Full text
K-12 EDUCATION
School Districts
Reported Spending
Initial COVID Relief
Funds on Meeting
Students' Needs and
Continuing School
Operations
Report to the Ranking Member
Committee on Health, Education, Labor
and Pensions, U.S. Senate
September 2024
GAO-24-106913
United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office
Highlights of GAO-24-106913, a report to the
Ranking Member, Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions, U.S. Senate
September 2024
K-12 EDUCATION
School Districts Reported Spending Initial COVID
Relief Funds on Meeting Students’ Needs and
Continuing School Operations
What GAO Found
School districts nationally reported spending a combined total of nearly $60
billion in Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds
through school year 2021–22, according to GAO’s analysis of the Department of
Education’s (Education) data. About 80 percent of ESSER spending through
school year 2021–22 went to addressing students’ academic, social, and
emotional needs and continuing school operations. For example, most of the
districts GAO visited added instructional time and many purchased new curricula.
The remaining 20 percent went to addressing physical and mental health
concerns, including purchasing cleaning supplies, improving ventilation, and
hiring school psychologists.
School Districts’ Reported Use of K-12 COVID Relief Funds for Activities to Maintain Safe, In-
Person Instruction, School Year 2021–22
Note: Percentages do not add to 100 percent because school districts could use funds for multiple
activities.
Multiple national, state, and district level factors influenced ESSER spending
decisions in the 17 school districts across six states GAO visited. For example,
the amount of ESSER funds received was a key factor in prioritizing spending for
these districts. For some, that meant being able to take care of basic needs while
avoiding funding deficits. For others, it meant moving beyond basic needs to
making capital improvements or implementing new activities. State officials
described their processes for screening and approving districts’ proposed uses of
ESSER funds. They said they approved proposed activities that demonstrated
clear linkage to COVID-related issues. States sometimes differed on what
activities they considered allowable under ESSER. Ten of the districts relied on a
specific philosophy to guide and prioritize their ESSER spending. For example,
one district developed broad pandemic-related goals such as addressing learning
loss and ensuring a safe return to school.
Officials from 16 districts said they used various data to examine ESSER-funded
activities. However, pinpointing the effectiveness of any one individual activity
may be difficult because, for example, districts initiated multiple activities during
the pandemic. Further, not enough time has passed to know if any initial positive
effects will remain long-term. Most district officials also said they began making
decisions about whether to sustain, scale, or sunset ESSER-funded activities
well before the funding ended. Factors included program results and access to
other sources of funding. State officials said they also encouraged school
districts to avoid spending that could not be sustained after ESSER funds ended.
View GAO-24-106913. For more information,
contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-
7215 or nowickij@gao.gov.
Why GAO Did This Study
The COVID-19 pandemic caused
widespread closures and disruption for
K-12 schools nationwide. To help
address issues related to COVID-19,
Congress appropriated nearly $190
billion in ESSER funds, the vast
majority of which went to school
districts. School districts could
generally use ESSER funds for a
broad range of purposes designed to
prevent, prepare for, or respond to the
pandemic (e.g., addressing learning
loss or facilitating a safe return to in-
person instruction).
GAO was asked to review how school
districts used their ESSER funds. This
report addresses (1) how the nation’s
school districts spent ESSER funds,
(2) factors selected districts considered
when prioritizing spending, and (3) how
selected districts gauge the effects of
their spending and how they are
planning for the end of ESSER
funding.
GAO analyzed Education’s ESSER
spending data for school years 2020–
21 and 2021–22 (most recent data
available) nationally and by district
characteristics. GAO also conducted
site visits to 17 school districts across
California, Florida, Michigan, New
York, Pennsylvania, and Texas to
provide illustrative examples of state
and district decision-making regarding
ESSER spending. These six states
collectively received more than 40
percent of all ESSER funds. GAO
selected school districts for variety in
urbanicity, enrollment, total ESSER
funds received, and student
demographics. GAO also reviewed
relevant reports from and conducted
interviews with Education and national
organizations actively monitoring
ESSER spending.
Page i
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Letter
1
Background
4
School Districts Initially Spent ESSER Funds Primarily to Meet
Students’ Academic, Social, and Emotional Needs and
Continue School Operations
7
Selected School Districts Balanced National, State, and District
Considerations When Prioritizing ESSER Spending
15
Selected School Districts Used Various Data to Examine Effects
of ESSER Spending and Plan for the Future
20
Agency Comments
26
Appendix I
School Districts Included in Analysis of Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Fund Reported Spending
27
Appendix II
State Data on Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief
Fund Spending through School Year 2021–22
29
Appendix III
GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
31
Tables
Table 1: Overview of the Three Rounds of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Funding
5
Table 2: Common Core of Data (CCD) Variables Used to Analyze
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief
(ESSER) Data by School District Characteristics
27
Table 3: Characteristics of School Districts Selected for
Nongeneralizable Site Visits
27
Table 4: Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief
Fund Reported Spending by Category and State through
School Year 2021–22
29
Figures
Figure 1: School District Reported Spending of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds through
School Year 2021–22
8
Contents
Page ii
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Figure 2: School District Planned Usage of Unspent Elementary
and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds as of
School Year 2021–22
9
Figure 3: School Districts’ Reported Spending of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds for Activities
to Maintain Safe, In-Person Instruction in School Year
2021–22
11
Figure 4: Rooftop Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Units
Purchased with Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief Funds
12
Figure 5: “Reset Center” to Help Students Manage Behavior,
Staffed and Furnished Using Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Funds
13
Figure 6: School District Reported Spending of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds by
Subcategory through School Year 2021–22
14
Figure 7: Bulletin Board Tracking Student Performance Using a
New Assessment Funded with Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds
21
Abbreviations
ARP
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021
ARRA
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009
CCD
Common Core of Data
Education
Department of Education
ESSER
Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief
FRPL
free or reduced-price lunch
HVAC
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
PPE
personal protective equipment
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety
without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain
copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be
necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
441 G St. N.W.
Washington, DC 20548
September 23, 2024
The Honorable Bill Cassidy, M.D.
Ranking Member
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
United States Senate
Dear Dr. Cassidy,
The COVID-19 pandemic caused widespread closures and disruption for
K-12 schools. Both staff and students struggled to adapt to changing
safety requirements and remote learning environments.1 Even as schools
returned to in-person instruction, schools and students continued to
contend with an array of physical and mental health challenges brought
on or exacerbated by the pandemic. Academic, social, and health
challenges persist as school districts across the nation continue to adapt
to the post-pandemic landscape of K-12 education. For example, chronic
absenteeism nearly doubled during the pandemic with 14 million students
missing valuable instructional time in school year 2021–22, according to
the Department of Education (Education).
To help states and school districts address issues related to COVID-19,
Congress created the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency
Relief (ESSER) Fund in March 2020.2 Through three laws, Congress
appropriated nearly $190 billion in ESSER funds, the vast majority of
1See our series of reports on pandemic learning loss: GAO, Pandemic Learning: As
Students Struggled to Learn, Teachers Reported Few Strategies as Particularly Helpful to
Mitigate Learning Loss, GAO-22-104487 (Washington, D.C.: May 10, 2022); Pandemic
Learning: Teachers Reported Many Obstacles for High-Poverty Students and English
Learners As Well As Some Mitigating Strategies, GAO-22-105815 (Washington, D.C.:
May 31, 2022); and Pandemic Learning: Less Academic Progress Overall, Student and
Teacher Strain, and Implications for the Future, GAO-22-105816 (Washington, D.C.: June
8, 2022).
2CARES Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136, § 18003, 134 Stat. 281, 565-67 (2020).
Letter
Page 2
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
which have gone to local school districts.3 States and school districts had
to obligate the last round of ESSER funds by September 30, 2024.4
You asked us to review how school districts used their ESSER funds.
This report addresses (1) how the nation’s school districts spent ESSER
funds, (2) the factors selected school districts considered when prioritizing
ESSER spending, and (3) how selected school districts gauge the effects
of their ESSER spending and how they are planning for when ESSER
funding ends.
To examine how school districts spent their ESSER funds, we analyzed
Education’s data from its ESSER Annual Performance Reports (ESSER
data) for school years 2020–21 and 2021–22.5 These data were the most
recent available at the time of our analysis and the only national dataset
on ESSER reported spending.6
We analyzed ESSER data using the four high-level reporting categories
that Education developed to track school district ESSER spending:
1. Addressing Physical Health and Safety (e.g., cleaning supplies);
2. Meeting Students’ Academic, Social, Emotional, and Other Needs
(e.g., tutoring)7;
3In addition to the CARES Act, funds were appropriated under the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021 and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Pub. L. No. 116-
260, div. M, tit. III, § 313, 134 Stat. 1182, 1929-32 and Pub. L. No. 117-2, § 2001, 135
Stat. 4, 19-23.
4This is the obligation deadline for Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief
(ESSER) funds appropriated under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The obligation
deadlines for ESSER funds appropriated under the CARES Act and Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021 were September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023,
respectively.
5The Department of Education (Education) collected ESSER data by state fiscal year.
According to Education, 47 states reported ESSER data based on state fiscal years
ending on June 30th. Because nearly all states reported data ending on June 30th, which
corresponded to the end of the school year, we report ESSER data by school year, rather
than fiscal year. Education collected some data on ESSER spending in school year 2019–
20 during the first few months of the pandemic. We excluded those data from our analysis
because, according to Education, they differed significantly from subsequent years.
6Throughout this report, “ESSER spending” refers to expenditures (i.e., outlays), unless
otherwise noted.
7This category excluded mental health supports.
Page 3
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
3. Mental Health Supports for Students and Staff (e.g., hiring school
psychologists); and
4. Operational Continuity and Other Allowed Uses (e.g., paying staff
during school closures).
We also analyzed ESSER data using Education’s nine subcategories
(e.g., salaries, benefits, supplies)—used to further categorize school
district ESSER spending—and other relevant variables, such as whether
school districts used any ESSER funds to maintain safe, in-person
instruction.
We matched Education’s ESSER data to its Common Core of Data
(CCD) to analyze spending by school district characteristics.8 We
successfully matched more than 99 percent of districts.9 We determined
Education’s ESSER data and CCD data were sufficiently reliable for
analyzing ESSER reported spending by reviewing relevant
documentation; interviewing knowledgeable Education officials; and
testing the data for outliers, missing data, and other errors.
To gather information for all three objectives, we conducted site visits with
six states to provide illustrative examples of ESSER spending. We
selected California, Florida, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and
Texas for site visits because, collectively, these states received more
than 40 percent of all ESSER funds. We asked state officials about what
guidance they provided to districts about using ESSER funds, their
oversight of districts’ ESSER spending, the uses of funds they considered
allowable, and how districts across their states used funds.
Within those six states, we interviewed officials from 17 school districts,
selected for variety in urbanicity, enrollment, total ESSER funds received,
and student demographics. Collectively, these districts received
approximately $17.5 billion in ESSER funds. We asked district officials
about how they used ESSER funds, why they prioritized funds for those
8The Common Core of Data is Education’s comprehensive, national database of all K-12
public schools and school districts. Education updates the database annually. See app. I
for the school district characteristics included in our analyses.
9To match school districts, we first used the National Center for Education Statistics
identifier that was present in both datasets. We then used two other identifiers (the Unique
Entity ID and the DUNS number) to match additional districts. We manually matched the
remaining districts using publicly available information. An independent analyst verified the
matches. There were 13 school districts that we could not match across datasets; we
excluded these school districts from our analysis of ESSER spending by school district
characteristics.
Page 4
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
purposes, how they were examining the outcomes of ESSER spending,
and their plans for after ESSER funds ended. We met with officials from
12 districts virtually and five districts in-person. We toured 14 sites during
in-person visits, typically schools, to observe how districts had used
ESSER funds.
To complement our data analysis and site visits, we reviewed relevant
reports from and conducted interviews with Education as well as national
organizations that have been active in monitoring ESSER spending.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2023 to September 2024
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Congress created ESSER in March 2020 to help states and school
districts address the challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Through three COVID-19 relief laws, Congress appropriated nearly $190
billion in ESSER funds (see table 1). States are the primary ESSER
recipients. These COVID relief laws required states to allocate at least 90
percent of their ESSER funds to school districts. States could reserve up
to 10 percent for certain expenses, such as emergency needs.10
10This report focuses on ESSER funds provided to school districts rather than the state
reserves.
Background
Page 5
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Table 1: Overview of the Three Rounds of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Funding
Legislation
Enacted
Fund name
Total amount
Mandatory amount to
districts
Obligation
deadline
CARES Acta
March 2020
ESSER I
$13.2 billion
At least $11.9 billion
9/30/2022
Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2021b
December 2020
ESSER II
$54.3 billion
At least $48.9 billion
9/30/2023
American Rescue Plan Act of
2021c
March 2021
ARP ESSER
$121.9 billiond
At least $109.7 billion
9/30/2024
Source: GAO review of COVID-19 relief laws and agency guidance. | GAO-24-106913
aPub. L. No. 116-136, § 18003, 134 Stat. 281, 565-67 (2020).
bPub. L. No. 116-260, div. M, tit. III, § 313, 134 Stat. 1182, 1929-32.
cPub. L. No. 117-2, § 2001, 135 Stat. 4, 19-23.
dIn addition to this $121.9 billion, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 included $800 million in
ESSER funds for the Department of Education to identify and assist homeless children and youth.
Each round of ESSER funding included an obligation deadline, with a
final deadline of September 30, 2024, for funding under the American
Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP ESSER).11 The funds also have a
spending (i.e., liquidation) deadline, which is generally 120 days after the
obligation deadline. States could request extensions to the liquidation
deadline from Education on behalf of school districts in the state.
According to Education, the department approved every request it
received from states for extensions for ESSER I and ESSER II. Education
also provided a template for states and school districts to request ARP
ESSER extensions.
The relevant COVID relief laws allocated ESSER funds to states based
on their proportion of funds received under Title I, Part A of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, for fiscal
year 2019 (for ESSER I) or 2020 (for ESSER II and ARP ESSER).12 The
amount of funds states were to provide to school districts (including
charter schools that operate as school districts) were calculated the same
way.
11This includes the Tydings Amendment period, which refers to a provision of the General
Education Provisions Act that allows educational agencies or institutions an additional 12
months to obligate any funds that were not obligated at the end of the first 12 months. See
20 U.S.C. § 1225(b).
12Title I, Part A funds are allocated based primarily on U.S. Census Bureau poverty
estimates. Based on the allocation criteria, some school districts did not receive any
ESSER funds through the mandatory subgrants to school districts.
Page 6
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
School districts could generally use ESSER funds for a broad range of
purposes designed to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the pandemic
(see sidebar). While all ESSER funds could be used to respond to
pandemic-related challenges, ARP ESSER included several new
provisions to address pandemic learning loss and the return to in-person
learning. For example:
•
Addressing Learning Loss. School districts were required to reserve
at least 20 percent of their ARP ESSER funds to address learning
loss by implementing evidence-based interventions, such as summer
learning, extended day, comprehensive afterschool programs, or
extended school year programs. School districts also had to ensure
that such interventions responded to students’ academic, social, and
emotional needs and addressed the disproportionate impact of
COVID-19 on certain student subgroups.
•
Safe Return to In-Person Instruction and Continuity of Services.
School districts that received ARP ESSER funds were required to
develop—and make publicly available on their websites—a plan for
the safe return to in-person instruction and continuity of services
within 30 days after receiving their ARP ESSER allocation.
Education oversees state educational agencies’ implementation of
ESSER; state educational agencies monitor and oversee school district
ESSER spending. To help states and school districts implement ESSER,
Education provided guidance on the use of ESSER funds, including a
series of FAQ documents. In its guidance, Education encouraged school
districts to use funds to safely reopen schools, maximize in-person
instructional time for all students, and address the impacts of lost
instructional time resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Education also
encouraged districts to consider using funds to address inequities,
including by focusing supports and services on students
disproportionately affected by the pandemic.
Education also provided guidance on reporting on ESSER spending,
including webinars and user guides. Data on ESSER spending are
publicly available on Education’s website.13
13See https://covid-relief-data.ed.gov/.
Allowable Uses of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief
(ESSER) Funds
According to Education’s guidance, school
districts could use ESSER funds to support a
wide variety of activities, including:
•
Coordinating efforts to prevent, prepare
for, and respond to COVID-19.
•
Planning, coordinating, and implementing
activities during long-term closures, such
as providing meals to eligible students.
•
Implementing protocols to maintain health
and safety when reopening schools.
•
Addressing the unique needs of students
with disabilities, English learners, low-
income students, racial and ethnic
minorities, students experiencing
homelessness, or students in foster care.
•
Purchasing educational technology.
•
Planning and implementing summer
learning and enrichment activities and
afterschool programs.
•
Addressing the academic impact of lost
instructional time.
•
Providing mental health services.
•
Repairing and improving facilities to
reduce virus transmission and exposure
to environmental health hazards.
Source: Department of Education (Education) guidance. |
GAO-24-106913
Page 7
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
School districts reported spending about $57.3 billion in ESSER funds
through school year 2021–22, primarily to address students’ academic,
social, and emotional needs and continue school operations, according to
our analysis of Education’s ESSER data.14 This total was just under the
combined amount of the ESSER I and ESSER II subgrants to districts.15
About 80 percent went to addressing students’ academic, social, and
emotional needs and continuing school operations, while approximately
20 percent went to addressing physical health and safety and mental
health supports for students and staff (see fig. 1).16
14Our analysis reflects school district decisions about how to categorize their ESSER
spending. Education provided examples of ESSER-funded activities to include under each
category. To calculate total spending, we separately analyzed Education data for school
years 2020–21 and 2021–22 and combined the results. This allowed us to analyze
ESSER spending by categories and subcategories. Another way to calculate total
spending is to only use data from Education’s dataset for school year 2021–22, since it
includes cumulative spending. However, those data cannot be broken out into categories
and subcategories, which was the goal of our analysis. Calculating total spending by the
latter method results in a total of $58.3 billion in ESSER spending through school year
2021–22, according to Education officials.
15The $57.3 billion in ESSER spending through school year 2021–22 includes ESSER I,
ESSER II, and ARP ESSER funds. Districts received no less than $60.8 billion in
mandatory subgrants, collectively, from ESSER I and ESSER II.
16For state-level ESSER spending data, see app. II.
School Districts
Initially Spent ESSER
Funds Primarily to
Meet Students’
Academic, Social,
and Emotional Needs
and Continue School
Operations
Page 8
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Figure 1: School District Reported Spending of Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief Funds through School Year 2021–22
Note: Percentages in this figure do not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
As of school year 2021–22, school districts reported having a plan for
using about 90 percent of remaining ESSER funds—about $100 billion—
according to our analysis of Education’s data (see fig. 2).
Page 9
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Figure 2: School District Planned Usage of Unspent Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Funds as of School Year 2021–22
Note: Percentages in this figure do not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
Meeting students’ academic, social, emotional, and other needs.
According to Education’s guidance, activities that fell into this category
included afterschool programming, summer learning, tutoring, academic
assessments, and purchasing instructional materials.
School districts we interviewed described using ESSER funds for each of
these activities and more. For example, officials from 15 of the 17 school
districts we spoke with said they used ESSER funds to add instructional
time through afterschool programming, summer school programming, or
extending the school year; 10 said they purchased new curricula for the
district; and 11 said they used ESSER funds for teacher training or
professional development. Five districts described ESSER-funded
activities where they elevated the highest-performing teachers in the
district into new roles where they worked with the highest-need students
or trained other teachers on effective instructional practices.
Page 10
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
This spending category also included technology purchases such as
hardware and software, as well as devices to help students connect to the
internet. In the first full year of the pandemic, more than one-third of
school districts nationally reported using ESSER funds to purchase
mobile hotspots with data plans. In addition, officials from 14 of the 17
school districts we spoke with said they used ESSER funds to purchase
devices, like laptops, for students; 10 of these 14 districts said ESSER
funds helped provide every student with a device to use for schoolwork.
Some districts told us they initiated activities to provide every student with
a device before the pandemic, and ESSER funds helped them accelerate
such efforts.
Operational continuity and other allowed uses. According to
Education’s guidance, activities that fell into this category included those
not captured by the other three categories, but that were necessary to
maintain the operation of and continuity of services in school districts,
including continuing to employ staff.
Officials from 16 of the 17 school districts we interviewed said they used a
portion of their ESSER funds to pay staff salaries during the pandemic.
For example, one district used ESSER funds to pay bus drivers when
schools were closed early in the pandemic. District officials said this
allowed them to retain the bus drivers and bridge the gap until schools
reopened to in-person instruction. Had the district not used ESSER funds
in this way, officials said that the drivers may have changed jobs, which
would have negatively affected the operational continuity of the district’s
busing services.
This category also included activities authorized by several other statutes,
such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.17
Addressing physical health and safety. According to Education’s
guidance, activities that fell into this category included facilities upgrades
and maintenance, improving ventilation, cleaning and sanitizing supplies,
activities to promote social distancing, COVID-19 testing and contact
tracing, and purchasing personal protective equipment (PPE) such as
masks. Nationally, 80 percent of school districts reported spending some
17The statutes authorizing ESSER included provisions allowing school districts to use
ESSER funds for any activity authorized by a list of several other education-related
statutes.
Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief (ESSER) Spending by
School District Characteristics
We analyzed Education’s data on ESSER
spending through school year 2021–22 by
school district characteristics:
•
Urbanicity (urban, suburban, rural)
•
Enrollment (small, medium, large)
•
Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility
(low, mid, and high)
•
Student racial demographics (majority
White, majority Nonwhite).
Overall, school districts spent their ESSER
funds in similar ways across a range of district
characteristics with a few minor differences.
For example, urban districts used 45 percent
of their ESSER funds on meeting students’
academic, social, and emotional needs. Rural
and suburban districts used 47 percent and
51 percent, respectively. In addition, a higher
percentage of initial ESSER funds went
toward operational continuity in large districts
(40 percent) compared to districts with small
(34 percent) and medium (30 percent)
enrollments.
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Education
(Education) data. | GAO-24-106913
Page 11
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
ESSER funds on at least one activity to maintain safe, in-person
instruction in school year 2021–22 (see fig. 3).
Figure 3: School Districts’ Reported Spending of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds for Activities to
Maintain Safe, In-Person Instruction in School Year 2021–22
Page 12
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Officials from 13 of the 17 school districts told us they used ESSER funds
to upgrade heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems or
other efforts to improve air quality (see fig. 4). Two districts we visited
were in the process of building new schools from the ground up, using an
estimated $260 million in ESSER funds, collectively, to build four schools,
according to district officials. District officials said that three of these new
schools would replace schools that were more than 100 years old and in
dire need of repair.
Figure 4: Rooftop Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Units Purchased with
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds
Page 13
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Mental health supports for students and staff. According to
Education’s guidance, activities that fell into this category included
staffing or activities to assess and support mental health for students,
educators, and families.
School districts we interviewed described a range of ESSER-funded
activities to support mental health. For example, officials from 12 of the 17
school districts we spoke with said they hired social workers or school
psychologists or purchased telehealth therapy services. One district we
visited used ESSER funds to establish “Reset Centers” in the district’s
middle and high schools to help students manage their behavior (see fig.
5). Students with minor disciplinary infractions typically spend one period
at the Reset Center before returning to the classroom, according to
district officials.
Figure 5: “Reset Center” to Help Students Manage Behavior, Staffed and Furnished
Using Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds
Efforts to Reengage Students with Poor
Attendance or Participation
Education collected data on school district
efforts to reengage students with poor
attendance or participation, regardless of
whether the district used Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief funds to
support the effort. For school year 2021–22,
Education’s data showed that 80 percent of
districts had engaged in at least one effort for
this purpose. Specifically:
•
71 percent outreached directly to families.
•
67 percent introduced new curricular
strategies for student engagement.
•
58 percent offered credit recovery and
acceleration.
•
54 percent offered home internet service
or devices.
•
50 percent engaged with the district’s
homeless liaison.
•
36 percent partnered with community
organizations.
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Education
(Education) data. | GAO-24-106913
Page 14
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Subcategories of ESSER spending. Among the nine subcategories of
spending that Education collected data on, the highest percentage of
ESSER funds went to salaries (about 40 percent, or $23.1 billion) through
school year 2021–22 (see fig. 6). This subcategory included salaries for
staff that were already employed by the district when the pandemic began
and new hires during the pandemic.
Figure 6: School District Reported Spending of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds by Subcategory
through School Year 2021–22
For example, officials from 15 of the 17 school districts we interviewed
said they hired new staff using ESSER funds. These new staff included
teachers, nurses, counselors, math and reading specialists, and
custodians. Conversely, officials from two districts we interviewed said
they were wary of adding permanent staff using ESSER funds because
they were not sure they could sustain those positions after ESSER
funding ended. Instead, these two districts relied on contractors or
temporary workers to fill positions in the district during the pandemic.
Page 15
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Multiple considerations at the national, state, and district levels influenced
selected school districts’ decisions on how to prioritize ESSER spending.
National and state issues included the amount and timing of ESSER
funds districts received, spending deadlines, the availability of service
providers, and state requirements. District-level issues such as
community input, districts’ spending philosophy, and districts’ specific
financial needs and goals also influenced spending priorities.
ESSER funding amount. For the 17 districts we visited, the amount of
ESSER funds received varied considerably and was an important factor
in determining how they prioritized their spending. Although larger
districts did not necessarily receive more ESSER funds per pupil than
smaller districts, the total amount of funding large districts received
allowed them to afford higher-cost items that smaller districts might be
less likely to afford. For example, one large, urban district that received
over $1 billion in ESSER funds spent nearly $2 million in ESSER-funded
HVAC system upgrades for a single school according to district officials.
Officials from a small, rural district that received less than $2 million in
ESSER funds in total told us the school district also made HVAC
upgrades to one of its schools. However, the district limited the upgrades
to a wing of the school, enabling the district to save ESSER funds to
address other issues like learning loss, mental health, and reengaging
students.
Regardless of the amount of ESSER funds selected districts received,
officials in most of the 17 districts said their ESSER funds allowed them to
do things they would not have been able to do otherwise. For some
districts that meant taking care of basic needs while preventing funding
deficits. For others, it meant moving beyond basic needs to make capital
improvements or implement new activities.
Spending requirements. ESSER spending requirements presented a
challenge, according to some district officials, that influenced how they
spent ESSER funds. For example, officials from three districts told us that
their districts had to have available funds to pay for goods and services
Selected School
Districts Balanced
National, State, and
District
Considerations When
Prioritizing ESSER
Spending
Page 16
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
upfront, while awaiting ESSER reimbursement.18 Additionally, officials
from two districts said federal and state spending and procurement
processes made it challenging for them to spend funds within the required
time frames.
Officials from three districts told us they were challenged by the spending
deadlines because of supply chain issues. One district had recently
planned to use ARP ESSER funds to purchase an HVAC system but
chose not to once it learned the wait-time for a new system was at least
18 months. Officials were concerned about the project meeting the
obligation deadline. Officials from 15 of 17 districts told us about having
difficulty procuring needed equipment and supplies.19 Officials from two of
these districts said they would change their spending decisions because
of it.
Some state officials we interviewed echoed districts’ concerns about
ESSER’s time frames. Officials from New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas
described the speed with which they needed to distribute such a large
amount of funding as particularly challenging. Some state officials noted
that because state legislatures sometimes had to appropriate ESSER
funds before states could distribute the funds, districts were not able to
spend ESSER funds as soon as states received them. State and district
officials also described other state actions that also affected district
spending. For example, state officials told us that Texas districts received
their ESSER II funds about 3 months after receiving their ARP ESSER
because of the time needed to implement a state policy affecting the
allocation of ESSER II funds.
18According to Education officials, each state determined its subrecipient payment
process. The ESSER program did not require that subrecipients be reimbursed.
19We have previously reported on the difficulty districts had purchasing high demand
items such as HVAC air filters and laptops during the pandemic. See, COVID-19:
Sustained Federal Action Is Crucial as Pandemic Enters Its Second Year, GAO-21-387
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 31, 2021).
Page 17
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Conversely, officials from seven districts told us they benefitted from
ESSER being less restrictive than other federal grants as they responded
to the pandemic. Although based on Title I, Part A allocations, ESSER
funds could be used for a wider range of potential activities under several
federal education statutes, including Title I, Part A. According to
Education guidance, districts had considerable flexibility in determining
how best to use ESSER funds. Officials from one district said the
flexibility meant that the district could direct ESSER funds to emergencies
and surprises that emerged throughout the pandemic. Officials from 12 of
the 17 selected districts said they used ESSER funds to free up other
funds. This way, general funds could be redirected for other needs, such
as longer-term facilities updates.
State requirements. Officials in all six states described processes for
reviewing and approving districts’ proposed uses of ESSER funds.
Officials from all six states said they required districts to submit
applications describing how their planned use of ESSER funds aligned
with the statute’s allowable uses of the funds, and rejected proposals that
did not meet that requirement.
States sometimes differed on what they considered allowable uses. For
example, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Texas officials told us that
they denied school districts’ proposed use of ESSER funds to renovate or
upgrade athletic fields, stadiums, or tracks because school districts could
not justify that these were necessary to plan for, prevent, or respond to
the COVID-19 pandemic. Officials in California said they approved
proposals when districts could clearly justify the spending with data on
students’ academic and behavioral outcomes. New York officials said that
while they did not reject any ESSER applications overall, they did reject
individual proposals within them, such as building a community center,
because the linkage to preventing, preparing for, and responding to the
pandemic was unclear.
Some state and district officials we spoke with said they worked together
to ensure proposals met ESSER requirements and were successful. For
Page 18
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
example, officials from one district said there was back and forth with the
state to ensure the district was using ESSER funds for allowable
purposes. Three districts reported having a proposal rejected by the state.
Other state actions also influenced districts’ spending decisions.
Legislatures in Florida and Michigan set broad goals for the use of
ESSER funds, but districts decided exactly which activities to pursue
within the goals, according to state officials. Legislatures in New York and
Texas used ESSER I funds to replace state education funding to districts.
New York and Texas district officials told us that they used their ESSER I
funds to replace lost state funding and maintain basic operations. Officials
from one Florida district said the state legislature required districts to
spend some of their ESSER II funds on summer instruction. However, the
district struggled with both teacher and student participation and had
difficulty spending the funds. Officials added that they might have used
those funds elsewhere, if not for the state legislature’s requirements.
Availability of service providers. Along with supply chain issues,
officials in 10 of the 17 districts said they struggled to find vendors,
contractors, or staff to implement ESSER-funded activities. For example,
officials from a rural district said it took a year to find a qualified applicant
for a licensed professional counselor position. Officials from a small
district told us that they believed they did not always receive what they
needed, such as laptops, in a timely fashion because vendors gave
preferential treatment to larger districts with bigger orders.
Officials from 10 districts told us they were inundated with solicitations
from vendors offering their services. One district official told us that early
in the pandemic it was not uncommon for him to return to his desk after a
meeting and find 100 vendor emails. Officials from 10 of 17 districts told
us they generally tried to rely on vendors with whom they had an
established relationship for ESSER-funded activities. For example,
officials from one district told us they were able to sort through
solicitations based on their established contracts and relationships with
vendors. Thus, it was not difficult to find reputable vendors to provide the
goods or services the district wanted to purchase with ESSER funds.
Officials from states we visited said they played a minimal role in
identifying vendors or contractors. However, state officials in New York
and Texas said districts were able to access statewide contracts to
procure goods such as PPE and HVAC items, and technology items such
as laptops and remote learning technologies at discounted prices.
Page 19
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Community engagement. Officials in almost all of the 17 districts we
visited described ways they engaged with stakeholders to inform
decisions about ESSER spending.20 For example, 10 districts held public
town halls or distributed surveys to stakeholders. Officials from two
districts said they used social media to engage and educate community
stakeholders. One district had a feedback button on its website that the
public could use to share its input on how the district should use its ARP
ESSER funds. This process generated more than 600 pieces of
feedback, which informed the district’s priority areas for ARP ESSER.
Officials from another district said their “roadshows” and other efforts to
reengage families helped lead to a decrease in chronic absenteeism.
Community engagement could also prove challenging for some districts,
as community members sometimes suggested activities that district
officials believed were not feasible. Officials from one district said
community members sometimes suggested activities that did not align
with the district’s strategy. Officials said it was challenging to
communicate why the district was not going to implement the activities
when other districts nearby were using ESSER funds for those purposes.
Districts’ own spending strategy. More than half of the districts (10 of
17) relied on a specific spending philosophy to guide and prioritize their
use of ESSER funds. For example, officials from one district told us the
outcomes the district sought to achieve through ESSER spending were
tied to the district’s local accountability plan. Some districts developed
specific goals during the pandemic and used ESSER funds to support
them. For example, one district focused on broad pandemic-related goals
including addressing learning loss and ensuring a safe return to school.
Officials said having these goals allowed the district to prioritize spending
and rule out proposals for spending ESSER funds that did not advance
these priorities. Given the short-term nature of ESSER funding, some
districts planned to use the funds to pilot new activities. For example,
officials in one district said they used ESSER funds to pilot programs to
determine their effectiveness and whether the district wanted to sustain
the program after ESSER ended.
20For ARP ESSER, Education required districts to engage in meaningful consultation with
stakeholders, including students, families, and staff in developing spending plans.
Page 20
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
District financial conditions. Officials told us that the districts’ financial
conditions also influenced how they used ESSER funds. Officials in one
district told us that they had run a deficit for many years prior to the
pandemic. They said ESSER funds helped the district address some
basic needs, like re-opening school libraries which had been shuttered for
over a decade. Officials from another district told us that ESSER funds
would help the district eliminate a large budget deficit without massive
service cuts. Officials from four districts told us they used ESSER funds to
free up general funds for needed capital investment projects. For
example, officials from one district said they had major school facility
needs, but prior to the pandemic the district could not secure the funds to
address them. ESSER funding allowed the district to start a capital
improvement program to address deferred maintenance and upgrade
facilities.
Officials from 16 of 17 districts told us they were examining the effects of
their ESSER spending. Many districts used academic performance data,
including assessment data, to help them understand the effectiveness of
activities such as tutoring and summer school programs. A few districts
also used graduation rates to assess outcomes. Officials from two
districts told us they used ESSER funds to purchase products that assess
and monitor academic performance (see fig. 7). Another district
discovered that it could replicate a dashboard created for contact tracing
to manage academic and social and emotional learning data.
Selected School
Districts Used Various
Data to Examine
Effects of ESSER
Spending and Plan
for the Future
Most Districts We Spoke
with Were Examining
Effects of ESSER-funded
Activities, but Isolating the
Effects of ESSER
Spending Was
Challenging
Page 21
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Figure 7: Bulletin Board Tracking Student Performance Using a New Assessment
Funded with Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Funds
Nine districts also used other data to assess ESSER-funded activities,
according to officials. For example, officials from seven districts told us
they used behavior and disciplinary referrals or school climate survey
data to examine effects of activities aimed at improving behavioral and
mental health. Several districts used attendance data to assess activities
designed in part to reengage students and encourage students to return
in person when schools reopened. Most officials said they were seeing
improvement, including officials from three districts who said academic
performance was generally back to pre-pandemic levels. Officials from
other districts told us they were seeing mixed results with improvement in
some grade levels and not in others.
Districts also described challenges with rigorously evaluating the
relationship between education spending and outcomes. First, it may be
difficult to pinpoint the effectiveness of any individual activity because
districts often implemented multiple activities simultaneously. For
example, officials from 10 districts told us they provided both afterschool
and summer enrichment programs as ARP ESSER required activities to
combat pandemic learning loss. At the same time, officials in some
districts told us they made substantial changes to their curriculum. To
encourage students to reengage and return to school, officials from one
district told us they employed multiple strategies: they formed a team to
call families when students were absent, hired multilingual liaisons to
connect families with services and address factors contributing to
Page 22
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
absenteeism, added new afterschool programs to engage students, and
partnered with the local Parks and Recreation Department to offer
programs between school sessions.
Additionally, it may be several years before districts see measurable
effects. Officials from two districts told us it was too early to know for sure
how the district’s ESSER investments have affected academic
performance. An official from another district said, “It takes time to
develop and implement new initiatives, so it will also take several years to
accurately start to measure outcomes.” Not enough time has passed to
know if any initial positive effects attributed to districts’ ESSER-funded
activities will be sustained in the coming years.
Most state officials we interviewed said examining the effects of ESSER
spending generally fell to the school districts. New York officials told us
that while they track various outcomes for students, it was difficult to
causally relate those outcomes to spending of specific ESSER funds.
California and New York officials told us they were partnering with the
Comprehensive Center Network’s Strategic Planning for Continued
Recovery initiative, funded through an Education grant, to help school
districts evaluate the effectiveness of their ESSER-funded activities and
plan for when ESSER expires. Pennsylvania officials said they were
considering working with Education to measure ESSER’s effects.
Page 23
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Most district officials told us school districts actively planned for ESSER
funding’s end and several officials said that outcomes data and the
availability of post-ESSER funding influenced their decisions to sustain,
scale, or sunset ESSER-funded activities. For instance, officials from one
district told us they started formally planning for ESSER funding’s end
nearly 2 years before the final obligation deadline in September 2024.
Officials from four districts told us that ESSER funding’s end figured into
their spending decisions from the beginning. For example, officials from
one district said they did not hire many permanent staff whom they might
have to fire after ESSER funds ran out. The district relied on several
contractors instead. Officials from two other districts told us that their
experience using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (ARRA) influenced how they spent ESSER funds. For
example, one official said their experience with ARRA made them wary of
spending ESSER funds in a way that would not be sustainable long-term
and cause a funding cliff.21
Officials from four districts expressed concerns about experiencing an
“ESSER fiscal cliff.” For example, officials from one district said their
district was running a financial deficit prior to the pandemic. While ESSER
allowed them to avoid cuts for a few years and add many new services
and activities, officials said they had some hard decisions ahead about
what to keep and what to cut.
21We reported on similar issues in our November 2023 report on states’ experiences with
COVID-19 relief funds. See GAO, COVID-19 Relief Funds: State Experiences Could
Inform Future Federal Relief Funding, GAO-24-106152 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 15,
2023).
Selected School Districts’
Decisions About
Sustaining or Sunsetting
ESSER-funded Activities
Depended on Program
Results and Available
Funding
Page 24
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Officials in all six states we visited described efforts to help school
districts prepare for the end of ESSER funds, including providing
consistent messaging throughout the pandemic that ESSER funds would
end. Officials also encouraged school districts to be thoughtful about
avoiding the kind of spending that could lead to an ESSER fiscal cliff. For
example, in Texas, school districts had to attest that they had discussed
the spending deadlines and potential fiscal cliff issues with their local
school board before the state provided the district with their ESSER II and
ARP ESSER allocations, according to state officials.
Sustaining activities. Officials from 14 of our 17 districts told us they
intended to sustain at least one ESSER-funded activity after funding
expired. For example, officials from one district said that they had seen
strong academic gains from students that participated in the district’s
enhanced summer programming and would maintain that effort. Another
district used ESSER funds to hire a board-certified behavior analyst to
identify students in need of support and then develop individualized plans
to assist those students. District officials said this strategy has been
effective and that they planned to keep the analyst on staff after ESSER
funding ends.
Three of these districts intended to use general funds to sustain specific
initiatives, according to district officials. In addition to using general funds,
some districts planned to repurpose some federal funding, explore
options for new funding from non-governmental organizations, or use
state funding to sustain activities. For example, officials from one district
planned to use increased funding from a state grant for schools with high
concentrations of high-needs students to continue activities. Officials from
one district said they would sunset older, pre-pandemic programs to free
up funds to continue ESSER-funded activities because the ESSER-
funded activities were showing better results.
Page 25
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Scaling activities up or down. Officials from seven districts intended to
either scale up or scale down ESSER-funded activities. For example, in
one district, officials told us that a new curriculum piloted with ESSER
funds was so successful that they had already scaled it up district-wide. In
another district, officials implemented a state-authorized professional
development program for teacher certifications, including one targeting
paraprofessionals and tutors. Officials said the district sought to scale this
program up and recruit more teachers from it.
Officials from four districts said they lacked the funding needed to
continue some ESSER-funded activities as implemented and planned to
scale them down. For example, a district with no licensed professional
counselors prior to the pandemic used ESSER funds to hire three
counselors. The district planned to scale back to two counselors once
ESSER expired.
Sunsetting activities. Officials from three districts told us they planned to
sunset some activities that had not produced desired results. For
instance, one district will sunset a summer school program due to low
student participation and high cost. Officials from another district said that
they would not renew an ESSER-funded contract for a curriculum that
provides personalized learning modules because the program was
difficult to implement and did not produce the expected academic gains.
Officials from three districts said they may be forced to sunset ESSER-
funded activities due to a lack of funds when ESSER funding ends, even
if the activities were successful. Officials from one of these districts told
us that although afterschool enrichment and tutoring programs were
Page 26
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
effective for students during the pandemic, they would end because there
would be no available funding after ESSER for continuing these
programs. Officials from two districts said they would use natural attrition
to avoid laying off staff hired with ESSER funds.
We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Education for
review and comment. The Department of Education provided technical
comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of
this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the
report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate
congressional committees, the Secretary of Education, and other
interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the
GAO website at https://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
me at 202-512-7215 or nowickij@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices
of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report
are listed in appendix III.
Sincerely,
Jacqueline M. Nowicki, Director
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues
Agency Comments
Appendix I: School Districts Included in
Analysis of Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief Fund Reported Spending
Page 27
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
This appendix includes two tables that describe the school districts
included in our analysis of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency
Relief funds. Specifically, this appendix includes:
•
Table 2: Common Core of Data Variables Used to Analyze
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Data by School
District Characteristics, and
•
Table 3: Characteristics of School Districts Selected for
Nongeneralizable Site Visits.
Table 2: Common Core of Data (CCD) Variables Used to Analyze Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief
(ESSER) Data by School District Characteristics
CCD variable
Description
Urbanicity
Urban
School districts with a “city” locale code.
Suburban
School districts with a “suburb” locale code.
Rural
School districts with a “rural” or “town” locale code.
Enrollment
Small
School districts with 0-4,999 students.
Medium
School districts with 5,000-24,999 students.
Large
School districts with 25,000 or more students.
Student racial demographics
Majority White
School districts where more than 50% of the students are White.
Majority Nonwhite
School districts where more than 50% of the students are Nonwhite.
Free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL) eligibility
Low
School districts where 0-25% of students are eligible for FRPL.
Mid-low
School districts where 25.1-49.9% of students are eligible for FRPL.
Mid-high
School districts where 50-74.9% of students are eligible for FRPL.
High
School districts where 75% or more of students are eligible for FRPL.
Source: GAO review of the Department of Education’s CCD and ESSER data. | GAO-24-106913
Table 3: Characteristics of School Districts Selected for Nongeneralizable Site
Visits
Characteristics
Number of selected school districts
Urbanicity
Urban
8
Suburban
5
Rural
4
Appendix I: School Districts Included in
Analysis of Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Fund Reported
Spending
Appendix I: School Districts Included in
Analysis of Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief Fund Reported Spending
Page 28
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Characteristics
Number of selected school districts
Enrollment
Small
4
Medium
4
Large
9
Student racial demographics
Majority White
2
Majority Nonwhite
15
Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility
Low
0
Mid-low
3
Mid-high
3
High
10
Source: GAO review of Department of Education data. | GAO-24-106913
Note: One district did not have free or reduced-price lunch eligibility data available.
Appendix II: State Data on Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
Spending through School Year 2021–22
Page 29
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
This appendix shows school district reported spending of Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds through school year
2021–22, aggregated at the state level (see table 4).
Table 4: Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund Reported Spending by Category and State through School
Year 2021–22
Academic, social,
emotional, and
other needs
Continuity of
operations
and other
allowed uses
Physical health
and safety
Mental health
supports for
students and staff
Total
Dollars in billions
State
$
%
$
%
$
%
$
%
$
%
Alabama
$0.696
67.6%
$0.165
16.0%
$0.145
14.1%
$0.024
2.3%
$1.030
100%
Alaska
$0.124
65.3%
$0.046
24.2%
$0.017
8.9%
$0.003
1.6%
$0.190
100%
Arizona
$0.456
43.5%
$0.393
37.5%
$0.189
18.0%
$0.011
1.0%
$1.049
100%
Arkansas
$0.359
45.1%
$0.292
36.7%
$0.139
17.5%
$0.006
0.8%
$0.796
100%
California
$3.518
46.0%
$2.330
30.5%
$1.641
21.5%
$0.160
2.1%
$7.649
100%
Colorado
$0.047
75.4%
$0.005
8.0%
$0.010
16.1%
$0.000
0.5%
$0.062
100%
Connecticut
$0.285
62.5%
$0.074
16.2%
$0.065
14.3%
$0.032
7.0%
$0.456
100%
Delaware
$0.102
52.8%
$0.046
23.8%
$0.038
19.7%
$0.007
3.6%
$0.193
100%
District of Columbia
$0.164
73.9%
$0.010
4.5%
$0.043
19.4%
$0.005
2.3%
$0.222
100%
Florida
$2.106
59.2%
$0.856
24.0%
$0.500
14.0%
$0.098
2.8%
$3.560
100%
Georgia
$1.268
46.8%
$1.092
40.3%
$0.288
10.6%
$0.059
2.2%
$2.707
100%
Hawaii
$0.057
20.1%
$0.207
72.9%
$0.019
6.7%
$0.001
0.4%
$0.284
100%
Idaho
$0.071
37.6%
$0.077
40.7%
$0.032
16.9%
$0.009
4.8%
$0.189
100%
Illinois
$0.825
31.7%
$1.202
46.2%
$0.528
20.3%
$0.045
1.7%
$2.600
100%
Indiana
$0.502
56.0%
$0.201
22.4%
$0.174
19.4%
$0.019
2.1%
$0.896
100%
Iowa
$0.258
47.2%
$0.153
28.0%
$0.125
22.9%
$0.011
2.0%
$0.547
100%
Kansas
$0.126
39.9%
$0.141
44.6%
$0.042
13.3%
$0.007
2.2%
$0.316
100%
Kentucky
$0.694
64.6%
$0.239
22.3%
$0.121
11.3%
$0.020
1.9%
$1.074
100%
Louisiana
$0.580
56.3%
$0.290
28.1%
$0.149
14.5%
$0.012
1.2%
$1.031
100%
Maine
$0.069
51.5%
$0.025
18.7%
$0.038
28.4%
$0.002
1.5%
$0.134
100%
Maryland
$0.300
36.3%
$0.181
21.9%
$0.159
19.2%
$0.187
22.6%
$0.827
100%
Massachusetts
$0.351
56.4%
$0.115
18.5%
$0.120
19.3%
$0.036
5.8%
$0.622
100%
Michigan
$1.669
42.7%
$1.655
42.3%
$0.449
11.5%
$0.140
3.6%
$3.913
100%
Minnesota
$0.406
55.1%
$0.212
28.8%
$0.095
12.9%
$0.024
3.3%
$0.737
100%
Mississippi
$0.204
45.6%
$0.157
35.1%
$0.079
17.7%
$0.007
1.6%
$0.447
100%
Missouri
$0.485
40.5%
$0.481
40.2%
$0.203
16.9%
$0.029
2.4%
$1.198
100%
Montana
$0.063
42.6%
$0.046
31.1%
$0.035
23.6%
$0.004
2.7%
$0.148
100%
Appendix II: State Data on Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
Spending through School Year 2021–22
Appendix II: State Data on Elementary and
Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
Spending through School Year 2021–22
Page 30
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Academic, social,
emotional, and
other needs
Continuity of
operations
and other
allowed uses
Physical health
and safety
Mental health
supports for
students and staff
Total
Dollars in billions
State
$
%
$
%
$
%
$
%
$
%
Nebraska
$0.143
54.0%
$0.057
21.5%
$0.057
21.5%
$0.008
3.0%
$0.265
100%
Nevada
$0.254
53.4%
$0.198
41.6%
$0.018
3.8%
$0.006
1.3%
$0.476
100%
New Hampshire
$0.113
78.5%
$0.020
13.9%
$0.008
5.6%
$0.003
2.1%
$0.144
100%
New Jersey
$0.386
45.8%
$0.213
25.3%
$0.216
25.6%
$0.028
3.3%
$0.843
100%
New Mexico
$0.199
53.6%
$0.092
24.8%
$0.063
17.0%
$0.017
4.6%
$0.371
100%
New York
$0.901
37.8%
$1.158
48.6%
$0.212
8.9%
$0.112
4.7%
$2.383
100%
North Carolina
$1.343
63.6%
$0.430
20.4%
$0.338
16.0%
$0.002
0.1%
$2.113
100%
North Dakota
$0.049
45.4%
$0.034
31.5%
$0.023
21.3%
$0.002
1.9%
$0.108
100%
Ohio
$1.051
51.2%
$0.577
28.1%
$0.394
19.2%
$0.032
1.6%
$2.054
100%
Oklahoma
$0.503
53.3%
$0.420
44.5%
$0.001
0.1%
$0.019
2.0%
$0.943
100%
Oregon
$0.313
54.2%
$0.189
32.7%
$0.069
11.9%
$0.007
1.2%
$0.578
100%
Pennsylvania
$1.164
41.2%
$1.212
42.9%
$0.344
12.2%
$0.105
3.7%
$2.825
100%
Rhode Island
$0.049
50.5%
$0.020
20.6%
$0.024
24.7%
$0.004
4.1%
$0.097
100%
South Carolina
$0.485
61.8%
$0.168
21.4%
$0.121
15.4%
$0.011
1.4%
$0.785
100%
South Dakota
$0.028
31.1%
$0.017
18.9%
$0.033
36.7%
$0.012
13.3%
$0.090
100%
Tennessee
$0.681
55.7%
$0.225
18.4%
$0.293
24.0%
$0.023
1.9%
$1.222
100%
Texas
$2.342
42.0%
$2.561
45.9%
$0.578
10.4%
$0.093
1.7%
$5.574
100%
Utah
$0.171
79.5%
$0.020
9.3%
$0.022
10.2%
$0.002
0.9%
$0.215
100%
Vermont
$0.060
60.6%
$0.022
22.2%
$0.016
16.2%
$0.001
1.0%
$0.099
100%
Virginia
$0.298
44.1%
$0.199
29.5%
$0.164
24.3%
$0.014
2.1%
$0.675
100%
Washington
$0.298
29.5%
$0.275
27.2%
$0.221
21.9%
$0.216
21.4%
$1.010
100%
West Virginia
$0.205
59.4%
$0.068
19.7%
$0.064
18.6%
$0.008
2.3%
$0.345
100%
Wisconsin
$0.269
61.8%
$0.036
8.3%
$0.120
27.6%
$0.010
2.3%
$0.435
100%
Wyoming
$0.063
56.8%
$0.029
26.1%
$0.016
14.4%
$0.003
2.7%
$0.111
100%
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Education data. | GAO-24-106913
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
Page 31
GAO-24-106913 K-12 COVID-19 Relief Spending
Jacqueline M. Nowicki, Director, (202) 512-7215 or nowickij@gao.gov
In addition to the contact named above, Scott Spicer (Assistant Director),
David Watsula (Analyst-in-Charge), Sean Connolly, and Cheryl Jones
made key contributions to this report. Elizabeth Calderon, Sara Daleski,
Brooke Linsenbardt, Jean McSween, John Mingus Jr., Mimi Nguyen,
Kathryn O’Dea Lamas, and Joy Solmonson provided additional support.
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Staff
Acknowledgments
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative
arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the
federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public
funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed
oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government
is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is
through our website. Each weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence. You can also subscribe to
GAO’s email updates to receive notification of newly posted products.
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and
distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether
the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering
information is posted on GAO’s website, https://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm.
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard,
Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.
Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or Email Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at https://www.gao.gov.
Contact FraudNet:
Website: https://www.gao.gov/about/what-gao-does/fraudnet
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7700
A. Nicole Clowers, Managing Director, ClowersA@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, Washington,
DC 20548
Sarah Kaczmarek, Acting Managing Director, KaczmarekS@gao.gov, (202) 512-
4800, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, DC 20548
Stephen J. Sanford, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814,
Washington, DC 20548
GAO’s Mission
Obtaining Copies of
GAO Reports and
Testimony
Order by Phone
Connect with GAO
To Report Fraud,
Waste, and Abuse in
Federal Programs
Congressional
Relations
Public Affairs
Strategic Planning and
External Liaison
Please Print on Recycled Paper.