Study of the Implementation of the 'ESEA' Title I -- Part C Migrant Education Program

The children of migratory agricultural workers and fishers are extremely disadvantaged and more likely than their nonmigratory peers to live in poverty and experience disconnected educational experiences that can hinder their educational progress and success. Congress established the Migrant Education Program (MEP) in 1966 through an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). The goal of the program under ESEA, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA), is to help meet the unique educational needs of migratory children. In particular, the MEP seeks to mitigate challenges associated with mobility that may impede students' academic success, such as differences in curricular or academic requirements as students move between and among states. State MEP grantees and local/regional MEP subgrantees carry out a range of activities and services to support the needs of migratory children, including identifying and recruiting migratory children, providing instructional and support services that help bolster and sustain the educational progress of migratory children, and collaborating with other organizations and programs that serve migratory children (e.g., Migrant and Seasonal Head Start, 8 the College Assistance Migrant Program, or the High School Equivalency Program). In 2018, this study examined how state MEP grantees and local/regional subgrantees implemented the program's four central components: (1) identification and recruitment; (2) records transfer; (3) service delivery; and (4) coordination and collaboration. The study focused on four main study questions: (1) How do state MEP grantees and local/regional subgrantees identify, recruit, and prioritize migratory children for services?; (2) How does the Migrant Student Information Exchange (MSIX) system facilitate the transfer of educational and health information to support enrollment, placement, and accrual of credits for migratory children?; (3) What services do state MEP grantees and local/regional subgrantees provide to migratory children?; and (4) How do state MEP grantees and local/regional subgrantees collaborate with other programs and organizations to deliver services to migratory children? Key findings include the following: (1) Most state MEP grantees relied on their local/regional MEP subgrantees and outside contractors to manage the identification and recruitment (ID&R) process, including hiring, deploying, and supervising MEP recruiters; (2) Most state MEP directors and local/regional MEP coordinators reported that the Migrant Student Information Exchange (MSIX) had improved timely notification when migratory children moved across states and facilitated interstate migratory student records transfers; (3) State MEP directors considered a variety of factors in determining specific services to provide or fund for migratory children, including the needs of migratory children, the availability of funds, student outcomes, policy priorities, and the services provided by other programs; (4) State MEP grantees and local/regional MEP subgrantees that provided direct services to migratory children most commonly provided supplemental instructional services that included reading/language arts instruction and mathematics instruction; and (5) Most state MEP grantees and local/regional MEP subgrantees that provided direct instructional and support services to migratory children collaborated with other agencies and organizations to provide these services. [For "Study of the Implementation of the ESEA Title I -- Part C Migrant Education Program. Volume II: Technical Appendices," see ED600467.]