Education Stabilization Fund Programs Funded by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA: Background and Analysis

Congressional research reportJan 9, 2023

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Education Stabilization Fund Programs

Funded by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and

ARPA: Background and Analysis

Updated January 9, 2023

Congressional Research Service

https://crsreports.congress.gov

R47027

SUMMARY

Education Stabilization Fund Programs Funded

by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA:

Background and Analysis

From March 2020 through March 2021, the enactment of three laws provided increasing levels of

federal funding for elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education primarily through the

Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) in response to the national emergency related to the COVID19 pandemic as declared by President Trump on March 13, 2020. On March 27, 2020, $30.750

billion was initially appropriated for the ESF by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic

Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136). On December 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Response

and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA; Division M of the Consolidated

Appropriations Act, 2021 [P.L. 116-260]), was enacted, providing an additional $81.880 billion

in appropriations for an amended ESF. On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of

2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2), a budget reconciliation measure, provided an additional $169.609

billion for programs originally enacted as part of the ESF.

R47027

January 9, 2023

Rebecca R. Skinner

Specialist in Education

Policy

Joselynn H. Fountain

Analyst in Education Policy

Cassandria Dortch

Specialist in Education

Policy

The ESF is generally composed of three emergency relief funds: (1) a Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER)

Fund, which includes the Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS) program; (2) an Elementary and Secondary

School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund; and (3) a Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF). Funds were to

remain available through September 30, 2021, under the CARES Act; and remain available through September 30, 2022,

under the CRRSAA and through September 30, 2023, under the ARPA. The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA)

provides for an automatic one-year extension of these deadlines for the GEER Fund, EANS program, and ESSER Fund. All

ESF programs are admininstered by the U.S. Department of Education (ED).Each act specifies either a percentage of the

appropriated ESF funds to be made available under each ESF program after reserving funds for required purposes, such as

the outlying areas and the Bureau of Indian Education, or specifies the amount of funding to be provided to individual

programs.

A total of $277.7 billion was appropriated for ESF programs through a combination of discretionary and mandatory funding,

with $247.0 billion provided in FY2021 under the CRRSAA and ARPA. By comparison, in FY2021, total discretionary and

mandatory appropriations for ED were $77.2 billion.

GEER Fund

The GEER Fund received $2.953 billion under the CARES Act in FY2020 and $4.053 billion under the CRRSAA in FY2021

for a total of $7.006 billion. From the CRRSAA funds, the Secretary of Education is required to reserve $2.750 billion to

provide grants to states to provide services and assistance to private schools under the EANS program. While the GEER Fund

did not receive an appropriation under the ARPA, the EANS program received a separate appropriation of $2.750 billion.

Each governor may choose to use GEER funds not reserved for the EANS program to provide emergency funds to local

educational agencies (LEAs) and institutions of higher education (IHEs) serving students within the state for the continuity of

operations or to any other IHE, LEA, or education-related entity within the state for a broad array of purposes, including the

provision of child care and the protection of education-related jobs.

ESSER Fund

The ESSER Fund received $13.229 billion under the CARES Act in FY2020, $54.311 billion under the CRRSAA in

FY2021, and $122.775 billion under the ARPA in FY2021, for a total of $190.315 billion. State educational agencies (SEAs)

are required to provide at least 90% of the funds received to LEAs to be used for myriad purposes such as any activity funded

under various federal education laws, coordination of preparedness and response to the COVID-19 emergency, technology

acquisition, mental health services, and activities related to summer learning.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

HEERF

The HEERF received $13.953 billion under the CARES Act in FY2020, $22.697 billion under the CRRSAA in FY2021, and

$39.585 billion under the ARPA in FY2021, for a total of $76.234 billion. Subsequent rescissions reduced HEERF funding to

$75.481 billion. The HEERF is generally composed of three programs: (1) direct grants to IHEs, (2) minority serving

institutions (MSIs) programs, and (3) assistance provided through the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education

Program (FIPSE). The majority (90% or more) of funds under each act are awarded as direct grants to IHEs. A minimum

specified percentage of each direct grant must be used for financial aid grants to students; any remaining funds may be used

for specified institutional expenses. A portion (7.5%) of HEERF funds from each act is made available to MSIs. The

remaining HEERF funds are made available to IHEs through FIPSE. Grants under the MSI and FIPSE programs may be used

for financial aid grants to students and specified institutional expenses.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Education Stabilization Fund Overview and Appropriations .......................................................... 2

Funds for the Outlying Areas, the BIE, and Competitive Grants .................................................... 8

Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Fund............................................................... 18

Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS) Program ................................................. 21

Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund ......................................... 25

Equitable Services for Private School Students and Teachers Under the CARES Act ................. 34

Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) ................................................................... 37

Maintenance of Effort and Maintenance of Equity ....................................................................... 57

Reporting Requirements ................................................................................................................ 60

Continued Payment to Employees................................................................................................. 62

Definitions ..................................................................................................................................... 62

Tables

Table 1. Appropriations for the ESF and ESF Programs as Provided by the CARES Act,

CRRSAA, and ARPA ................................................................................................................... 5

Table 2. Summary of Reservations under the ESF as Provided by the CARES Act and

CRRSAA, and Funds for Similar Purposes Under the CARES Act and ARPA......................... 16

Table 3. Allowable Uses of GEER Funds Under the CARES Act and CRRSAA ......................... 19

Table 4. Allowable Uses of EANS Funds Under the CRRSAA and ARPA .................................. 23

Table 5. Summary of SEA Grant Reservation Requirements Under the ESSER Fund

Included in the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA ................................................................... 29

Table 6. Allowable Uses of ESSER Funds by LEAs Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

and ARPA ................................................................................................................................... 31

Table 7. Reservations of Funds Under the HEERF as Provided by the CARES Act,

CRRSAA, and ARPA ................................................................................................................. 39

Table 8. Percentage of Funds Allocated by Each Formula Factor For the HEERF Direct

Grants to IHEs Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA .................................................. 40

Table 9. Actual Reservations of Funds for the MSI Programs Under HEERF of the

CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA ............................................................................................ 41

Table 10. CRRSAA SAIHE Eligibility and Formula Allocation Methodology ............................ 44

Table 11. ARPA SSARP Eligibility and Formula Allocation Methodology .................................. 45

Table 12. Allowable Uses of HEERF by IHEs Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

and ARPA ................................................................................................................................... 49

Table A-1. GEER Funds, ESSER Fund State Grants, and HEERF IHE Grants Aggregated

at the State Level for the CARES Act ESF ................................................................................ 63

Table A-2. GEER Funds, ESSER Fund State Grants, and HEERF IHE Grants Aggregated

at the State Level for the CRRSAA ESF .................................................................................... 66

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Table A-3. EANS Program, ESSER Fund State Grants, and HEERF IHE Grants

Aggregated at the State Level for the ARPA .............................................................................. 68

Table A-4. Total GEER Funds, EANS Program, ESSER Fund State Grants, and HEERF

IHE Grants Aggregated at the State Level for the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

ESF ............................................................................................................................................. 71

Table A-5. Actual Grants to the Outlying Areas from ESF Funds Reserved Under the

CARES Act and CRRSAA, and from Funds for the Outlying Areas Under the ARPA,

for Programs Administered by ED ............................................................................................. 75

Table B-1. Obligation and Liquidation Periods for the GEER Fund Under the

CARES Act and CRRSAA ........................................................................................................ 78

Table B-2. Obligation and Liquidation Periods for the EANS Program Under the

CRRSAA and ARPA: Funds Used to Serve Private Schools ..................................................... 79

Table B-3. Obligation and Liquidation Periods for the EANS Program Under the

CRRSAA and ARPA: Funds Reverting to the Governor ........................................................... 79

Table B-4. Obligation and Liquidation Periods for the ESSER Fund Under the CARES

Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA ......................................................................................................... 80

Table B-5. Obligation and Liquidation Periods for IHEs Under the HEERF Under the

CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA ............................................................................................ 81

Table C-1. GEER Fund State Grants Provided by the CARES Act and CRRSAA ....................... 83

Table D-1. EANS Program State Grants Provided by the CRSSAA and ARPA ........................... 87

Table E-1. State Grants Under the ESSER Fund Provided by the CARES Act (ESSER I) .......... 91

Table E-2. State Grants Under the ESSER Fund Provided by the CRRSAA (ESSER II) ............. 94

Table E-3. State Grants Under the ESSER Fund Provided by the ARPA (ESSER III) ................. 97

Table E-4. State Grants Under the ESSER Fund Provided by the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

and ARPA ................................................................................................................................. 100

Table F-1. Estimated Allocations to IHEs Under the HEERF Provided by the CARES

Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA, Aggregated at the Institutional Sector Level ................................ 104

Table F-2. Estimated Allocations to IHEs Under the HEERF Provided by the CARES

Act, Aggregated at the State Level (HEERF I) ........................................................................ 106

Table F-3. Estimated Allocations to IHEs Under the HEERF Provided by the CRRSAA,

Aggregated at the State Level (HEERF II)............................................................................... 109

Table F-4. Estimated Allocations to IHEs Under the HEERF Provided by the ARPA,

Aggregated at the State Level (HEERF III) .............................................................................. 112

Table F-5. Estimated Allocations to IHEs Under the HEERF Provided by the CARES

Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA, Aggregated at the State Level ....................................................... 115

Appendixes

Appendix A. Grants to States, the Outlying Areas, and IHEs Under ESF Programs .................... 63

Appendix B. Obligation and Liquidation of Funds Under ESF Programs .................................... 76

Appendix C. Actual State Grants Under the Governor’s Emergency Education Relief

(GEER) Fund.............................................................................................................................. 83

Appendix D. Actual State Grants Under the Emergency Assistance for Non-Public

Schools (EANS) Program .......................................................................................................... 87

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Appendix E. Actual State Grants Under the Elementary and Secondary Schools

Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund .............................................................................................. 91

Appendix F. Estimated HEERF IHE Allocations Aggregated at the Institutional Sector

and State Levels for the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA ESF ........................................... 104

Contacts

Author Information....................................................................................................................... 119

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Introduction

From March 2020 through March 2021, three laws providing federal funding for elementary,

secondary, and postsecondary education were enacted in response to the national emergency

related to the COVID-19 pandemic declared by President Trump on March 13, 2020.1 The second

of these laws provided a higher amount of funding than the first, and the third provided a higher

amount than the second. The funds were intended to help the U.S. educational system “prevent,

prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” Funds were generally made available to states, local

educational agencies (LEAs), private schools, and institutions of higher education (IHEs) to

support the transition to remote learning, provide support services to students, protect educationrelated jobs, provide institutional support, and provide grant aid to postsecondary students.

On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L.

116-136) was signed into law. Included in the act was the Education Stabilization Fund (ESF),

which was created “to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus, domestically or

internationally.” The ESF was composed of three emergency relief funds:

1. a Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Fund,

2. an Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund, and

3. a Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF).2

It also included a reservation of funds from the total ESF appropriation for the outlying areas,3 the

Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), and a competitive grant program. The ESF, administered by

the U.S. Department of Education (ED), had an appropriations level of $30.750 billion for

FY2020 under the CARES Act.4 The act provided that these funds were to remain available

through September 30, 2021.5

On December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA; P.L. 116-260) was

enacted. Division M of the act is the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA). The CRRSAA reauthorized the ESF and provided

additional appropriations for it. The ESF continued to include appropriations for the GEER Fund,

ESSER Fund, and HEERF. From appropriations for the GEER Fund, the Secretary of Education

(hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) was required to reserve funds for the Emergency

Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS) program. The ESF also included a reservation of funds

for the outlying areas and BIE from the total ESF appropriation but not a reservation of funds for

1 The White House, “Proclamation on Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease

(COVID-19) Outbreak,” March 13, 2020, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-declaringnational-emergency-concerning-novel-coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak/; also at U.S. President (Trump),

“Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID–19) Outbreak,” 85 Federal

2 The acronyms used throughout this report are those utilized by the Department of Education in ESF-related materials.

3 The outlying areas are American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S.

Virgin Islands.

4 The CARES Act appropriations provided for the ESF are designated as being for an emergency requirement pursuant

to Section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

5 Section 421 of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), commonly referred to as the “Tydings amendment,”

provides that any funds appropriated for an applicable program that are not obligated and expended by the recipient

educational agencies and institutions before the end of the fiscal year shall remain available for obligation for one

additional fiscal year (e.g., through September 30, 2022, in this case). This extension of the period of obligation of

funds applies to the GEER and ESSER Funds.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

the competitive grant program enacted under the CARES Act. Under the CRRSAA, the ESF had

an appropriation level of $81.880 billion for FY2021.6 The CRRSAA provided that these funds

are to remain available through September 30, 2022.7

On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed into law the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021

(ARPA; P.L. 117-2), an FY2021 budget reconciliation measure developed in response to the

COVID-19 pandemic.8 It provided mandatory appropriations for the ESSER Fund and HEERF.9

It also provided a separate mandatory appropriation for the EANS program, which had been

initially authorized as a reservation of funds for the GEER Fund under the CRRSAA. The ARPA

did not provide additional funding for the GEER Fund. It also did not include funding for the

outlying areas or the BIE as part of the ESF.10 Under the ARPA, the ESSER Fund, EANS

program, and HEERF had a total appropriations level of $165.109 billion for FY2021. The ARPA

provides that these funds are to remain available through September 30, 2023.11

This report discusses the ESF and the programs initially authorized under it that were included in

the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA. The report begins with an overview of the appropriations

available for the ESF and the required reservations of funds under each act. It then discusses each

of the emergency education relief funds, including the EANS program. The next part of the report

provides an overview of the other provisions included in the ESF: maintenance of effort (MOE)

and maintenance of equity (MOEq) provisions, reporting requirements, continued payments to

employees, and definitions. The report also includes several appendices that provide information

on state funding under the GEER Fund, EANS program, and ESSER Fund, and funding

aggregated at the state level and institutional sector level under the HEERF based on ED’s

published grant amounts, as well as information about periods of obligation and liquidation of

funds and deadlines that apply to HEERF.

Education Stabilization Fund Overview and

Appropriations

The ESF was initially authorized by the CARES Act. Under the act, funds were reserved from the

total appropriation for grants to the outlying areas and BIE and for competitive grants. The

6 The CRRSAA appropriations provided for the ESF are designated as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to

Section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

7 The “Tydings amendment” provides that any funds appropriated for an applicable program that are not obligated and

expended by the recipient educational agencies and institutions before the end of the fiscal year shall remain available

for obligation for one additional fiscal year (e.g., through September 30, 2023, in this case). This extension of the

period of obligation of funds applies to the GEER Fund and ESSER Fund.

8 See the House Budget Committee report (H.Rept. 117-7) for a discussion of the context surrounding the ARPA.

9 ESF appropriations provided under the CARES Act and CRRSAA were discretionary appropriations. For more

information on the difference between discretionary and mandatory appropriations, see CRS Report R44477,

Department of Education Funding: Key Concepts and FAQ.

10 The outlying areas received an appropriation of $850,000,000 under Title II—Committee on Health, Education,

Labor, and Pensions—of the ARPA. The BIE received an appropriation of $850,000,000 under Title XI—Committee

on Indian Affairs—of the ARPA. Statutory language did not specify that the funds for the outlying areas or the funds

for the BIE had to be used for purposes authorized by ESF programs.

11 The “Tydings amendment” provides that any funds appropriated for an applicable program that are not obligated and

expended by the recipient educational agencies and institutions before the end of the fiscal year shall remain available

for obligation for one additional fiscal year (e.g., through September 30, 2024, in this case). This extension of the

period of obligation of funds applies to the ESSER Fund. At this time, it is unclear if it would apply to the EANS

program.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

remaining funds were then allocated to the GEER Fund, ESSER Fund, and HEERF. The

CRRSAA reauthorized the ESF and preserved a structure for it similar to that under the CARES

Act: reservations of funds for the outlying areas and BIE, with the remaining funds allocated to

the GEER Fund, ESSER Fund, and HEERF.12 Under the CRRSAA, about two-thirds of the funds

appropriated for the GEER Fund were reserved for the EANS program. The ARPA did not

provide appropriations for all of the ESF programs that had previously received appropriations

under the CARES Act and CRRSAA. Rather, appropriations were provided separately for the

ESSER Fund, EANS program, and the HEERF. Separate appropriations were also provided for

the outlying areas and BIE.13 No funds were appropriated for the GEER Fund.

Table 1 provides appropriations for the ESF and programs initially authorized by the ESF. The

ESF initially received $277.739 billion from the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA combined. It

indicates instances where funds are required to be reserved under the GEER Fund or ESSER

Fund for various purposes. It also provides a breakdown of how HEERF funds must be allocated

by ED for five major purposes. In response to congressional interest, the appropriations data

presented in Table 1 have not been rounded.

A portion of the initial appropriations ($76.234 billion) for the HEERF has been rescinded. The

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), enacted on November 15, 2021, rescinded

$353 million of the unobligated HEERF balances to offset spending for federal aid to highways,

highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes. The Keep Kids Fed Act

of 2022 (P.L. 117-158), enacted on June 25, 2022, rescinded an addtional $400 million of the

unobligated HEERF balances to offset increased reimbursements for various federal child

nutrition programs in school year 2022-2023.14 In total, the rescissions reduce HEERF

appropriations by $753 million to $75.481 billion, and reduce the total ESF appropriations to

$276.986 billion. The rescissions are not reflected in Table 1 or Table 7.

The appendices of this report include detailed tables of funding allocations and other aspects of

the ESF. Specifically,



Appendix A details ESF grants by state under the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

ARPA, and all three acts combined.

Table A-5 provides ESF grants to the outlying areas as well as funds provided

directly to the outlying areas under the ARPA.

Appendix B includes a detailed discussion of the periods of obligation and

liquidation of funds that correspond to the GEER Fund, EANS program, ESSER

Fund, and HEERF.

Appendix C includes state grants under the GEER Fund under the CARES Act

and CRRSAA.

Appendix D displays state grants under the EANS program under the CRRSAA

and ARPA.

Appendix E presents actual state grant amounts under the ESSER Fund as

provided under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, ARPA, and all three acts combined.

12 The CRRSAA did not include a reservation of funds for competitive grants.

13 The ARPA appropriation for the BIE was provided directly to the bureau.

14 For more information about P.L. 117-158, see CRS Report R46681, USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response

to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA



Appendix F presents estimated IHE allocations under the HEERF aggregated by

institutional sector and state under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, ARPA, and all

three acts combined.

A total of $277.7 billion was appropriated for ESF programs through a combination of

discretionary and mandatory funding, with $247.0 billion provided in FY2021 under the

CRRSAA and ARPA. This level of appropriations is substantially higher than the level of

appropriations provided annually for programs administered by ED. For example, in FY2021

total discretionary and mandatory appropriations for ED were $77.2 billion.15 For that same fiscal

year, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the largest source of federal aid for

elementary and secondary education provided through annual appropriations acts, received $26.3

billion in appropriations. Title I-A of the ESEA, the largest program authorized by the ESEA,

received $16.5 billion in FY2021. By comparison, the ESSER Fund received a total of $177.1

billion in FY2021 through the CRRSAA and ARPA.16 Additionally, the HEERF provided a

substantially higher level of appropriations to IHEs than was provided in annual funding bills.

The majority of annual funding for higher education is provided as financial assistance to

students, and a smaller portion of funding is provided as aid to IHEs. For example, annual

funding for Minority Serving Institutions, the primary source of institutional aid in the HEA,

received $1 billion in discretionary and mandatory appropriations through the Department of

Education Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260, Divison H, Title III). By comparison, those

programs were allocated $4.7 billion through the CRRSAA and ARPA.

15 This does not include rescissions or supplemental appropriations. For more information, see CRS Report R46859,

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education: FY2021 Appropriations. FY2021 discretionary appropriations and

appropriated mandatory spending were provided for ED through the Department of Education Appropriations Act,

2021 (P.L. 116-260, Division H, Title III). Total discretionary approprations for ED in FY2021 were $73.5 billion (not

including rescissions or supplemental appropriations). For more information, see https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/

budget/budget23/23pbapt.pdf. For more information about discretionary and mandatory appropriations, see CRS

Report R44477, Department of Education Funding: Key Concepts and FAQ.

16 The ARPA provided mandatory funding for the ESSER Fund, EANS program, and HEERF as the funds were

provided through a budget reconciliation measure.

Congressional Research Service

Table 1. Appropriations for the ESF and ESF Programs as Provided by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CARES Act (FY2020)a

Program or Activity

Reservation

from Total

Appropriation

or Remaining

Fundsb

Total appropriation

Outlying areas

CRRSAA (FY2021)a

Appropriations

Reservation

from Total

Appropriation

or Remaining

Fundsb

$30,750,000,000

Appropriations

ARPAa

(FY2021)

Totalc

(FY2020 and

FY2021)

$81,880,000,000

$165,109,370,000

$277,739,370,000

Up to 0.5%d

$153,750,000

0.5%

$409,400,000

$0e

$563,150,000

Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)

0.5%f

$153,750,000

0.5%

$409,400,000

$0e

$563,150,000

Competitive grants for states with the

“highest coronavirus burden”g

1.0%

$307,500,000

Subtotal for outlying areas, BIE, and

competitive grants

2% of total

appropriation

$615,000,000

1% of total

appropriation

$818,800,000

$1,433,800,000

Remaining funds for GEER, ESSER,

EANS program, and HEERF

100.0% of the

remaining funds

$30,135,000,000

100.0% of the

remaining funds

$81,061,200,000

$165,109,370,000

$276,305,570,000

Governor’s Emergency Education Relief

(GEER) Fund

9.8%

$2,953,230,000

5.0%

$4,053,060,000

$7,006,290,000

Reservation of funds for the Emergency

Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS)

programh

$2,750,000,000

Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools

(EANS) Programh

$2,750,000,000

43.9%

$13,229,265,000

67.0%

$54,311,004,000

$122,774,800,000

$190,315,069,000

$800,000,000

46.3%

$13,952,505,000

28.0%

$22,697,136,000

$39,584,570,000

$76,234,211,000c

Elementary and Secondary School

Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund

Reservation of funds for homeless children

and youth

Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund

(HEERF)

CRS-5

CARES Act (FY2020)a

Reservation

from Total

Appropriation

or Remaining

Fundsb

Direct Grants to Institutions of Higher

Education (IHEs)

CRRSAA (FY2021)a

Appropriations

Reservation

from Total

Appropriation

or Remaining

Fundsb

Appropriations

$12,557,254,500

Direct Grants to Public and Private

Nonprofit IHEs

$20,200,451,040

$36,021,958,700

$56,222,409,740

Direct Grants to Proprietary IHEs

$680,914,080

$395,845,700

$1,076,759,780

Programs for Minority Serving Institutions

$1,046,437,875

$1,702,285,200

$2,968,842,750

$5,717,565,825

Fund for the Improvement of

Postsecondary Education

$348,812,625

$113,485,680

$197,922,850

$660,221,155

Program or Activity

Totalc

(FY2020 and

FY2021)

ARPAa

(FY2021)

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the

Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA; P.L.

116-260); and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

Notes: NA = not applicable.

a. While funds provided under the CARES Act and CRRSAA were discretionary appropriations, funds provided under the ARPA were mandatory appropriations. The

ARPA did not provide funds for the ESSER Fund or HEERF based on a percentage of overall ESF funds available. Rather, the ARPA specified the appropriations for

each program. The period of availability of funds varies by act and may be extended. Funds for ESF programs authorized by the CARES Act are available through

September 30, 2021. Funds for ESF programs provided by the CRRSAA are available through September 30, 2022. Funds for ESF programs provided by the ARPA

are available through September 30, 2023. See Appendix B for more information about how these periods of availability may be extended.

b. Under the CARES Act and CRRSAA, appropriations for the outlying areas, the BIE, and competitive grants were determined based on a statutorily specified

percentage of the total ESF appropriation. The appropriations for the GEER Fund, ESSER Fund, and HEERF were determined based on a statutorily specified

percentage of the funds remaining after reserving funds for the outlying areas, the BIE, and competitive grants.

c. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58) and the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-158) rescinded $753 million of the unobligated HEERF

balances. The amount of the rescissions is not reflected in the table as CRS is unable to break down the recission by each respective law.

d. The Secretary was required to allocate up to 0.5% of the total appropriation to the outlying areas on the basis of their relative need as determined by him/her, in

consultation with the Secretary of the Interior. The outlying areas—American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S.

Virgin Islands—are as defined in Section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended. The Secretary opted to allocate the full 0.5% to the

outlying areas under the ESF authorized by the CARES Act.

e. The outlying areas received an appropriation of $850,000,000 under Title II—Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions—of the ARPA. The BIE

received an appropriation of $850,000,000 under Title XI—Committee on Indian Affairs—of the ARPA. Statutory language did not specify that the funds for the

CRS-6

CRS-7

outlying areas or the BIE had to be used for purposes authorized by ESF programs. These funds are not included in the table; if the funds had been included, the

outlying areas total would have been $1,413,150,000, the BIE total would have been $1,413,150.000, and the ARPA overall total would have been $166,809,370,000.

The overall total for the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA would have been $279,439,370,000.

Outside of the ESF, the BIE received a direct appropriation of $69,000,000 under Title VII of Division B—Emergency Appropriations for Coronavirus Health

Response and Agency Operations—of the CARES Act.

Statutory language does not define “highest coronavirus burden” or indicate how this should be determined.

The CRRSAA required that $2.75 billion (just over two-thirds) of the funds appropriated for the GEER Fund ($4.05 billion) be reserved for the EANS program. The

ARPA appropriated $2.75 billion for the EANS program directly.

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Funds for the Outlying Areas, the BIE, and

Competitive Grants

As discussed previously, both the CARES Act and CRRSAA included reservations of funds from

the total ESF appropriation for the outlying areas and BIE. The CARES Act also included a

reservation of funds for competitive grants. The ARPA did not reserve funds under the ESF for

any of these purposes but did provide separate funding for the outlying areas and BIE.

Reservation for the Outlying Areas

This section provides an overview of the availability of ESF funds to the outlying areas. It begins

with a discussion of how grant amounts were determined and awarded under the CARES Act.

This is followed by discussion of supplemental funding provided to the outlying areas under the

ESF provided by the CRRSAA. This section ends with a description of the funds available to the

outlying areas under ARPA, although such funds are not part of the ESF.

Following the enactment of the CARES Act, ED announced on May 5, 2020, that it would award

the full allowable 0.5% of the ESF overall appropriation to the outlying areas (§18001).17 ED

calculated grant amounts for each outlying area in accordance with the provisions of the GEER

Fund and the ESSER Fund.18 ED awarded 20% of the funds to the outlying areas based on factors

similar to those that were used to award state grants under the GEER Fund, including each

outlying area’s share of the population ages 5 to 24 relative to the total population ages 5 to 24

across the outlying areas, and each outlying area’s share of the count of children used to

determine Title I-A grants under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) relative to

the total number of children included in the determination of Title I-A grants for the outlying

areas. The remaining 80% of the funds were awarded using factors similar to those used to award

state grants under the ESSER Fund, including each outlying area’s share of prior year Title I-A

grants relative to the total amount of Title I-A funding provided to the outlying areas in the prior

year (see subsequent discussion of each fund for more information about these factors).19 The

grant amounts available to each outlying area are detailed in Table A-5. To receive available

funds under the GEER Fund, the governor of an outlying area had to submit a Certification and

Agreement document (application) to ED.20 To receive available funds under the ESSER Fund,

the state educational agency (SEA) of an outlying area had to submit a Certification and

Agreement document.21 Outlying areas can use funds received under the GEER Fund and ESSER

Fund in similar ways as states (see subsequent discussion of each fund). For each application, the

applicant must provide various assurances, respond to questions about the use of funds, and agree

to comply with CARES Act reporting requirements.

17 U.S. Department of Education, Formula Grants to the Outlying Areas, May 5, 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/offices/

education-stabilization-fund/outlying-areas/.

18 U.S. Department of Education, Education Stabilization Fund Grants to the Outlying Areas, https://oese.ed.gov/files/

2020/05/OA-Allocations-Table.pdf.

19 With respect to the number of individuals ages 5-24 in each of the outlying areas, ED used data from the 2010

Decennial Census, as annual data are not available for the outlying areas.

20 A copy of the application is available at https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/05/Governors-ESF-OA-Certification-andAgreement.pdf.

21 A copy of the application is available at https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/05/SEA-ESF-OA-Certification-andAgreement.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Under the CRRSAA, the Secretary was required to reserve 0.5% of the total ESF appropriation

for the outlying areas for supplemental awards (§311). The funds had to be allocated to the

outlying areas not more than 30 calendar days after enactment of the CRRSAA. ED was required

to distribute the funds on the basis of the terms and conditions for funding provided to the

outlying areas under the CARES Act. Thus, ED used the same methodology to distribute funds to

the outlying areas under the CRRSAA ESF as it used to distribute funds to them under the

CARES Act ESF.22 An outlying area did not have to complete a new application to receive these

funds. Table A-5 provides the grant amounts for each of the outlying areas under the CRRSAA

ESF.

As discussed previously, the ARPA did not provide an overall appropriation for the ESF. Rather, it

provided appropriations for specific programs that were part of the ESF under the CARES Act or

CRRSAA. Thus, there was no total ESF appropriation from which to reserve funds for the

outlying areas. The ARPA, however, did provide $850 million for the outlying areas. These funds

are independent of the ESF and are therefore not considered ESF funds. The ARPA did not

specify the purpose or allowable uses of the funds. According to ED, the $850 million would

enable SEAs in the outlying areas to



enact measures to help schools implement mitigation strategies that are consistent

with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC) to the “greatest extent” practicable;

address the effects of COVID-19 on students, including effects resulting from

interrupted instructions;

implement strategies to meet students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental

health needs;

offer evidence-based summer, afterschool, and extended learning and enrichment

programs;

support early childhood education;

invest in staff capacity; and

avoid layoffs.23

ED also stated that the ARPA funds would enable schools in the outlying areas to “support

students who have been most severely impacted by the pandemic and are likely to have suffered

the most because of long-standing inequities in our communities and schools.”24 Thus, while

funds provided to the outlying areas under the ARPA were not provided as part of the ESF, they

can be used for similar purposes as the ESSER funds provided under the ARPA. However, unlike

the ESF funds provided to the outlying areas under the CARES Act and CRRSAA, the ED22 ED used the most current Title I-A formula child count data available for the outlying areas to determine allocation

amounts under the CARES Act and CRRSAA. As the same Title I-A formula child counts were used to determine

allocations to the outlying areas under both acts, each outlying area’s proportionate share of funds available under the

CARES Act and CRRSAA was the same. For more information about the data used to determine CARES Act ESF and

CRRSAA ESF grants to the outlying areas, see U.S. Department of Education, Education Stabilization Fund

Allocations to the Outlying Areas, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/05/OA-Allocations-Table.pdf; and U.S. Department of

Education, Education Stabilization Fund II Allocations to the Outlying Areas, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/01/

CRRSA-OA-allocations-and-methodology-1.11.21.doc, respectively.

23 Letter from Ian Rosenblum, Delegated the Authority to Perform the Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary,

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, to Commissioner, April 2021,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/ARP-Cover-letter-to-Commissioners-in-OAs.docx (hereinafter referred to as “ED

letter about ARPA grants to the outlying areas”).

24 ED letter about ARPA grants to the outlying areas.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

established uses of funds provided to the outlying areas under the ARPA do not include higher

education. Table A-5 details funds appropriated for the outlying areas under the ESF as provided

by the ARPA.

In addition to the aforementioned funds, institutions of higher education (IHEs) in the outlying

areas and those in the freely associated states of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the

Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau are also eligible for grants under the

HEERF as funded by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

In total, the outlying areas received $1.413 billion under the CARES Act ESF reservation,

CRRSAA ESF reservation, and ARPA appropriation.

Reservation for the Bureau of Indian Education

This section provides an overview of the availability of ESF funds to the BIE. The BIE, part of

the U.S. Department of the Interior, manages and funds an educational system for over 40,000

Indian students that includes 183 elementary and secondary education schools and dormitories

and two BIE postsecondary schools. The BIE also funds tribal colleges and universities (TCUs).

The section begins with a discussion of how grant amounts were distributed under the CARES

Act and CRRSAA. This is followed by a description of funding provided directly to the BIE for

similar purposes under the CARES Act and ARPA although such funds were not part of the ESF.

Under the CARES Act, the Secretary was required to reserve 0.5% of the total ESF appropriation

for the BIE (§18001). The statutory language requires that the funds be provided for programs

operated or funded by the BIE in consultation with ED. In accordance with listening sessions with

stakeholders and the agreement with ED, the BIE allotment was disbursed as follows: 70% to BIE

elementary and secondary schools based on weighted student counts,25 20% to TCUs based on the

Indian student count,26 and 10% for emergency needs determined by the BIE.27 The BIE was

permitted to reserve up to 0.5% of the total BIE allocation for administrative costs, which would

be taken from the 10% of funds reserved for emergency needs. Elementary and secondary schools

may use the funds in accordance with the ESSER Fund (see subsequent discussion). TCUs may

use the funds in accordance with the HEERF (see subsequent discussion) except that funds are

not required to be expended for student grants.28

Under the CRRSAA, the Secretary also was required to reserve 0.5% of the total ESF

appropriation for the BIE for a supplemental award (§311). The Secretary was required to award

the funds to the Secretary of the Interior not more than 30 calendar days after enactment of the

CRRSAA. The funds must be used for programs operated or funded by the BIE under the terms

and conditions established for funding provided to the BIE under the CARES Act. The statutory

language further specifies that 60% of the funds must be allocated for BIE-funded elementary and

25 The BIE assigns weights to student counts based on several factors including, but not limited to, school size, grade

levels, and number of English language learners.

26 Tribal colleges and universities are as defined in Section 316 of the Higher Education Act, as amended. In addition to

funds from the BIE reservation, TCUs are also separately eligible to receive funds under the HEERF.

27 U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General, CARES Act Flash Report: Bureau of Indian Education

Snapshot, No. 2020-FIN-050, July 14, 2020.

28 U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of the Interior, Agreement Between the U.S. Department of

Education (DOE) and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) – Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), June 11-12, 2020.

School-level allocations are available at U.S. Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 2020 CARES Act,

https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/opa/Attachment%202%20%20TCUs%20and%20Schools%20Allocations.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

secondary schools. These schools may not be required to submit a spending plan prior to

receiving the funds. The remaining 40% of funds must be distributed to TCUs in accordance with

Section 316(d)(3) of the Higher Education Act.29 Under agreement with ED, the BIE may reserve

up to 10% of the total BIE reservation for national-level support, from which BIE may reserve up

to 0.5% of the total BIE reservation for administrative costs.

Outside of the ESF, the BIE received a direct appropriation of $69 million under the CARES Act

and $850 million under the ARPA. These funds are independent of the ESF and are therefore not

considered ESF funds. The CARES Act funds were provided for the programs and activities

supported by the BIE to prevent, prepare for, and respond to COVID-19, and at least $20 million

was required be allocated to TCUs. Of the CARES Act funds, the BIE allocated $46.1 million to

its K-12 schools based on weighted student counts,30 $2.7 million to its postsecondary schools,

and $20.2 million to TCUs (other than the BIE postsecondary schools) based on the Indian

student count.31 ARPA funds must be allocated within 45 calendar days of enactment to programs

or activities operated or funded by the BIE.32 Of the ARPA funds, the BIE allocated $535.5

million to BIE K-12 schools based on weighted student counts, $229.5 million to TCUs based on

Indian student counts, and $85.0 million for BIE-managed information technology and facilities

projects.33 The CARES Act funds were available until September 30, 2021; while the ARPA funds

are available until expended.

Overall, the BIE received $563 million under the ESF as funded by the CARES Act and

CRRSAA. In addition, it received direct appropriations of $919 million under the CARES Act

and ARPA. In total, the BIE received $1.482 billion from the three acts.

Competitive State Grants under the CARES Act

Under the ESF as authorized by the CARES Act, the Secretary was required to reserve 1% of the

overall ESF appropriation to provide competitive grants to the states with the “highest

coronavirus burden” to support activities under the ESF. The CARES Act did not include a

definition of “highest coronavirus burden.” The ESF as funded by the CRRSAA did not include a

reservation of funds for competitive state grants. The ARPA also did not include a reservation of

funds for competitive state grants.

Within 30 days of enactment of the CARES Act, the Secretary was required to issue a notice

inviting states to apply for the competitive grants. Upon receipt of an application, the Secretary

had 30 days to approve or deny it. On April 27, 2020, ED announced that two types of

competitive grants would be awarded:

1. $180 million would be made available for Education Stabilization Fund—

Rethink K12 Education Models Grants (ESF-REM Grants), and

29 In addition to funds from the BIE reservation, TCUs are also separately eligible to receive funds under the HEERF.

30 The BIE assigns weights to student counts based on several factors including, but not limited to, school size, grade

levels, and number of English language learners.

31 U.S. Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 2020 CARES Act, Bureau of Indian Education Virtual Listening

Session- July 8, https://www.bia.gov/covid-19/cares-act.

32 BIE-funded schools are as defined in 25 U.S.C. 2021(3), and TCUs are as defined in HEA Section 316(b)(3).

33 U.S. Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, BIE Implementation of American Rescue Plan (ARP) Funding,

https://www.bia.gov/service/american-rescue-plan-act/bie-implementation-arp-funding.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

2. $127.5 million would be made available for Education Stabilization Fund—

Reimagining Workforce Preparation Grants (ESF-RWP Grants).34

ESF Rethink K-12 Education Models (ESF-REM) Grants

The ESF-REM Grant was “aimed at opening new, innovative ways for students to access K-12

education with an emphasis on meeting students’ needs during the coronavirus national

emergency.”35 Awards were made to states for “activities to help prevent, prepare for, and respond

to the devastating effects of COVID-19.”36 Each SEA could submit only one application and was

required to apply to use ESF-REM Grants under one of three absolute priorities established by

ED:

1. microgrants37 to parents to meet the educational needs of their school-age

children through increased access to high-quality remote learning to support their

educational needs,

2. development or expansion of a high-quality course-access program or statewide

virtual school, and

3. new, field-initiated models for providing remote education to meet the specific

educational needs of the state.38

First Absolute Priority: Microgrants to Parents

Under the first absolute priority,39 a state was required to provide parents and students with a list

of service providers from which the parents and students may select. The list had to include more

than one education service for remote learning. The notice included examples of 11 possible

remote learning options that could be made available, including tuition and fees for a public or

private course or program, especially online; special education and related services; tutoring;

summer or afterschool education programs; and testing preparation and examination fees.

The state was required to provide an online and other method to allow parents and students to

select services, ensure that microgrant accounts were established within the project period of the

grant, and ensure that each parent is aware of how much funding is available. The state was also

required to establish a parent involvement and feedback process that, for example, described a

way for parents to request services and providers that were not currently offered and to have input

34 U.S. Department of Education, “Secretary DeVos Launches New Grant Competition to Spark Student-Centered,

Agile Learning Opportunities to Support Recovery from National Emergency,” press release, April 27, 2020,

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devos-launches-new-grant-competition-spark-student-centered-agilelearning-opportunities-support-recovery-national-emergency.

35 U.S. Department of Education, “Secretary DeVos Launches New Grant Competition to Spark Student-Centered,

Agile Learning Opportunities to Support Recovery from National Emergency,” press release, April 27, 2020,

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devos-launches-new-grant-competition-spark-student-centered-agilelearning-opportunities-support-recovery-national-emergency.

36 U.S. Department of Education, “Notice Inviting Applications (NIA) for the FY2020; Education Stabilization FundRethink K-12 Education Models (ESF-REM) Discretionary Grant Program,” 85 Federal Register 25411-25417, May 1,

2020 (hereinafter referred to as “ESF-REM notice”), p. 25411.

37 The notice defines a microgrant as “an account established for a parent that provides funds directly to service

providers to expand educational choice. The parent must have easy access to and visibility into the account and it must

allow the parent to select particular education services, expenses, or materials, to expand the ability to choose highquality educational opportunities to meet their needs” (ESF-REM notice, p. 25414).

38 ESF-REM notice, pp. 25412-25413.

39 ESF-REM notice, pp. 25412-25415.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

on the creation of the list of services and providers. The state was also required to include a “fair

and documented”40 process for selecting which students would be served if requests for services

from the parents of public and nonpublic school students exceeds capacity. The state also had to

ensure that at least 80% of the grant funds are used for services that are directly utilized by public

and nonpublic school students under the microgrants. No more than 5% of the funds could be

used by the state for administration.

Second Absolute Priority: Statewide Program

A state choosing the second absolute priority41 was required to develop or expand a statewide

virtual learning or course-access program, provided that it also proposed to implement either a

statewide course-access program or virtual school. The state’s application also had to propose to

widely disseminate information on the availability of course-access programs or virtual school

programs. Additionally, it had to include a parent involvement and feedback process that, for

example, describes a way for parents to request courses or programming that are not currently

offered and to provide input on services provided through the project.

Third Absolute Priority: Proposals for Remote Learning

Under the third absolute priority,42 applications should “propose projects that demonstrate a

rationale and that are designed to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale fieldinitiated educational models for remote learning.”43 Proposed projects were required to address

specific needs related to accessing high-quality remote learning opportunities.

Nonpublic School Students

In addition, the notice stated that an applicant must ensure equitable access for nonpublic school

students under the absolute priority that it proposes to address.44 The notice defined this to mean

providing students in nonpublic schools “with the same opportunity to access program benefits as

students attending public schools, which may include proportional provision of services to both

public and non-public school students.”45

Application Review

Applications were reviewed and assigned a score of up to 100 points. Of these, up to 40 points

were based on the coronavirus burden in each state. Under the requirements of Section 18001 of

the CARES Act, the Secretary was required to provide competitive grants to the states with the

“highest coronavirus burden” to support activities under the ESF.46 For the purposes of the ESF40 ESF-REM notice, p. 25413.

41 ESF-REM notice, pp. 25413-25415.

42 ESF-REM notice, pp. 25413-25415.

43 ESF-REM notice, p. 25413.

44 ESF-REM notice, p. 25413.

45 ESF-REM notice, p. 25414.

46 ED defined coronavirus burden to mean the “burden on a State from coronavirus based on the measures in the

application package and any measures identified by the applicant in response to Application Requirement 3” (ESFREM notice, pp. 25413-25414). Application Requirement 3 requires the state to provide a description of the state’s

coronavirus burden based on “indicators and information factors other than those provided in the application package

that demonstrate the significance of the impact of COVID-19 on students, parents, and schools in the State” (ESF-REM

notice, p. 25414).

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

REM grants, ED established a series of four metrics to determine, in part, the coronavirus burden

in each state: the (1) percentage of the population without broadband access, (2) percentage of

students ages 5-17 in poverty, (3) state percentage share of confirmed COVID-19 cases per

capita, and (4) percentage of students in rural LEAs.47, 48

Grant Awards49

Overall, 39 SEAs applied for ESF-REM grants. Of these, 11 received an award. Of the six

applicants that applied under the first absolute priority, two SEAs (Louisiana and Tennessee)

received grants. Of the 14 applicants that applied under the second absolute priority, four SEAs

(Georgia, Iowa, Rhode Island, and Texas) received grants. Of the 19 applicants that applied under

the third absolute priority, five SEAs (Maine, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, and

South Dakota) received grants. The average grant award was $16.4 million. Grant amounts

ranged from $6.9 million for South Dakota to $20 million for Tennessee. The project period for

all grants is scheduled to run through July 31, 2023.

ESF Reimagining Workforce Preparation (ESF-RWP) Grants

These grants were “designed to expand short-term postsecondary programs and work-based

learning programs in order to get Americans back to work and help small businesses return to

being our country’s engines for economic growth.”50 ED established two absolute priorities and

three competitive priorities for the grant program.51

Absolute Priority 1: Short-Term Opportunities or Career Pathways

Under Absolute Priority 1, states could create or expand short-term education and training

opportunities or career pathway programs to help citizens return to work, become entrepreneurs,

or expand their small businesses. Short-term education programs or career pathways created or

expanded under this priority must lead to some type of workplace-relevant credential that

responds “to the needs of employers or facilitate entrepreneurship.”52 Grantees could use funds to

develop and implement short-term education and training programs and career pathways, hire

qualified instructors, obtain needed equipment and supplies, and subsidize tuition and fees. Funds

47 U.S. Department of Education, Application for Grants Under the Education Stabilization Fund—Rethink K-12

Education Models (ESF-REM) Discretionary Grants Program, April 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/04/ESF-REMApplication-Package-FY20.pdf.

48 ED published the final metrics on June 29, 2020 (U.S. Department of Education, Education Stabilization Fund—

Rethink K12 Education Models Discretionary Grants, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/07/ESF-REM-BurdenMethodology-Appendix-FINAL-6.29.20.pdf).

49 The information discussed in this section is available from U.S. Department of Education, Education Stabilization

Fund: Rethink K-12 Education Models Discretionary Grant Program Award Fact Sheet, July 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/

files/2020/07/ESF-REM-Award-Fact-Sheet-7.29.20_FINAL.pdf.

50 U.S. Department of Education, “Secretary DeVos Launches New Grant Competition to Spark Student-Centered,

Agile Learning Opportunities to Support Recovery from National Emergency,” press release, April 27, 2020,

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devos-launches-new-grant-competition-spark-student-centered-agilelearning-opportunities-support-recovery-national-emergency.

51 U.S. Department of Education, “Notice Inviting Applications (NIA) for the FY2020 Education Stabilization Fund—

Reimagine Workforce Preparation (ESF-RWP) Grants Program,” 85 Federal Register 37636-37648, June 23, 2020

(hereinafter referred to as “ESF-RWP notice”).

52 ESF-RWP notice, p. 37636.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

could also be used for other purposes, such as student support services, transportation vouchers,

and child care support.

Two competitive priorities applied to applications submitted under Absolute Priority 1. Under the

first competitive priority, preference was given to applications that propose a project in which

short-term educational programs and training programs “include didactic education that will be

principally delivered through distance education.”53 Under the second competitive priority,

competitive preference was given to applicants that propose to “serve lifelong learners in

distressed communities.”54

Absolute Priority 2: Small Business Incubators

Under Absolute Priority 2, states could use grants to “create or expand small business incubators

that offer education and training, mentorship, as well as shared facilities and resources that will

help small businesses recover and grow and new entrepreneurs thrive.”55 According to ED, the

incubators create new opportunities for IHEs to expand their offerings and create new revenue

streams, enabling the institutions to “become entrepreneurial at a time when declining

enrollments and COVID-19 related disruptions may result in longer-term underutilization of

campus facilities. In this regard, these funds assist in the stabilization of institutions and the local

economy.”56

ED established one competitive priority for applicants under Absolute Priority 2. Under this

competitive priority, competitive preference was given to applicants serving entrepreneurs and

businesses in distressed communities.

Application Review

For the purposes of the ESF-RWP grants, a state’s coronavirus burden was determined based on

three equally weighted factors: (1) percentage of population without broadband access, (2) initial

unemployment insurance claims filed (as a percentage of the civilian labor force), and (3) state

percentage share of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100,000 persons.57 Using these three factors,

ED calculated a burden score for each state and ranked states based on their burden score.58

Grants Awarded

Grant applications were made available in June 2020 and were due on August 24, 2020.59 ED

awarded eight ESF-RWP grants, ranging in size from $13.3 million to $18.1 million, to grantees

in eight states (Alabama, Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Michigan, Nevada, New York, and

Virginia).60

53 ESF-RWP notice, p. 37639.

54 ESF-RWP notice, p. 37639. Distressed communities refers to rural communities or Opportunity Zones.

55 ESF-RWP notice, p. 37637.

56 ESF-RWP notice, p. 37637.

57 ESF-RWP notice, pp. 37646-37648.

58 ED updated these data and state burden scores on August 24, 2020. The updated data are available at

https://s3.amazonaws.com/PCRN/file/ESF-RWP_Burden_Methodology_Appendix_Final.pdf.

59 U.S. Department of Education, Application for Grants Under the Education Stabilization Fund—Reimagine

Workforce Preparation (ESF-RWP) Discretionary Grants Program, June 2020, https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/

opportunities/instructions/PKG00262274-instructions.pdf.

60 For more information, see U.S. Department of Education, ESF-RWP FY2020 Awards, 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/

offices/education-stabilization-fund/reimagine-workforce-preparation/awards-4/.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Summary of Provisions Related to Reservations from the Total ESF

Appropriations

Table 2 provides an overview of the key provisions related to the outlying areas, the BIE, and

competitive state grants under the ESF as funded by the CARES Act and CRRSAA. It also

includes information about the funds appropriated for the outlying areas and BIE under the

CARES Act and ARPA, which were not part of the ESF.

Table 2. Summary of Reservations under the ESF as Provided by the CARES Act and

CRRSAA, and Funds for Similar Purposes Under the CARES Act and ARPA

Provision

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

Allocation of funds

Secretary may reserve up

to 0.5% of the total ESF

appropriation.a

Secretary must reserve

0.5% of the total ESF

appropriation.

Separate appropriation of

$850 million was provided

(non-ESF funds).

Application process

Outlying areas required

to apply for funds.

No additional application

required for outlying

areas that received funds

under the CARES Act.

No application process

was specified.

Timing for distribution of

funds

Not specified in statutory

language.

Must be allocated by the

Secretary no more than

30 calendar days after

enactment of the

CRRSAA.

Must be allocated by the

Secretary no more than

30 calendar days after

enactment of the ARPA.

Uses of funds

Funds must be used to

carry out the ESF.

Same as the CARES Act.

No uses of funds were

specified.b

Allocation of funds

(1) Secretary must

reserve 0.5% of the total

ESF appropriation.

(2) Separate appropriation

of $69 million was

provided to the BIE (nonESF funds).

Secretary must reserve

0.5% of the total ESF

appropriation.

Separate appropriation of

$850 million was provided

to the BIE (non-ESF

funds).

Timeline for distributing

funds to the BIE

(1) Not specified in

statutory language.

(2) Not specified in

statutory language.

Must be allocated by the

Secretary to the Secretary

of the Interior not more

than 30 calendar days

after enactment of the

CRRSAA.

Must be allocated by the

Director of the BIE within

45 calendar days after

enactment of the ARPA.

Allocation of funds within

the BIE

(1) Not specified in

statutory language.c

(2) BIE must reserve at

least $20 million for tribal

colleges and universities

(TCUs).

60% for BIE-funded

schools and 40% for

TCUs.d

Statutory language does

not specify an allocation

of funds between the

programs or activities

operated or funded by

the BIE, BIE-funded

schools, and TCUs.e

Outlying Areas

BIE

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Provision

Uses of funds

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

(1) Funds must be used

for programs operated or

funded by the BIE to carry

out the ESF.

(2) Funds provided for

programs and activities

funded by the BIE to

prevent, prepare for, and

respond to COVID-19.

Funds must be used for

programs operated or

funded by the BIE under

the terms and conditions

established under the

CARES Act for BIEoperated and funded

elementary and secondary

schools and TCUs.

Funds must be used for

programs or activities

operated or funded by

the BIE for BIE-funded

schools and TCUs.

Competitive State Grants

Allocation of funds

Secretary must reserve

1% of the total ESF

appropriation for grants

to states with the “highest

coronavirus burden.”

No reservation of funds

for competitive state

grants.

No reservation of funds

for competitive state

grants.

Application process

Secretary must issue a

notice inviting applications

not later than 30 days

after the enactment of the

CARES Act and must

approve or deny

applications not later than

30 days after receipt.

Timeline for distributing

funds

Not specified, but the

Secretary is required to

approve or deny

applications for funding

not later than 30 days

after receipt.

Uses of funds

Funds must be used to

support activities under

the ESF.

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

(CAA; P.L. 116-260); and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

a. The Secretary reserved the full 0.5% of ESF appropriations for the outlying areas (U.S. Department of

Education, Formula Grants to the Outlying Areas, May 5, 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/offices/educationstabilization-fund/outlying-areas/).

b. ED specified the uses of funds in a letter to the outlying areas (Letter from Ian Rosenblum, Delegated the

Authority to Perform the Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary, Office of Elementary and

Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, to Commissioner, April 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/

2021/04/ARP-Cover-letter-to-Commissioners-in-OAs.docx).

c. The BIE allotment was disbursed as follows: 70% to BIE elementary and secondary schools and early

childhood education programs, 20% to TCUs, and 10% for emergency needs determined by the BIE. The

BIE was permitted to reserve up to 0.5% of the total BIE allocation for administrative costs, which would be

taken from the 10% of funds reserved for emergency needs (U.S. Department of Education and U.S.

Department of the Interior, Agreement Between the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and the U.S.

Department of the Interior (DOI) – Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), June 11-12, 2020).

d. The BIE allotment was disbursed as follows: 54% to BIE elementary and secondary schools and early

childhood education programs, 36% to TCUs, and 10% for national-level support. The BIE was permitted to

reserve up to 0.5% of the total BIE allocation for administrative costs, which would be taken from the 10%

of funds reserved for national-level support (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Education,

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Listening Session Documents: CRRSA Funding Distribution and Waiver Overview, Completed BIE K-12

ESF-II COVID-19 Relief Act Allocations, https://www.bie.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/BIE%20K12%20Schools%20ESF-II%20COVID-19%20Relief%20Act%20Allocations_0.pdf).

The BIE plans to disburse its allotment as follows: 63% to BIE elementary and secondary schools and early

childhood education programs, 27% to TCUs, and 10% for BIE-wide investments (U.S. Department of the

Interior, BIE Implementation of American Rescue Plan (ARP) Funding, https://www.bia.gov/service/americanrescue-plan-act/bie-implementation-arp-funding).

Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER)

Fund

Both the CARES Act and the CRRSAA provided appropriations for the GEER Fund. In each

state61 receiving GEER funds, the governor may use the grant to provide emergency funds to

LEAs and IHEs serving students within the state to provide for the continuity of operations, or to

any other IHE, LEA, or education-related entity within the state for a broad array of purposes,

including the provision of child care and the protection of education-related jobs. The CARES

Act appropriated $2.953 billion in FY2020 for the GEER Fund (commonly referred to as GEER

I). The CRRSAA provided $4.053 billion in supplemental ESF appropriations in FY2020.

However, the CRRSAA created a new reservation of funds under the GEER Fund (commonly

referred to as GEER II) for providing grants to governors to be used by SEAs for providing

services and assistance to private schools. Of the $4.053 billion provided for the GEER Fund

under the CRRSAA, $2.750 billion (about two-thirds) was reserved for the Emergency Assistance

to Non-Public Schools program. The remaining $1.303 billion was available for grants to

governors. The ARPA did not include an appropriation for the GEER Fund.

This section discusses the provisions of the GEER Fund authorized under the CARES Act and the

CRRSAA. The EANS program is discussed in a subsequent section.

Requirements for ED to Award Funds

Under GEER I, the Secretary was required to make grants to the governor of each state with an

approved application. The Secretary was required to issue a notice inviting states to apply for the

grants within 30 days of enactment of the CARES Act. Upon receipt of an application, the

Secretary had 30 days to approve or deny it. The statutory language did not provide for an appeals

process for any state whose application was denied. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and

Puerto Rico had their applications for funding approved.

Under the CRRSAA, governors were not required to submit a new application to receive GEER II

funds. Rather, the governor of each state with an approved GEER Fund application under the

CARES Act was eligible to receive GEER funds under the CRRSAA. ED was required to make

GEER funds available for state grants, after reserving $2.75 billion for the EANS program, within

30 calendar days of enactment of the CRRSAA.

State Grant Formula

Under the CARES Act and the CRRSAA, after reserving $2.75 billion for the EANS program, as

discussed below, the funds available for the GEER Fund were awarded to states based on two

61 For the purposes of the GEER Fund, state is defined to include the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto

Rico.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

formula factors: (1) 60% was awarded based on each state’s share of individuals ages 5-24

relative to the total number of individuals in this age group in all states,62 and (2) 40% was

awarded based on each state’s share of children counted under Section 1124(c) of the ESEA

relative to the total number of children counted under this section for all states. Population

estimates for the first factor were available from the U.S. Census Bureau. For the purposes of

GEER allocations under the CARES Act, ED used 2018 state-level resident population estimates

for individuals ages 5-24 that were released by the U.S. Census Bureau in June 2019. For GEER

allocations under the CRRSAA, ED used 2019 state-level resident population estimates for

individuals ages 5-24 that were released by the U.S. Census Bureau in June 2020.

Data for the second factor are based on formula child counts used to determine Title I-A grants

under the ESEA. These state counts consist of children who are ages 5-17 (1) living in families in

poverty, according to estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Income and Poverty

Estimates (SAIPE) program; (2) in institutions for neglected or delinquent children or in foster

homes; and (3) in families receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) payments

with income above the federal poverty level. For state grants under GEER I, ED used formula

child counts for FY2020 Title I-A grants. For state grants under GEER II, ED used preliminary

formula child counts for FY2021 Title I-A grants. Thus, as the underlying data used to determine

state allocations differ for GEER I and GEER II, some states’ shares of the available GEER Fund

appropriations differ under each act.

Table C-1 includes state grants under GEER I and GEER II.

Uses of Funds

Grants awarded to governors from the GEER Fund may be used for educational services in three

categories: (1) elementary and secondary education, (2) higher education, and (3) elementary,

secondary, higher, and other areas of education, including child care, early childhood education,

social and emotional support, and protecting education-related jobs. Table 3 provides a list of all

authorized activities under the CARES Act and CRRSAA. The specific wording of these uses of

funds in the CARES Act column has been taken directly from statutory language.

Table 3. Allowable Uses of GEER Funds Under the CARES Act and CRRSAA

CARES Act

(GEER I)

CRRSAA

(GEER II)

“Provide emergency support through

grants to local educational agencies that

the State educational agency deems have

been most significantly impacted by

coronavirus to support the ability of such

local educational agencies to continue to

provide educational services to their

students and to support the on-going

functionality of the local educational

agency.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Notes

Neither the CARES Act nor the

CRRSAA includes a definition for

“most significantly impacted by

coronavirus” or provides any metrics

by which this should be determined.

Thus, the criteria used by SEAs to

identify LEAs that are eligible to receive

emergency education relief funds may

differ from state to state.

62 Data for the 50 states and the District of Columbia were available from the U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Estimates of

the Resident Population for Selected Age Groups by Sex: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019, https://www.census.gov/data/

tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-state-detail.html#par_textimage_673542126. More recent data for Puerto Rico

by age groups were not yet available, so data from 2018 were used. These data are available at Annual Estimates of the

Resident Population by Single Year of Age and Sex for the United States, States, and Puerto Rico Commonwealth:

April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2018, https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-state-detail.html.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CARES Act

(GEER I)

CRRSAA

(GEER II)

“Provide emergency support through

grants to institutions of higher education

serving students within the State that the

Governor determines have been most

significantly impacted by coronavirus to

support the ability of such institutions to

continue to provide educational services

and support the on-going functionality of

the institution.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Neither the CARES Act nor the

CRRSAA includes a definition for

“most significantly impacted by

coronavirus” or provides any metrics

by which this should be determined.

Thus, the criteria used by SEAs to

identify IHEs that are eligible to receive

emergency education relief funds may

differ from state to state.

“Provide support to any other institution

of higher education, local educational

agency, or education related entity within

the State that the Governor deems

essential for carrying out emergency

educational services to students for

authorized activities described in section

18003(d)(1) of this title or the Higher

Education Act, the provision of child care

and early childhood education, social and

emotional support, and the protection of

education-related jobs.”

Similar to the CARES

Act.a

Neither the CARES Act nor the

CRRSAA includes a definition of what

qualifies an entity as essential for

carrying out emergency educational

services to students. Thus, the criteria

used by governors to identify these

entities may vary from state to state.

Notes

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); and the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

(CAA; P.L. 116-260).

a. The reference to Section 18003(d)(1) in the CARES Act and a reference to Section 313(d)(1) in the

CRRSAA are both references to the uses of ESSER Funds by LEAs in each act, respectively.

While the uses of funds under GEER I and GEER II are broad, the CRRSAA includes some

restrictions on the uses of GEER II funds that did not apply to GEER I funds. More specifically,

GEER II funds and the funds reserved for the EANS program cannot be used to provide direct or

indirect assistance to scholarship granting organizations or related entities for elementary or

secondary education. In addition, such funds cannot be used to provide or support vouchers,

tuition tax credit programs, education savings accounts, scholarships, scholarship programs, or

tuition-assistance programs for elementary or secondary education. The one exception to these

restrictions is that GEER II funds not reserved for the EANS program may be used to provide

such support to students who received such assistance with GEER I funds provided under the

CARES Act for the 2020-2021 school year, but only for the same assistance previously provided

to students.63 This exception does not apply to funds used under the EANS program but does

apply to unobligated EANS funds that revert to the governor for use under GEER II requirements.

Reallocation of Funds

Any funds that a governor does not award under GEER I or GEER II within one year of receiving

them must be returned to the Secretary. The Secretary is required to reallocate such funds to the

remaining states based on the formula used to provide the initial grant amounts.

63 The statutory provision requires that the “same assistance” be provided to students but does not specify whether this

means the same type of assistance (e.g., voucher), the same amount of assistance, or both.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools

(EANS) Program

This section discusses appropriations reserved for the EANS program under GEER II by the

CRRSAA (EANS I) and appropriations provided directly for the EANS program under the ARPA

(EANS II). With exceptions noted in the subsequent discussion, the ARPA referenced the

CRRSAA EANS program provisions in its provision of additional funds for the EANS program.

The EANS program provides grants to SEAs, which in turn use the funds to provide services or

assistance to nonpublic schools to address educational disruptions resulting from the COVID-19

emergency.

Allocation of Funds to Governors

The CRRSAA required that $2.75 billion (just over two-thirds) of the funds appropriated for the

GEER Fund ($4.05 billion) be reserved for the EANS program. These funds were allocated to

states based on their proportional share of children ages 5-17 from families with incomes at or

below 185% of poverty. The remaining $1,303,060,000 was distributed to states based on the

GEER Fund state grant formula described in the previous section.

The ARPA appropriated $2.75 billion for the EANS program directly. The ARPA did not include

appropriations for the GEER Fund. Based on the requirements of the EANS program included in

the CRRSAA, funds provided under the EANS program must be allocated to states based on their

proportional share of children ages 5-17 enrolled in private schools from families with incomes at

or below 185% of the poverty level.

The governor is required to designate the SEA as the program administrator for the EANS

program. Table D-1 details EANS grants to states under the CRRSAA and ARPA.

Application for Grants

The Secretary was required to issue a notice inviting applications for EANS funds not later than

30 days after the enactment of the CRRSAA. The Secretary was required to approve or deny an

application not later than 15 days after receiving it.

The CRRSAA required each governor to provide an assurance in its application that the SEA

would do the following:



distribute information about the EANS program to nonpublic schools and make

the information and application to apply for services or assistance easily

available;

process all applications submitted promptly and approve or deny an application

not later than 30 days after the date of receipt;

ensure that services or assistance that is provided is available to any nonpublic

school that meets three criteria:

1. it is a nonpublic school that under EANS I enrolls low-income students and

is “most impacted by the qualifying emergency” and under EANS II enrolls a

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA



“significant percentage of low-income students” and is “most impacted by

the qualifying emergency”64;

2. the school submits an application to the SEA at such time, in such manner,

and accompanied by such information that the SEA may require, which shall

include the following: (1) the number and percentage of students from lowincome families enrolled by such nonpublic school in the 2019-2020 school

year, (2) a description of the services that such nonpublic school requests that

the SEA provide, and (3) whether such nonpublic school requesting services

or assistance received a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan that was

made prior to the date of enactment of the CRRSAA, and what the loan

amount was;65 and

3. the school requests services or assistance that is allowable under the EANS

program;

to the extent practicable, obligate all EANS funds provided for services or

assistance to nonpublic schools in an “expedited and timely” manner; and

obligate all EANS funds provided for services or assistance to nonpublic schools

not later than six months after receiving such funds from ED.

While it was not part of the assurances that a governor must provide, an SEA was required to

make the application for services or assistance available to nonpublic schools not later than 30

days after the receipt of EANS funds.

For purposes of the CRRSAA, an SEA was required to prioritize services or assistance to

nonpublic schools that enroll low-income students and were the most impacted by the COVID-19

emergency. The statutory language did not define which students qualify as “low-income” or how

to determine which schools are “most impacted” by the COVID-19 emergency. Under the ARPA,

SEAs may only provide services or assistance to nonpublic schools that serve a “significant

percentage of low-income students” and are “most impacted” by the COVID-19 emergency.

Similar to CRRSAA, these terms were not defined in the ARPA.66

64 The CRRSAA did not establish a threshold with respect to the enrollment of low-income students or define “most

impacted by a qualifying emergency.” Similarly, the ARPA did not define what constitutes a “significant percentage of

low-income students” or define “most impacted by a qualifying emergency.” ED solicited feedback on how the ARPA

terms should be implemented. (For more information, see U.S. Department of Education, Notice Inviting Applications

and Announcing Allocations for the Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools Program under the American Rescue

Plan Act of 2021; Invitation for Comment, April 12, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/FINAL-ARP-EANSnotice-4.12.21.pdf.) The measures that states are required to use with respect to the ARPA are detailed in the state

application for EANS program funds. (U.S. Department of Education, Application for Funding: Emergency Assistance

to Non-Public Schools (EANS) Program Under the American Rescue Plan of 2021 (ARP Act), July 7, 2021, pp. 1-2,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/ARP-EANS-Application-7.7.21_FINAL.pdf).

65 The application for EANS I funds is available at U.S. Department of Education, Certification and Agreement:

Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools Program under the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSA Act), January 11, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/01/

Final_EANS_CertificationandAgreement_FY21_1.11.21.pdf (hereinafter referred to as ED, EANS I application). The

application for EANS II funds is available at U.S. Department of Education, Application for Funding: Emergency

Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS) Program Under the American Rescue Plan of 2021 (ARP Act), July 7, 2021,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/ARP-EANS-Application-7.7.21_FINAL.pdf (hereinafter referred to as ED, EANS II

application).

66 ED solicited feedback on how the ARPA terms should be implemented (for more information, see U.S. Department

of Education, Notice Inviting Applications and Announcing Allocations for the Emergency Assistance to Non-Public

Schools Program under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021; Invitation for Comment, April 12, 2021,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/FINAL-ARP-EANS-notice-4.12.21.pdf).

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

An SEA may reserve not more than the greater of $200,000 or 0.5% of the EANS grant for

administering the services and assistance provided under the EANS program to nonpublic

schools.

Each SEA that complies with all of the aforementioned assurances provided by the governor but

has unobligated EANS funds remaining six months after receiving them is required to return the

unobligated funds to the governor for use under the GEER II uses of funds requirements. This

also applies to the EANS program funds provided by ARPA.67 According to ED guidance, any

EANS program funds returned to the governor under the CRRSAA or ARPA remain available to

the governor for use through the full period of availability of the funds.68

Uses of Funds

A nonpublic school receiving services or assistance under the EANS program is required to use

such services or assistance to address educational disruptions from the COVID-19 emergency.

Table 4 provides a complete list of authorized activities under the CRRSAA and ARPA. The

specific wording of these uses of funds in the CRRSAA column has been taken directly from

statutory language.

Table 4. Allowable Uses of EANS Funds Under the CRRSAA and ARPA

CRRSAA

ARPA

“(A) supplies to sanitize, disinfect, and clean school facilities”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(B) personal protective equipment”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(C) improving ventilation systems, including windows or portable air

purification systems to ensure healthy air in the non-public school”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(D) training and professional development for staff on sanitation, the use of

personal protective equipment, and minimizing the spread of infectious

diseases”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(E) physical barriers to facilitate social distancing”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(F) other materials, supplies, or equipment to implement public health

protocols, including guidelines and recommendations from the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention for the reopening and operation of school

facilities to effectively maintain the health and safety of students, educators, and

other staff during the qualifying emergency”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(G) expanding capacity to administer coronavirus testing to effectively

monitor and suppress coronavirus, to conduct surveillance and contact tracing

activities, and to support other activities related to coronavirus testing for

students, teachers, and staff at the non-public school”

Same as the CRRSAA

67 U.S. Department of Education, Application for Funding: Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS)

Program Under the American Rescue Plan of 2021 (ARP Act), July 7, 2021, pp. 1-2, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/

ARP-EANS-Application-7.7.21_FINAL.pdf.

68 U.S. Department of Education, Frequently Asked Questions: Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS)

Program as Authorized by the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (the CRRSA

Act) and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP Act), September 17, 2021, Item G-4, https://oese.ed.gov/files/

2021/09/Final-EANS-FAQ-Update-9.17.21.pdf. However, the Certification and Agreement for Funding documents for

EANS I and EANS II indicate that the governor must return to the Secretary any EANS funds that are not awarded or

obligated within one year of receiving such funds. It is unclear whether the one year time period begins on the date on

which the state originally received the EANS funds or the date on which any unobligated EANS funds are returned to

the governor. In either case, the one year time period aligns with statutory language but differs from the aformentioned

guidance provided by ED. For more information, see ED, EANS I application and ED, EANS II application.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CRRSAA

ARPA

“(H) educational technology (including hardware, software, connectivity,

assistive technology, and adaptive equipment) to assist students, educators, and

other staff with remote or hybrid learning”

Same as the CRRSAA

(I) redeveloping instructional plans, including curriculum development, for

remote learning, hybrid learning, or to address learning loss

Same as the CRRSAA

“(J) leasing of sites or spaces to ensure safe social distancing to implement

public health protocols, including guidelines and recommendations from the

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(K) reasonable transportation costs”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(L) initiating and maintaining education and support services or assistance for

remote learning, hybrid learning, or to address learning loss”

Same as the CRRSAA

“(M) reimbursement for the expenses of any services or assistance described

in this paragraph (except for subparagraphs (C) (except that portable air

purification systems shall be an allowable reimbursable expense), (D), (I), and

(L)) that the non-public school incurred on or after the date of the qualifying

emergency, except that any non-public school that has received a loan

guaranteed under paragraph (36) of section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15

U.S.C. 636(a)) as of the day prior to the date of enactment of this Act shall not

be eligible for reimbursements described in this paragraph for any expenses

reimbursed through such loan”

Not permitted

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Response and Relief

Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations

Act, 2021 (CAA; P.L. 116-260), and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

As previously discussed, EANS funds cannot be used to provide direct or indirect assistance to

scholarship granting organizations or related entities for elementary or secondary education. In

addition, EANS funds cannot be used to provide or support vouchers, tuition tax credit programs,

education savings accounts, scholarships, scholarship programs, or tuition-assistance programs

for elementary or secondary education.69 Unobligated EANS funds that revert to the governor for

use under the GEER II uses of funds requirements, however, may be used for these purposes

under certain circumstances as detailed in the GEER II discussion above.

Provision of Services and Assistance to Nonpublic Schools

Statutory language requires that a public agency control the EANS funds used to provide services

or assistance to nonpublic schools and that title to materials, equipment, and property purchased

with such funds be retained by a public agency. In addition, a public agency must administer such

funds, services, assistance, materials, equipment, and property. The provision of services and

assistance must be provided by employees of a public agency or through a contract between such

public agency and an individual, association, agency, or organization. Such employee, individual,

agency, or organization has to be independent of the nonpublic school receiving services or

assistance, and such employment and contracts shall be under the control and supervision of the

69 In the applications for EANS I and EANS II funds, ED indicates that the SEA may use funds for these purposes for

students who received such assistance under GEER for the 2020-2021 school year, and only for the same assistance

provided to such students. This does not appear to be permitted by the statutory language (§321(e)(2)). For more

information, see ED, EANS I application, p. 6, and ED, EANS II application, p. 9.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

public agency. All services or assistance provided, including equipment, material, and other

items, are required to be secular, neutral, and nonideological.

Under the EANS program as funded by the CRRSAA and the ARPA, private schools and their

students and teachers can benefit from the services and assistance provided. However, the

governor, not the private school, is the recipient of federal financial assistance and is responsible

for ensuring the SEA “administers the EANS program in accordance with applicable laws,

including civil rights laws.”70 In its nonregulatory guidance, ED states, “A non-public school

whose students and teachers receive services or assistance under the EANS program, even if such

services or assistance are delivered through reimbursement, is not a ‘recipient of Federal financial

assistance’.”71 Thus, according to ED’s interpretation of these laws and consistent with ED’s

interpretation of equitable service provisions in the ESEA,72 none of the equitable services

provided through the CARES Act (see subsequent discussion), CRRSAA, or ARPA result in a

nonpublic school being considered a recipient of federal financial assistance.

Paycheck Protection Program

As mentioned previously, a nonpublic school had to state in its application for services or

assistance whether it received a PPP loan prior to the enactment date of the CRRSAA and the

amount of the loan. In addition, to receive services or assistance under the EANS program, a

nonpublic school also had to provide an assurance that it did not and would not apply for a PPP

loan that is made on or after the enactment date of the CRRSAA. The receipt of a PPP loan prior

to the enactment date of the CRRSAA did not make a nonpublic school ineligible to receive

services and assistance under the EANS program.

Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief

(ESSER) Fund

Under the ESSER Fund, grants are provided to SEAs, which are then required to provide at least

90% of the funds received to LEAs to be used for myriad purposes such as any activity

authorized under various federal education laws, coordination of preparedness and response to the

COVID-19 emergency, technology acquisition, mental health services, and activities related to

summer learning. As shown in Table 1, the ESSER Fund received an increasing amount of

appropriations under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA. The CARES Act provided $13.2

billion dollars for the ESSER Fund (ESSER I), the CRRSAA provided $54.3 billion for the

ESSER Fund (ESSER II), and the ARPA provided $122.8 billion for the ESSER Fund (ESSER

III)—for a total of $190.3 billion. Under ESSER I and ESSER II, the appropriated amount was

then allocated to states by formula. Under ESSER III, as discussed in the next section, the

70 U.S. Department of Education, Frequently Asked Questions: Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS)

Program as Authorized by the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), March

19, 2021, Item D-12, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/03/Final-EANS-FAQ-2.0-3.19.21.pdf (hereinafter referred to as

“U.S. Department of Education, FAQs: EANS Program”).

71 U.S. Department of Education, FAQs: EANS Program, Item D-12.

72 See, for example, U.S. Department of Education, Frequently Asked Questions—General Issues Related to NonPublic Schools, August 2019, Item 11, https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/non-public-education/files/onpe-faqsaug2019.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Secretary was required to reserve $800 million from the ESSER III appropriation for homeless

children and youth, leaving $122.0 billion to be allocated by formula to states.

Reservation of ARPA ESSER Funds for Homeless Children and

Youth

Under the ARPA, from the total appropriated for the ESSER Fund, the Secretary is required to

reserve $800 million to identify homeless children and youth and provide these youth with wraparound services and assistance needed to attend school and fully participate in school activities.73

The statutory language does not address how these funds should be distributed to other entities to

meet the aforementioned uses of funds. The remaining $121,974,800,000 must be used to award

ESSER Fund grants to SEAs. Neither the CARES Act nor the CRRSAA included a similar

requirement.

Of the $800 million reserved for services and assistance to homeless children and youth, ED

reserved $1 million for national activities and provided the remaining funds to states74 in two

allocations.75 In April 2021, ED awarded 25% ($199,750,000) of the remaining funds to states.

The other 75% ($599,250,000) of the remaining funds was awarded to states following the

completion and approval of an application for funds that states were required to submit to ED in

July 2021.76 Each installment of funds was awarded based on the proportion of funds that each

state received under Title I-A of the ESEA for the prior fiscal year (i.e., FY2020) relative to all

states.

State Grant Application

This section discusses the application requirements that each SEA was required to meet under

ESSER I, ESSER II, and ESSER III to receive funding.

ESSER I

Under ESSER I, the Secretary was required to make ESSER Fund grants available to each SEA

with an approved application. Similar to the GEER Fund grants, the Secretary was required to

issue a notice inviting states to apply for the grants within 30 days of enactment of the CARES

Act. Upon receipt of an application, the Secretary had 30 days to approve or deny it. The statutory

language did not provide for an appeals process for any state whose application was denied.

73 For more information on the uses of funds, see U.S. Department of Education, Frequently Asked ARP-HCY

Questions and Answers, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/offices/american-rescue-plan/american-rescue-plan-elementarysecondary-school-emergency-relief-homeless-children-youth-arp-hcy/frequently-asked-arp-hcy-questions-and-answers/

; Letter from Miguel A. Cardona, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, to Chief State School Officers, April 23,

2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/ARP-Homeless-DCL-4.23.pdf; and U.S. Department of Education, Application

for Funding under the American Rescue Plan Act Education for Homeless Children and Youth (ARP-HCY): Second

Disbursement (ARP Homeless II), July 6, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/ARP-HCY-Application_FINAL_0706-2021.docx.

74 For the purposes of this reservation of funds, states include the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

75 State grant amounts are available at U.S. Department of Education, “American Rescue Plan Supporting the Needs of

Homeless Children and Youth: Reservation from the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund,” July

2, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/Revised-Attachment-1-ARP-Homeless-I-II-Total-Allocations.docx.

76 U.S. Department of Education, Application for Funding under the American Rescue Plan Act Education for

Homeless Children and Youth (ARP-HCY): Second Disbursement (ARP Homeless II), July 6, 2021,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/07/ARP-HCY-Application_FINAL_07-06-2021.docx.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

On April 23, 2020, in a letter to each state commissioner of education, ED announced the

availability of grants under the ESSER Fund and the opening of the application process.77 To

apply, each state had to complete a Certification and Agreement form.78 In the letter, ED indicated

that once a state submitted a completed Certification and Agreement form, ED would process the

application and obligate the funds within three business days.

The Certification and Agreement form required each state to provide programmatic, fiscal, and

reporting assurances. These included, for example, assurances related to the distribution of at

least 90% of the funds received to LEAs, and to the statutory requirement that LEAs provide

equitable services to students and teachers in nonpublic schools. Required assurances also

pertained to the provision of technical assistance to LEAs related to remote learning, and the use

of funds retained by the SEA.

The application further required the SEA to describe the information the SEA could request that

LEAs include in their subgrant applications. In addition, it required the SEA to specify the extent

to which the SEA intended to use funds reserved at the state level to support (1) technological

capacity and access to support remote learning and (2) remote learning by developing “new

informational and academic resources and expanding awareness of, and access to, best practices

and innovations in remote learning and support for students, families, and educators.”79 A

governor also had to include an assurance that the state would comply with the reporting

requirements included in Section 15011(b)(2) of Division B of the CARES Act (see the

“Reporting Requirements” section) and submit quarterly reports to the Secretary containing such

information as the Secretary may reasonably require. For example, within 60 days of receipt of

funds, the SEA was required to provide ED with a report that includes a budget specifying how

the SEA would use funds reserved at the state level.

ESSER II

Under ESSER II, the Secretary was required to award funds to each SEA with an approved

application for ESSER I within 30 days of enactment of the CRRSAA. All SEAs had an approved

application for ESSER I, so all SEAs were eligible to receive ESSER II funds without having to

complete an application.

ESSER III

The ARPA did not require SEAs to have an approved application on file or to submit a new

application. The statutory language did not address the application process. In addition, it did not

establish any deadlines for when ED needed to allocate funds to SEAs.

In the absence of statutory language, ED made two-thirds of the ESSER III funds available for

grants to SEAs in March 2021. By accepting the funds, an SEA had to agree to submit a plan that

contained information that the Secretary may “reasonably require.” The plan had to be submitted

77 Letter from Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Education, to State Commissioner of Education, April 23, 2020,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/04/ESSER-Fund-Cover-Letter.pdf.

78 A copy of the Certification and Agreement form is available at https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/04/ESSERFCertification-and-Agreement-2.pdf.

79 U.S. Department of Education, Certification and Agreement for Funding under the Education Stabilization Fund

Program Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER Fund), April 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/

files/2020/04/ESSERF-Certification-and-Agreement-2.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

based on the timeline established by the Secretary for an SEA to receive the remaining one-third

of its ESSER III grant.

In April 2021, ED released the application that SEAs were required to complete as a condition of

receiving ESSER III funds.80 The application required an SEA to provide information on its

current status and needs, how the SEA would support LEAs in safely reopening schools and

sustaining the safe operation of schools, the SEA’s plans for consultation and for coordinating the

use of ESSER III funds with other resources to meet the needs of students, the SEA’s evidencebased strategies for maximizing the use of funds to support students, how the SEA would support

LEAs in developing high-quality plans for their use of ESSER III funds, strategies the SEA would

use to support and stabilize the educator workforce and make staffing decisions, and how the SEA

is building capacity at the SEA and LEA levels to ensure high-quality data collection and

reporting and to ensure funds are used for their intended purposes. The application also included

several required assurances, including those related to the uses of funds, maintenance of effort,

maintenance of equity, and civil rights protections.

Formula Grants to SEAs

ESSER Fund appropriations were awarded to states based on their relative shares of grants

awarded under Title I-A of the ESEA for the most recent fiscal year. The ESSER Fund state

grants calculated by ED under the CARES Act were based on FY2019 Title I-A grants. The

ESSER Fund state grants calculated by ED under the CRRSAA and ARPA were based on

FY2020 Title I-A grants (see Appendix E). The ESEA requires that Title I-A grant amounts used

to determine other formula grants to states be calculated assuming no hold harmless provisions

are applied.81 Thus, ED calculated state grants for the ESSER Fund using Title I-A grants with no

hold harmless provisions applied. Because the underlying data used for calculating ESSER Fund

state grants under the CRRSAA and ARPA are more recent than the underlying data used by ED

in calculating ESSER Fund state grants under the CARES Act, some states’ shares of the

appropriations available for the ESSER Fund differ under each act.

Table E-1, Table E-2, Table E-3, and Table E-4 present actual state grant amounts under the

ESSER Fund as provided under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA, respectively. Table E-1,

Table E-2, and Table E-3 also show the amount of funds that states were required to reserve for

various purposes under each of the laws. Table E-3 also details the amount of funding that LEAs

were required to reserve for learning loss. Table E-4 provides a summary of state grant amounts

across the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

Formula Grants to LEAs

Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA, each state is required to use at least 90% of the

funds received to make subgrants to LEAs in proportion to each LEA’s share of Title I-A grants

made to all LEAs in the state during the most recent fiscal year. The ESSER I grants to LEAs

80 For more information, see Letter from Miguel A. Cardona, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, to Chief State

School Officers, April 21, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/21-002903-ARP-application-DCL_FINAL.pdf, and

U.S. Department of Education, State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency

Relief Fund, April 21, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/04/ARP-ESSER-State-Plan-Template-04-202021_130PM.pdf.

81 The requirement to determine state grants with no hold harmless provisions applied is in Section 1122(c)(3) of the

ESEA. For more information on Title I-A formulas, see CRS Report R44461, Allocation of Funds Under Title I-A of

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

were calculated based on FY2019 Title I-A grants. The ESSER II and ESSER III grants to LEAs

were calculated based on FY2020 Title I-A grants.

The ARPA included a new requirement that an SEA must award grants to LEAs in an “expedited

and timely manner and, to the extent practicable, not later than 60 days” after the SEA received

the funds. Neither the CARES Act nor the CRRSAA included a similar requirement.

Other State Reservations of Funds

Under ESSER I and ESSER II, an SEA was permitted to reserve up to 10% of the funds received

for administration and for other state activities as determined by the SEA “to address issues

responding to coronavirus.” An SEA could reserve no more than 0.5% of the total grant amount

for administration.

While SEAs were permitted to reserve ESSER III funds for administration and other state

activities, there are additional requirements for the reservation of funds by the SEA. Under

ESSER III, SEAs were required to reserve at least 5% of the total grant award for activities to

address learning loss. SEAs also were required to reserve at least 1% of the total grant award for

evidence-based summer enrichment programs and at least 1% for “evidence-based

comprehensive” afterschool programs. Each SEA was permitted to reserve up to 0.5% of its total

grant award for administration. Any remaining funds could be used by the SEA for other state

activities as determined by the SEA to “address issues responding to coronavirus.”

For purposes of this report, it was assumed that SEAs would reserve the full 0.5% for

administration under each ESSER Fund enacted by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

Under the CARES Act and CRRSAA, this would leave a maximum of 9.5% for other state

activities. Under the ARPA, this would leave a maximum of 2.5% for other state activities. Any

funds not used for administration could be used for other state activities.

The SEA grant reservation requirements and the allocation of funds to LEAs under the CARES

Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA are summarized in Table 5.

Table 5. Summary of SEA Grant Reservation Requirements Under the ESSER Fund

Included in the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Percentage of Total SEA Grant Award to Be Reserved or

Allocated by the SEA

SEA Reservations and

Allocations

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

Allocation of funds for grants to LEAs

At least 90.0%

At least 90.0%a

Reservation of funds for other state

activitiesb

At most 9.5%

At most 2.5%

Reservation of funds for

administrationb

At most 0.5%

Reservation of funds for activities to

address learning loss

At least 5.0%

Reservation of funds for summer

enrichment activities

At least 1.0%

Reservation of funds for afterschool

programs

At least 1.0%

100.0%

Total

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

(CAA; P.L. 116-260), and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

a. LEAs are required to reserve at least 20.0% of the funds received to address learning loss.

b. It was assumed that each state would reserve the full 0.5% for administrative purposes. Any funds not used

for administrative purposes could be used for other state activities.

LEA Plan to Return to In-Person Instruction

The ARPA included a new requirement for LEAs receiving ARPA funds. Within 30 days of

receipt of such funds, an LEA was required to make publicly available on its website a plan for

the “safe return to in-person instruction and continuity of services.” Prior to making the plan

publicly available, the LEA must seek public comments on it and take such comments into

account in the development of the plan. Neither the CARES Act nor the CRRSAA included a

similar requirement.

LEA Uses of Funds

Funds provided to LEAs under the ESSER Fund can be used for a multitude of purposes. Under

the ARPA, however, LEAs must reserve at least 20% of their funds to address learning loss before

using funds for other activities. While both the CRRSAA and ARPA added additional uses of

funds to the uses of funds specified in the CARES Act, these additional uses were already

permissible under the CARES Act.82 For example, the CRRSAA and ARPA included statutory

language allowing ESSER funds for the following two purposes:

1. “School facility repairs and improvements to enable operation of schools to

reduce risk of virus transmission and exposure to environmental health hazards,

and to support student health needs.”

2. “Inspection, testing, maintenance, repair, replacement, and upgrade projects to

improve the indoor air quality in school facilities, including mechanical and nonmechanical heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, filtering,

purification and other air cleaning, fans, control systems, and window and door

repair and replacement.”

While not included in the CARES Act statutory language, school facility repairs and

improvements and projects to improve the indoor air quality in school facilities also are allowable

uses of funds under the CARES Act.

As previously discussed, funds for ESF programs were provided to “prevent, prepare for, and

respond to coronavirus”.83 Table 6 provides a list of all authorized activities under each of the

acts that may be undertaken to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The specific

wording of the uses of funds has been taken directly from statutory language (where applicable).

82 See, for example, U.S. Department of Education, Fact Sheet: Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief

Fund II, Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021, 2021, https://oese.ed.gov/files/

2021/01/Final_ESSERII_Factsheet_1.5.21.pdf.

83 See for example, the CARES Act, Division B provisions that apply to the Department of Education or U.S.

Department of Education, Frequently Asked Questions: Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Programs

and Governor’s Emergency Education Relief Programs, December 7, 2022, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2022/12/ESSERand-GEER-Use-of-Funds-FAQs-December-7-2022-Update.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Table 6. Allowable Uses of ESSER Funds by LEAs Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

and ARPA

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

“Any activity authorized by the

ESEA of 1965, including the Native

Hawaiian Education Act and the

Alaska Native Educational Equity,

Support, and Assistance Act (20

U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), the Individuals

with Disabilities Education Act (20

U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) (‘‘IDEA’’), the

Adult Education and Family Literacy

Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), the

Carl D. Perkins Career and

Technical Education Act of 2006

(20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.) (‘‘the

Perkins Act’’), or subtitle B of title

VII of the McKinney-Vento

Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.

11431 et seq.).”

Same as the CARES Act.

Similar to the CARES Act, but does

not include a specific reference to

the Native Hawaiian Education Act

and the Alaska Native Educational

Equity, Support, and Assistance Act.

These acts are included in the

ESEA, so it is not a substantive

change. However, using funds under

Title VII-B of the McKinney-Vento

Homeless Assistance Act is no

longer included in the list of uses of

funds. The ARPA, unlike the CARES

Act or CRRSAA, requires the

Secretary to reserve $800 million

from the total ESSER appropriation

for homeless children and youth.

“Coordination of preparedness and

response efforts of local educational

agencies with State, local, Tribal,

and territorial public health

Departments, and other relevant

agencies, to improve coordinated

responses among such entities to

prevent, prepare for, and respond

to coronavirus.”

Same as the CARES Act.

“Providing principals and other

school leaders with the resources

necessary to address the needs of

their individual schools.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Not included in statutory language.

“Activities to address the unique

needs of low-income children or

students, children with disabilities,

English learners, racial and ethnic

minorities, students experiencing

homelessness, and foster care

youth, including how outreach and

service delivery will meet the needs

of each population.”

Same as the CARES Act.

“Developing and implementing

procedures and systems to improve

the preparedness and response

efforts of local educational

agencies.”

Same as the CARES Act.

“Training and professional

development for staff of the local

educational agency on sanitation

and minimizing the spread of

infectious diseases.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

“Purchasing supplies to sanitize and

clean the facilities of a local

educational agency, including

buildings operated by such agency.”

Same as the CARES Act.

“Planning for and coordinating

during long-term closures, including

for how to provide meals to eligible

students, how to provide

technology for online learning to all

students, how to provide guidance

for carrying out requirements

under the Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (20

U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) and how to

ensure other educational services

can continue to be provided

consistent with all Federal, State,

and local requirements.”

Similar to the CARES Act:

“Planning for, coordinating, and

implementing activities during longterm closures, including providing

meals to eligible students, providing

technology for online learning to all

students, providing guidance for

carrying out requirements under

the IDEA and ensuring other

educational services can continue to

be provided consistent with all

Federal, State, and local

requirements.”

Same as the CRRSAA.

“Purchasing educational technology

(including hardware, software, and

connectivity) for students who are

served by the local educational

agency that aids in regular and

substantive educational interaction

between students and their

classroom instructors, including

low-income students and students

with disabilities, which may include

assistive technology or adaptive

equipment.”

Same as the CARES Act.

“Providing mental health services

and supports.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Similar to the CARES Act:

“Providing mental health services

and supports, including through the

implementation of evidence-based

full-service community schools.”

“Planning and implementing

activities related to summer

learning and supplemental

afterschool programs, including

providing classroom instruction or

online learning during the summer

months and addressing the needs of

low-income students, students with

disabilities, English learners, migrant

students, students experiencing

homelessness, and children in foster

care.”

Similar to the CARES Act.

Changes the phrase “students with

disabilities” to “children with

disabilities.”

Same as the CRRSAA.

“Other activities that are necessary

to maintain the operation of and

continuity of services in local

educational agencies and continuing

to employ existing staff of the local

educational agency.”

Same as the CARES Act.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CARES Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

Not included in statutory language.

“Addressing learning loss among

students, including low-income

students, children with disabilities,

English learners, racial and ethnic

minorities, students experiencing

homelessness, and children and

youth in foster care, of the local

educational agency, including by—

(A) Administering and using highquality assessments that are valid

and reliable, to accurately assess

students’ academic progress and

assist educators in meeting

students’ academic needs, including

through differentiating instruction.

(B) Implementing evidence-based

activities to meet the

comprehensive needs of students.

assistance to parents and families

on how they can effectively support

students, including in a distance

learning environment.

(D) Tracking student attendance

and improving student engagement

in distance education.”

Same as the CRRSAA.

Not included in statutory language.

“School facility repairs and

improvements to enable operation

of schools to reduce risk of virus

transmission and exposure to

environmental health hazards, and

to support student health needs.”

Same as the CRRSAA.

Not included in statutory language.

“Inspection, testing, maintenance,

repair, replacement, and upgrade

projects to improve the indoor air

quality in school facilities, including

mechanical and non-mechanical

heating, ventilation, and air

conditioning systems, filtering,

purification and other air cleaning,

fans, control systems, and window

and door repair and replacement.”

Same as the CRRSAA.

Not included in statutory language.

“Developing strategies and

implementing public health

protocols including, to the greatest

extent practicable, policies in line

with guidance from the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention for

the reopening and operation of

school facilities to effectively

maintain the health and safety of

students, educators, and other

staff.”

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

(CAA; P.L. 116-260), and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

Reallocation of Funds

Under ESSER I, ESSER II, and ESSER III, any funds that a state does not award within one year

of receiving them must be returned to the Secretary. The Secretary is required to reallocate such

funds to the remaining states based on the formula used to provide the initial amounts.

Equitable Services for Private School Students and

Teachers Under the CARES Act

In addition to assistance available to nonpublic schools through the EANS program (see previous

discussion), the CARES Act included equitable services requirements that apply to funds received

by LEAs under the GEER I and the ESSER I. This section provides an overview of these

requirements and discusses the controversy related to them stemming from ED’s interpretation of

the statutory provisions.

Under the CARES Act, an LEA that received funds under the GEER Fund or the ESSER Fund is

subject to equitable services requirements. More specifically, LEAs receiving such funds are

required to provide equitable services to students and teachers in nonpublic schools, as

determined in consultation with representatives of nonpublic schools, in the same manner as

under Section 1117 of the ESEA. After reserving the required amount of funding to provide

services for nonpublic school students and teachers, the LEA is then required to provide services

that are equitable in comparison to services provided to public school students and teachers.

Services provided to nonpublic school students and teachers must be provided in a timely manner.

Such services, including materials and equipment, must be secular, neutral, and nonideological.

Under Section 1117 of the ESEA, an LEA’s determination of how much funding should be

reserved to serve nonpublic school students is based on the number of low-income students who

reside in the school attendance area of Title I-A public schools in the LEA, regardless of where

those children attend a nonpublic school (i.e., at a nonpublic school located inside or outside the

LEA). Funding provided to public schools under Title I-A is based on the percentage of lowincome students enrolled in each school. The LEA in which the nonpublic school student resides

is responsible for providing services to students in the school that the nonpublic school student

attends, even if that school is in another LEA.84 The provision of Title I-A services is not limited

to low-income public school or nonpublic school students.85

84 An LEA can also provide equitable services to eligible students attending a private school that is part of a group of

private schools by pooling the Title I-A funds that were generated by students from low-income families who reside in

participating Title I-A public school attendance areas and attend a private school that is part of the group of private

schools for which funds are being pooled. For more information, see U.S. Department of Education, Title I, Part A of

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as Amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act: Updated NonRegulatory Guidance, October 7, 2019, Items B-8 and B-9, https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/non-public-education/

files/equitable-services-guidance-100419.pdf.

85 With respect to private school students, “in general, to be eligible for Title I services, a private school child must

reside in a participating Title I public school attendance area and must be identified by the LEA as low achieving on the

basis of multiple, educationally related, objective criteria” (ibid., Item C-1).

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

ED’s initial interpretation of this provision indicated that only a portion of the Section 1117

provisions applied. Nonbinding guidance from ED86 indicated that the determination of the share

of funds available to serve nonpublic school students from GEER Fund and ESSER Fund grants

received by LEAs should be based on total enrollment in nonpublic schools located in the LEA.

The guidance explained that all public school students in the LEA are eligible to be served under

the GEER Fund and ESSER Fund. That is, the programs are not limited to serving low-income

public school students, so the required equitable services should not be limited to low-income

nonpublic school students. In practice, this means that LEAs would determine the amount of

funding to reserve to provide services to nonpublic school students and teachers based on the total

number of nonpublic school students enrolled in the LEA relative to total public and nonpublic

school enrollment. For some LEAs, this may result in them reserving a substantially larger

percentage of the funds they received under the GEER Fund or ESSER Fund than they would

have reserved if the calculation had been based only on the number of eligible low-income

nonpublic school students relative to the total number of eligible low-income nonpublic and

public school students.87

Some Members of Congress indicated that they did not agree that the guidance issued by ED

reflects congressional intent. For example, former Senator Lamar Alexander, then-Chair of the

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, stated that he thought, and he

believed that most Members also thought, that LEAs would reserve funds to serve nonpublic

school students and teachers in the same way that they are reserved under Title I-A. However, he

did not say that Secretary DeVos had exceeded any boundaries in issuing the guidance nor did he

commit to overturning the guidance, which does not have the force of law.88 In addition, several

Democratic Members sent a letter to Secretary DeVos indicating that they did not believe that the

ED guidance reflects congressional intent.89 The letter argued that the CARES Act’s reference to

the equitable services provision in Section 1117 of the ESEA requires the determination of how

much funding should be reserved to serve students and teachers in nonpublic schools to be made

based on the number of nonpublic school students who would be included in the count of students

used to determine funding for equitable services under Title I-A of the ESEA (i.e., low-income

nonpublic school students) rather than based on the count of all students attending nonpublic

schools in the LEA.

The letter further stated that if Congress had wanted to have funding determined based on the

number of students attending all nonpublic schools and have LEAs serve teachers and students

attending all nonpublic schools located in the LEA, it could have cited the equitable services

86 ED has removed the guidance from its website, as the guidance does not match the interim final rule that ED

published in July. The guidance is available to congressional clients from the authors of this report upon request.

87 See, for example, Letter from Carissa Moffat Miller, Executive Director, Council of Chief State School Officers, to

Secretary Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Education, May 5, 2020, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&

source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj73ZLI1cfpAhWRgnIEHZugAZoQFjAAegQIBBAB&url=

https%3A%2F%2Fccsso.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2F2020-05%2FDeVosESLetter050520.pdf&usg=

AOvVaw2GJDElYRfzHpWo8Udl7QSC.

88 Andrew Ujifusa, “Sen. Alexander Splits From Betsy DeVos on COVID-19 Aid to Help Private Schools,” Education

Week, May 21, 2021, http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2020/05/alexander-devos-COVID-aid-privateschools-CDC-reopening.html.

89 Letter from Representative Robert C. “Bobby” Scott, Chair, Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of

Representatives; Representative Rosa L. DeLauro, Chair, Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Health and

Human Services, Labor, and Education and Other Related Services, U.S. House of Representatives; and Senator Patty

Murray, Ranking Member, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, U.S. Senate, to The Honorable

Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Education, May 20, 2020, https://edlabor.house.gov/imo/media/doc/2020-520%20Ltr%20to%20DeVos%20re%20Equitable%20Services.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

provisions included in ESEA Section 8501 rather than Section 1117. Under the Section 8501

provision, all nonpublic school students who are eligible to be served by the relevant program are

included in the count used to determine the amount of funding that should be reserved to serve

nonpublic school students and teachers. In addition, under Section 8501 the determination of

eligible nonpublic school students is based on the number of eligible nonpublic school students

attending nonpublic schools in the LEA.

On July 1, 2020, ED published an interim final rule (IFR) providing LEAs with three options for

implementing the equitable services provision.90 (ED also removed the prior guidance from its

website.) Under one option, an LEA could determine the proportional share based on enrollment

in participating nonpublic elementary and secondary schools in the LEA compared to the total

enrollment in public and participating nonpublic elementary and secondary schools in the LEA

(total enrollment option).

The remaining options included in the IFR were available to LEAs only if they agreed to use the

funds available for public education exclusively to serve students and teachers in public Title I-A

schools. If this condition was met, an LEA could determine the share of funds to be reserved to

serve students and teachers in nonpublic schools by either (1) using the proportional share of Title

I-A funds calculated by the LEA under Section 1117(a)(4)(A) of the ESEA for school year 20192020, or (2) determining the number of children ages 5-17 who are from low-income families and

attend each nonpublic school in the LEA that would be participating in a CARES Act program

compared to the total number of children ages 5-17 who are from low-income families in Title IA schools and participating nonpublic elementary and secondary schools in the LEA. In addition,

if an LEA chose to implement one of these two options, it was required comply with the

supplement not supplant requirement included in Section 1118(b) of the ESEA.91 Among other

things, this requirement prohibited the LEA from allocating CARES Act funds to Title I-A

schools and then redirecting state or local funds to non-Title I-A schools.

The IFR was subsequently challenged in four U.S. district courts.92 On September 4, 2020, in

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Elisabeth D. DeVos, the U.S.

District Court for the District of Columbia issued an opinion93 and an order94 vacating the IFR.

ED did not appeal the rulings. In revised guidance following the court rulings, ED indicated that

90 U.S. Department of Education, “CARES Act Programs; Equitable Services to Students and Teachers in Non-Public

Schools,” 85 Federal Register 39479-39488, July 1, 2020.

91 The CARES Act did not apply a supplement not supplant requirement to either the GEER Fund or the ESSER Fund.

For more information about the Title I-A supplement not supplant requirement, see CRS In Focus IF10405, Fiscal

Accountability Requirements That Apply to Title I-A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

92 See Washington v. DeVos, No. 2:20-cv-1119-BJR, 2020 WL 5079038 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 21, 2020) (granting

preliminary injunction against the Department); Michigan v. DeVos, No. 3:20-cv-4478-JD, 2020 WL 5074397 (N.D.

Cal. Aug. 26, 2020) (granting preliminary injunction against the Department); NAACP v. DeVos, No. 20-cv-1996

(DLF), 2020 WL 5291406 (D. D.C. Sept. 4, 2020) (vacating the IFR); and Council of Parent Attorneys & Advocates,

Inc. v. DeVos, No. 1:20-cv-2310-GLR (D. Md.); U.S. Department of Education, Providing Equitable Services to

Students and Teachers in Non-Public Schools Under the CARES Act Programs, October 9, 2020, p. ii,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/10/Providing-Equitable-Services-under-the-CARES-Act-Programs-Update-10-92020.pdf (hereinafter referred to as “U.S. Department of Education, Providing Equitable Services Under the CARES

Act Programs.”)

93 Memorandum Opinion, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Elisabeth D. DeVos, No. 20cv-1996 (DLF) (United States District Court for the District of Columbia 2020), September 4, 2020,

https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/09/NAACP-v-DeVos-DDC_Opinion-Granting-Partial-Summary-Judgment.pdf.

94 Order, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Elisabeth D. DeVos, No. 20-cv-1996 (DLF)

(United States District Court for the District of Columbia 2020), September 4, 2020, https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/09/

NAACP-v-DeVos-DDC_Order-granting-Partial-SJ-09-04-2020.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

LEAs must calculate the proportional share for equitable services using the formula included in

ESEA Section 1117.95 In determining the proportional share, LEAs may use the proportional

share calculated for Title I-A purposes from either school year 2019-2020 or school year 20202021. However, unlike the requirements of Section 1117, ED determined that the LEA in which a

nonpublic school is located should provide the equitable services, which is similar to the

provision of services under ESEA Title VIII-F-1.96

Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF)

The HEERF provides funds to IHEs to address needs related to the COVID-19 emergency. IHEs

may variously use awards to provide grant aid to students, support the transition to distance

education, defray institutional expenses incurred as a result of the emergency, and provide support

services to students.

As shown in Table 1, the HEERF has received increasing levels of appropriations under each of

the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA. The CARES Act provided $13.9 billion for the HEERF

(HEERF I), the CRRSAA provided $22.7 billion (HEERF II), and the ARPA provided $39.6

billion (HEERF III). The amounts available for the HEERF are awarded to IHEs through three

types of programs: (1) direct grants to IHEs; (2) the minority serving institutions (MSIs)

programs authorized under Title III-A, Title III-B, Title V-A, and Title VII-A-4 of the Higher

Education Act (HEA);97 and (3) the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education

(FIPSE) authorized under HEA Title VII-B. The reservation of funds for the three types of

programs, the allocation of funds within the three types of programs, application requirements,

and allowable uses of funds differ between each of HEERF I, HEERF II, and HEERF III. This

section provides an overview of the statutory requirements and secretarial discretion exercised

under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

The reservation requirements for the three types of programs within the HEERF under the

CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA are summarized in Table 7. The funds represented by each

reservation are also displayed. The CRRSAA required that ED augment the reservation for direct

grants to public and private nonprofit IHEs under CRRSAA with CARES Act HEERF direct

grant funds and Safe Schools and Citizenship Education funds that were unobligated as of the

date of enactment of CRRSAA.98 As a consequence, an additional $317.8 million was repurposed

from the CARES Act to the CRRSAA reservation for direct grants to public and private nonprofit

IHEs (Table 7).99 The repurposed funds are not reflected in Table 1. Actual amounts distributed

to IHEs under each program will differ.

95 U.S. Department of Education, Providing Equitable Services Under the CARES Act Programs, Item 10.

96 U.S. Department of Education, Providing Equitable Services Under the CARES Act Programs, Item 4.

97 For more information on Programs for Minority Serving Institutions, see CRS Report R43237, Programs for

Minority-Serving Institutions Under the Higher Education Act.

98 The CARES Act provided $100,000,000 under the Safe Schools and Citizenship Education account to prevent,

prepare for, and respond to COVID-19, by supplementing funds otherwise available for Project School Emergency

Response to Violence (SERV). Project SERV funds short-term and long-term education-related services for LEAs and

IHEs to help them recover from a violent or traumatic event in which the learning environment has been disrupted.

Such funds that were previously designated by Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to the Balanced Budget

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 are designated by Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to

Section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

99 U.S. Department of Education, HEERF II: Institutional Portion for Public and Nonprofit Institutions (a)(1),

Methodology for Calculating Allocations, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/heerfiiinstitutional.html. Such

repurposed funds are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to Section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), enacted on November 15, 2021, and the

Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-158), enacted on June 25, 2022, rescinded a portion of the

unobligated HEERF balances remaining at the time. P.L. 117-58 rescinded $353 million from the

CARES Act and CRRSAA direct grants and MSI programs. P.L. 117-158 rescinded an additional

$400 million from the ARPA direct grants to proprietary IHEs program. The rescission is not

reflected in Table 1 or Table 7.

Congressional Research Service

Table 7. Reservations of Funds Under the HEERF as Provided by the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

(Dollars in thousands)

CARES Act

Program

Required

Reservation

CRRSAA

Amount

Required

Reservation

ARPA

Amount

Required

Reservation

Total

Amount

Direct Grants to Institutions of Higher

Education (IHEs): public, private nonprofit,

and proprietary IHEs and postsecondary

vocational institutions

90.0%

$12,557,255

Direct Grants to IHEs: public and private

nonprofit IHEs and postsecondary vocational

institutions

89.0%

$20,518,302a

91.0%

$36,021,959

$56,540,261

Direct Grants to IHEs: proprietary IHEs

3.0%

$680,914

1.0%

$395,846

$1,076,760

Subtotal for Direct Grants to IHEs

—

$12,557,255

—

$21,199,216a

—

$36,417,804

$70,174,275

Programs for Minority Serving Institutions

7.5%

$1,046,438

7.5%

$1,702,285

7.5%

$2,968,843

$5,717,566

2.5%

$433,147b

0.5%

$113,486

0.5%

$197,923

$744,555

100.0%

$14,036,839b

100.0%

$23,014,987a

100.0%

$39,584,570

$76,636,396

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary

Education

Total Fundingc

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the

Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA; P.L.

116-260), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2); and U.S. Department of Education documentation.

Notes: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. NA = not applicable.

a. This amount includes an additional $317,851,129 of designated CARES Act funds that were unobligated as of December 27, 2020, in accordance with the CRRSAA.

U.S. Department of Education, HEERF II: Institutional Portion for Public and Nonprofit Institutions (a)(1), Methodology for Calculating Allocations,

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/heerfiiinstitutional.html.

b. The estimated allocations and actual awards under the CARES Act FIPSE program exceeded the initial reservation for such purpose by $84,334,327.

c. These amounts do not take into account $753 million in rescissions enacted by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58) and the Keep Kids Fed Act

of 2022 (P.L. 117-158).

CRS-39

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Direct Grants

The HEERF direct grants were allocated to public, private nonprofit, and proprietary IHEs and

postsecondary vocational institutions, as defined in Section 102 of the HEA,100 based on the

enrollment of Pell Grant recipients and students who were not Pell Grant recipients who were and

were not enrolled exclusively in distance education prior to the COVID-19 emergency.101 The

specific formula factors and associated weights under the formula for the CARES Act, CRRSAA,

and ARPA are shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Percentage of Funds Allocated by Each Formula Factor For the HEERF

Direct Grants to IHEs Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

CARES Act

Formula Factor

CRRSAA

ARPA

Percentage of Appropriation

Full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment of Pell Grant

recipients who were not enrolled exclusively in distance

education prior to the COVID-19 emergency, relative to

the total FTE enrollment of such individuals in all eligible

institutions of higher education (IHEs).

75.0%

37.5%

12-month unduplicated headcount of Pell Grant recipients

who were not enrolled exclusively in distance education

prior to the COVID-19 emergency, relative to the total

unduplicated headcount of such individuals in all eligible

IHEs.

37.5%

FTE enrollment of students who were not Pell Grant

recipients and were not enrolled exclusively in distance

education prior to the COVID-19 emergency, relative to

the total FTE enrollment of such individuals in all eligible

IHEs.

25.0%

11.5%

12-month unduplicated headcount of students who were

not Pell Grant recipients and were not enrolled exclusively

in distance education prior to the COVID-19 emergency,

relative to the total unduplicated headcount of such

individuals in all eligible IHEs.

11.5%

FTE enrollment of Pell Grant recipients who were

enrolled exclusively in distance education prior to the

COVID-19 emergency, relative to the total FTE

enrollment of such individuals in all eligible IHEs.

1.0%

12-month unduplicated headcount of Pell Grant recipients

who were enrolled exclusively in distance education prior

to the COVID-19 emergency, relative to the total

unduplicated headcount of such individuals in all eligible

IHEs.

1.0%

100.0%

Total

Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of provisions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental

100 IHEs outside the United States, as defined in HEA Section 102(a)(2), are excluded.

101 For a description of the Pell Grant program, see CRS Report R45418, Federal Pell Grant Program of the Higher

Education Act: Primer.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA) included as Division M in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

(CAA; P.L. 116-260), and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2).

Note: NA = not applicable.

Although not required by the statutory provisions, ED reserved $50 million of the CARES Act

HEERF funds for direct grants for institutions that may have been eligible for an allocation but

were excluded from the original estimates.102 ED did not reserve funds for such a purpose from

the CRRSAA or ARPA.

Appendix F presents estimated IHE allocations aggregated at the institutional sector level (e.g.,

public two-year) and state level for the HEERF direct grants, as funded under the CARES Act,

CRRSAA, ARPA, and all of the acts combined. Actual amounts awarded to IHEs may differ as

IHEs must apply and/or agree to accept the terms and conditions of the awards, and IHEs may

decline a portion of the allocation. Specifically, Table F-1 displays IHE allocations aggregated at

the institutional sector level; Table F-2, Table F-3, and Table F-4 show the IHE allocations

aggregated at the state level for each act; and Table F-5 provides a summary of IHE allocations

aggregated at the state level across the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

Minority Serving Institutions Programs

The HEA authorizes several grant programs to assist IHEs that serve high concentrations of

minority and/or financially needy students. These programs are collectively known as the MSI

programs. Under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA, the HEERF MSI funds were to be

allocated to the MSI programs authorized under HEA Titles III-A, III-B, V-A, V-B, and VII-A-4

according to each program’s proportional share of funds allocated under the Further Consolidated

Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94).103 The actual reservations of funds for each of the select

MSI programs within the HEERF under the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA are summarized

in Table 9.

Table 9. Actual Reservations of Funds for the MSI Programs Under HEERF of the

CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

(Programs sorted in order of statutory authority; dollars in thousands)

Program

CARES

Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

Total

Strengthening Institutions Program (HEA, Title III-A)

$148,591

$241,719

$421,565

$811,874

Strengthening American Indian Tribally Controlled

Colleges and Universities (HEA, Title III-A)

$50,469

$82,101

$143,186

$275,756

Strengthening Alaska Native and Native HawaiianServing Institutions (HEA, Title III-A)

$25,239

$41,058

$71,607

$137,904

Strengthening Predominantly Black Institutions (HEA,

Title III-A)

$18,182

$29,577

$51,583

$99,341

Strengthening Native American-Serving, Nontribal

Institutions (HEA, Title III-A)

$6,123

$9,960

$17,370

$33,452

102 U.S. Department of Education, “Methodology for Calculating Allocations per Section 18004(a)(1) of the CARES

Act,” available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/heerf90percentformulaallocationexplanation.pdf.

103 In FY2020, the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) authorized under HEA Title IIIE received $12.8 million in discretionary appropriations. The CARES Act does not authorize the Secretary to allocate

funds to the MSEIP.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

Program

Strengthening Asian American and Native American

Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (HEA, Title III-A)

CARES

Act

CRRSAA

ARPA

Total

$6,123

$9,960

$17,370

$33,452

Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and

Universities (HBCUs) (HEA, Title III-B)

$447,466

$727,912

$1,269,503

$2,444,881

Strengthening Historically Black Graduate Institutions

(HEA, Title III-B)

$115,720

$188,247

$328,308

$632,275

Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HEA, Title

V-A)

$197,123

$320,668

$559,256

$1,077,047

Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for

Hispanic Americans (HEA, Title V-B)

$17,687

$28,772

$50,179

$96,638

Masters Degrees at HBCUs (HEA, Title VII-A-4)

$13,716

$22,313

$38,915

$74,944

$1,046,438

$1,702,285

$2,968,843

$5,717,566

Totala

Sources: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on allocation data published by the U.S.

Department of Education (ED), Formula Allocations for Section 18004 of the CARES Act, https://www2.ed.gov/

about/offices/list/ope/caresact.html as of May 22, 2020, and ED allocation data for Section 314(a)(2) of the

CRRSAA, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/crrsaa.html as of July 14, 2021; and ED, “U.S. Department of

Education Announces $3.2 Billion in Additional Higher Education Emergency Relief Funds to Support Students at

Historic and Under-Resourced Institutions,” press release, July 29, 2021.

a. These amounts do not take into account $753 million in rescissions enacted by the Infrastructure

Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58) and the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-158).

The allocation of funds to IHEs within some MSI programs under the CARES Act differs from

that under the CRRSAA and ARPA. The CARES Act does not specify how program funds should

be distributed among IHEs eligible to participate in the MSI programs. Generally, the Secretary

allocated funds within each MSI program using the same formula established to distribute the

direct grants to IHEs.

Under the CRRSAA and ARPA, most of the grants within each MSI program were to be allocated

in general accordance with the direct grants formula—with several exceptions, as follows:



Funds for the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) program

and Master’s Degree Programs at HBCUs were to be allocated as follows: 70%

in accordance with each IHE’s 12-month unduplicated headcount of students

who were Pell Grant recipients, relative to the total unduplicated headcount of

such individuals at all eligible HBCUs; 20% in accordance with each IHE’s 12month unduplicated headcount of all students relative to the total unduplicated

headcount of such individuals at all eligible HBCUs; and 10% in accordance with

each IHE’s inverse share of total endowments.104 In order to implement the

inverse share of total endowments, ED issued regulations to treat an institution

that has a total endowment of $0-$1.0 million as having an endowment of $1.0

million.105 Under the ARPA, institutions with endowments of less than $1.0

104 The inverse share of total endowments is the ratio of total endowment size at all eligible institutions to the

endowment size at each such institution.

105 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, “Calculation of the Endowment Factor for

Allocations to Historically Black Colleges and Universities Under Section 314(a)(2)(A) of the Coronavirus Response

and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021,” 86 Federal Register 21190-21195, April 22, 2021.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA



million, including $0 endowments, were adjusted to $1.0 million before

calculating the inverse endowment share.

Funds for the Historically Black Graduate Institutions (HBGIs) program were to

be allocated to eligible IHEs in accordance with each such IHE’s share of the

program’s FY2020 appropriation.

Funds for the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) program

were to be allocated to eligible IHEs in accordance with the HEA TCCU program

formula.

Appendix F presents estimated IHE allocations aggregated at the institutional sector level (e.g.,

public two-year) and state level for the HEERF MSI programs, as funded under the CARES Act,

CRRSAA, ARPA, and all of the acts combined. Actual amounts awarded to IHEs may differ as

IHEs must apply and/or agree to accept the terms and conditions of the awards, and IHEs may

decline a portion of the allocation. Specifically, Table F-1 displays IHE allocations aggregated at

the institutional sector level; Table F-2, Table F-3, and Table F-4 show the IHE allocations

aggregated at the state level for each act; and Table F-5 provides a summary of IHE allocations

aggregated at the state level across the CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA.

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education

FIPSE authorizes the Secretary to make awards to public and private nonprofit IHEs to promote

innovation and improvement in postsecondary education. The CARES Act, CRRSAA, and ARPA

direct the Secretary to allocate FIPSE funds to IHEs that the Secretary determines to “have the

greatest unmet needs related to coronavirus.”

Under the CARES Act, the Secretary is required to give priority to IHEs that do not otherwise

receive grants of at least $500,000 through the HEERF. The Secretary allocated sufficient funds

for each eligible IHE to receive at least $500,000 through their combined allocations under the

HEERF direct grants, MSI programs, and FIPSE under the CARES Act. Of the $348.8 million

available for awards under FIPSE I, $320.6 million was allocated to raise all public and private

nonprofit IHEs up to the $500,000 level.106 These grants are referred to as the CARES Act FIPSE

Formula Grants.

The CARES Act does not establish additional eligibility criteria for the disbursal of FIPSE funds.

To award the remaining (originally estimated at approximately $28.2 million) CARES Act FIPSE

funds, ED invited applications under the competitive Institutional Resilience and Expanded

Postsecondary Opportunity (IREPO) Grants program.107 To be eligible, public and private

nonprofit IHEs or consortia of such IHEs must demonstrate the greatest unmet need by having

greater than 30% Pell Grant recipient enrollment among full-time students prior to March 13,

2020, and/or by being underserved by other CARES Act programs. An IHE may have been

underserved by other CARES Act programs because it did not receive a loan under the Paycheck

Protection Program, and/or it serves large numbers of part-time students relative to IHEs of

similar total enrollment, and it had other unmet needs due to the COVID-19 emergency.

Applicants were required to propose projects to enable them to resume operations, serve the

106 U.S. Department of Education, Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund- FIPSE, Methodology for Calculating

Allocations, available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/heerffipse.html.

107 Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, “Applications for New Awards; Institutional

Resilience and Expanded Postsecondary Opportunity Grants Program,” 85 Federal Register 51685-51692, August 21,

2020. Applications were due October 20, 2020.

Congressional Research Service

ESF Funded by CARES, CRRSAA, and ARPA

needs of students, reduce disease transmission, and/or implement safe and effective instructional

delivery models. Despite the original estimate of $28.2 million, ED awarded $112.5 million in

CARES Act IREPO grants in July 2021.108

The CRRSAA and ARPA establish that FIPSE funds be granted to IHEs that the Secretary

determines have, after allocating other HEERF II and HEERF III funds, respectively, the

“greatest unmet needs related to coronavirus,” including IHEs with large populations of graduate

students and IHEs that did not otherwise receive an allocation under HEERF II.

To award the FIPSE funds under the CRRSAA, the Secretary issued an invitation for applications

for Supplemental Assistance to Institutions of Higher Education (SAIHE).109 To be eligible, an

IHE had to meet one of the seven absolute priorities established by ED. The Secretary indicated

that funds would be allocated to each priority depending on the number of applicants and award

amounts will be determined by a formula specific to each priority. The CRRSAA SAIHE

institutional eligibility requirements and formula allocation methodology is outlined in Table 10.

In July 2021, ED announced the award of more than $113 million to 110 IHEs under the

CRRSAA SAIHE program.110

Table 10. CRRSAA SAIHE Eligibility and Formula Allocation Methodology

Absolute

Priority

Public or Private Nonprofit IHE

Eligibility Requirements

Formula Allocation Methodology

Designated as eligible for at least one of the MSI

programs authorized under HEA Titles III and V

after ED made the initial CRRSAA MSI

allocations.

Based on the methodology used for CRRSAA

MSI program allocations.

Eligible for but did not receive a CRRSAA direct

grant because it did not report academic year

2018-2019 enrollment data to ED’s Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Based on the methodology used for CRRSAA

direct grants, but institutional data from the

application.

Eligible for but did not receive a CARES Act

direct grant because it tried but failed to

successfully apply by the deadline.

Based on the amount an applicant would have

received under the CARES Act direct grant

program.

HEA Title III or Title V-eligible branch campus

that was not funded directly or indirectly

through the CRRSAA MSI programs because ED

did not have the requisite data to calculate an

alloca

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.