School Improvement Grants: Implementation and Effectiveness (Final Report)

School Improvement Grants: Implementation and Effectiveness (Final Report)

Published: Jan 18, 2017
Publisher: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance
Associated Project

Evaluating Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants

Time frame: 2010-2018

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences


Jaime Thomas

Cheryl Graczewski

Andrea Boyle

Rachel Upton

Courtney Tanenbaum

Jessica Giffin

Key Findings

Key Findings:

  • Schools implementing a SIG-funded intervention model used more SIG-promoted practices than other schools (23 versus 20, out of the 35 practices examined), but there was no evidence that SIG caused schools to use more practices.
  • Implementing a SIG-funded model had no impact on math or reading test scores, high school graduation, or college enrollment.
  • Elementary schools had similar improvements in math and reading test scores regardless of which SIG model they implemented.
  • Secondary schools implementing the turnaround model had larger improvements in math test scores than those implementing the transformation model. In contrast, reading improvements were similar for all models. The differences in math improvements across models might be due to factors other than the model implemented, such as differences between schools that existed before they received grants.
This report examines the practices used by schools that received School Improvement Grants (SIG) and schools that did not, examines whether SIG had an impact on student achievement, and examines whether student achievement improved more with some school intervention models than with others.

Follow the Evidence

Interested in the most current findings from Mathematica? Subscribe to our bi-weekly newsletter, Evidence & Insights, to stay up to date with the issues that matter to you.

Sign Me Up