds to support students and staff.

Addressing Learning Loss

• High-dosage tutoring programs providing intensive, individualized support
• Expanded summer learning and after-school programs
• Extended school days or years to provide more time for core subjects
• Investments in high-quality instructional materials

Supporting Mental Health

• Hiring additional counselors, social workers, and nurses
• Expanding mental health services and supports
• Implementing social-emotional learning (SEL) programs

Technology and Infrastructure

• Purchasing educational technology (hardware, software, connectivity solutions)
• Upgrading HVAC systems and improving air quality

Supporting Specific Student Populations

• Programs addressing needs of low-income students, students with disabilities, English learners, students experiencing homelessness, and foster care youth

Professional Development

• Training on sanitation protocols, effective use of technology, strategies for addressing learning loss, and methods for supporting student mental health

Innovative Approaches

• Creating community schools that provide integrated support services
• Developing career pathway programs in partnership with local employers
• Implementing telehealth services to expand healthcare access for students

These examples highlight the diverse and creative ways ESSER funds were deployed to address multifaceted challenges posed by the pandemic. Many districts prioritized evidence-based strategies for learning recovery and made significant investments in supporting social, emotional, and mental health needs, recognizing the crucial link between well-being and academic success.

Best Practices and Recommendations for Responsible ESSER Fund Use

As the period for obligating and spending ESSER funds draws to a close, it’s crucial for Local Educational Agencies to focus on best practices for responsible and impactful use of remaining resources:

Strategic Planning

• Align remaining ESSER spending with existing strategic plans and long-term educational goals
• Conduct thorough needs assessments involving all stakeholders to direct funds toward the most pressing student needs

Sustainability

• Prioritize one-time investments in infrastructure and technology over creating new recurring personnel costs
• Explore opportunities to integrate successful ESSER-funded initiatives with other federal and state funding streams

Evidence-Based Approaches

• Emphasize implementation of programs and interventions with proven track records in addressing learning loss and supporting student well-being
• Utilize data to monitor effectiveness and make informed adjustments

Equity Focus

• Ensure remaining funds address needs of students disproportionately impacted by the pandemic (low-income students, students of color, English learners, students with disabilities)
• Actively engage the community in planning and implementation

Transparency and Planning

• Communicate openly about how funds are being used and their impact
• Develop thoughtful plans for strategically spending down remaining allocations before deadlines
• Explore possibilities for extensions on spending deadlines for longer-term projects

By adhering to these best practices, LEAs can maximize the positive impact of ESSER funds during their remaining period of availability and lay a foundation for continued support of student success beyond the expiration of this temporary funding.

Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.