Supplement, Not Supplant Under ESSA

What is Supplement, Not Supplant?

In general, federal funds allocated to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), in its current authorization as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), are supposed to be additive, or supplemental, to other funds available to schools in the district. ESEA funds may not be used to take the place of, or supplant, other funds.

Even though Supplement, not Supplant (SNS) is a statutory provision in numerous ESEA programs, the requirements vary. This resource is designed to help LEAs ensure compliance with SNS requirements in the following programs:

Title I, Part A - Improving Basic Programs Operated by LEAs
Title I, Part C - Education of Migratory Children
Title I, Part D – Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk
Title I School Improvement (Section 1003)
Title II, Part A - Supporting Effective Instruction
Title III, Part A - English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement
Title III, Part A - Immigrant Set-Aside
Title IV, Part A - Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants
Title V, Part B, Subpart 2 - Rural and Low-Income Schools Program

Please refer to the table below for an overview of which funds would be supplanted if replaced by ESEA funds.

ESEA Funding	Federal Funding	State Funding	Local Funding	Statute/Regulations
Title I, Part A		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 1118(b)
Title I, Part C		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 1304(c)(2)
Title I, Part D		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 1415(b); 1415(a)(2)(C)
Title I School Improvement (Section 1003)		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 1003(e)(2)
Title II, Part A		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 2301
Title III, Part A & Title III, Part A - Immigrant Set-Aside	✔️	✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 3115(g)
Title IV, Part A		✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 4110
Title V, Part B	✔️	✔️	✔️	ESSA Sec. 5232

Supplement, not Supplant Requirements by Program

Title I, Part A

General Rule

Title I, Part A funds for LEA- and school-level spending must only be used to supplement the funds that would, in the absence of Title I, Part A funds, be made available from state and local sources for the education of students participating in Title I programs and not to supplant such funds.

Methodology and Compliance

To demonstrate compliance with the Title I, Part A supplement, not supplant provision for LEA- and school-level expenditures, LEAs must annually demonstrate the methodology used to allocate state and local funds to each Title I school, including preschools. This ensures that each Title I school receives all of the state and local funds it would otherwise have received if it were not a Title I school.

For Title I, Part A, compliance with SNS is not measured by looking at individual Title I, Part A expenditures. Instead, SNS compliance is measured by whether the district has a written methodology to ensure that each Title I, Part A school receives all the state and local funds that it would have received if it were not a Title I, Part A school. In other words, decisions regarding state and local funds must be made in a Title I-neutral manner. Unlike other Titles, Title I, Part A SNS is not measured on an expense-by-expense basis. Title I, Part A funds therefore may be spent on any allowable expenditure regardless of what funds were used to pay for it in the past or whether state or local funds pay for the same expenditure in non-Title I, Part A schools.

Districts must demonstrate that the methodology they use to allocate state and local funds is Title I, Part A neutral. The methodology must provide each Title I school with all the state and local money it would receive if it did not participate in the Title I, Part A program. In other words, a school may not receive less state and local funds simply because it receives Title I, Part A funds.

Under ESSA §8304, the state must ensure that the LEA has a compliant methodology in place. The state is not required to approve an LEA’s SNS methodology. CDE collected, reviewed, and approved the methodology for allocating state and local funds in 2018, a copy of which can be requested from the LEA’s ESEA Regional Contact. Any revisions to LEA methodologies can be submitted to your LEA’s ESEA Regional Contact via the updated SNS Methodology Form. As part of ESEA monitoring, the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) may review the methodology.

Exclusions

A district need not have a methodology to comply with ESEA section 1118(b)(2) if it has:

Single-school LEAs
LEAs in which all schools are Title I schools
Grade spans that include only:
- A single school,
- Only non–Title I schools, or
- Only Title I schools

Title I, Part A SNS Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Which state and local funds are included when considering SNS?

A: All the state and local funds the school would otherwise receive are included. Must include state and local funds for activities required by federal, state or local law. Otherwise it includes the state and local funds each school is allocated from its LEA based on the LEA’s SNS methodology. SNS calculations do not take into account private contributions, fundraising, or parent fees.

Q: How does SNS impact district-level activities funded with state or local funds?

A: The LEA must conduct its district-level activities in a manner that does not consider a school’s Title I status. For example, if the LEA reserves the state and local funds for an instructional coach at the district level, and the LEA deploys the instructional coach to different schools throughout the school year on an as-needed basis, access to or assignment of the instructional coach must be Title I neutral in order to comply with the general SNS requirement.

Q: What is the difference between Supplement, Not Supplant, Comparability and Maintenance of Effort?

A: The Title I SNS requirements may seem similar to Comparability or Maintenance of Effort, as all three fiscal rules consider how LEAs distribute state and local funds and/or resources to schools. However, each of these rules measure distinct aspects of fiscal policy. See the Comparison of the Title I, Part A Fiscal Requirements table below.

Comparison of the Title I, Part A Fiscal Requirements

Supplement, Not Supplant	Comparability	Maintenance of Effort
Requires that LEAs distribute state and local funds without regard to whether a school receives Title I, Part A funds. Also referred to as a “Title I neutral” manner.	Requires that state and local funds are used, as a whole, to provide services that are comparable among Title I, Part A and non-Title I, Part A schools.	Requires districts to have a consistent base of state and local funding for public education from year to year.

Title I School Improvement - Section 1003

General Rule

A school participating in a Title I, Part A program shall use funds available to carry out this section only to supplement the amount of funds that would, in the absence of funds under this part, be made available from state and local sources for the school, including funds needed to provide services that are required by law for students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.

Methodology and Compliance

Section 1003(e)(2) requires districts to assure that each school the district serves with section 1003 school improvement funds will receive all the state and local funds it would have received in the absence of the section 1003 funds. Under section 1118(b)(2), each district must allocate state and local funds to each Title I, Part A school through a methodology that ensures the school receives all the state and local funds it would otherwise receive if it were not receiving Title I funds. Assuming a school district allocates state and local funds through its methodology first, any school that receives section 1003 funds would already have received, through the district’s methodology, all the state and local funds it would have received absent the 1003 funds. Thus, the district would be complying with both 1118(b)(2) and 1003(e)(2).

Title I, Part C

General Rule

Title I, Part C, Migrant Education Program (MEP), funds must supplement, not supplant, state, local, or other federal funds that would otherwise be used to support migrant students. In practice, this means that MEP-funded activities must be above and beyond the services that would normally be provided with those other funding sources.

Addressing Unmet Needs

In addition to supplementing state and local funds, Title I, Part C funds must be used to address the unique educational needs of migratory children that are not met by other federal or non‑federal programs.
Although similar to the SNS rule, this requirement focuses specifically on services funded by other programs. If another program already offers services that meet a migratory child’s needs, that child must be identified for and served by that program on the same basis as all other eligible children—before MEP funds are used.

Exclusions

Excluded Funds

When determining supplanting, SEAs and LEAs may exclude supplemental state or local funds used for programs that meet the intent and purposes of Title I, Part A (ESEA section 1118(d)). According to federal guidance on SNS, this same exclusion applies to the Migrant Education Program when supplemental funds meet the intent and purposes of MEP.

Exclusions From the SNS Methodology Requirement

Certain LEAs are not required to develop an SNS methodology. These include:

Single-school LEAs
LEAs in which all schools are Title I schools
Grade spans that include only:
- A single school,
- Only non–Title I schools, or
- Only Title I schools

Title I, Part D

General Rule

Title I, Part D programs must supplement the number of instructional hours students receive from state and local sources and shall be considered in compliance with the supplement not supplant requirement of ESEA §1118 without regard to the subject areas in which instruction is given during those hours.

Compliance

According to Section 1415(b), if a Title I, Part D, Subpart 1 program supplements the number of hours of instruction students receive from state and local sources, it complies with SNS requirements without regard to the subject areas in which instruction is given during those hours.

Title II, Part A

General Rule

Funds made available under Title II, Part A must be used to supplement and not supplant state and local funds that would otherwise be used for activities authorized under Title II, Part A. Title II, Part A funds can be used across all schools, regardless of their Title I status.

Compliance

According to Section 2301, supplanting is presumed if a district uses Title II, Part A funds for an activity the district:

Is legally required to carry out, or
Funded with state or local funds in the prior year.

When an activity was funded with state or local funds in the prior year, an LEA may rebut the presumption of supplanting if it can demonstrate that the LEA is unable to continue supporting the activity with the prior funding source due to documented precipitous reductions in those funding sources. The LEA must be able to demonstrate through written, contemporaneous documentation (e.g., state or local legislative action, budget information, school board minutes, or other materials) that it would not be able to fund a particular activity in the absence of funds.

Title III, Part A & Title III, Part A - Immigrant Set-Aside

General Rule

Title III, Part A funds, including Immigrant Set-Aside funds, must be used to supplement, not supplant, the level of federal, state, and local public funds that would otherwise be provided for programs serving English learners and immigrant children and youth. LEAs must ensure that any services supported with Title III, Part A funds are additional and could not be used to meet requirements of other federal programs, including ESEA Title I, Part A or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

For example, Title I requires schools and LEAs to communicate with parents in a language they can understand. Because this is a Title I requirement, Title III funds may not be used for this communication or translation. However, Title III funds may be used for supplemental communication and translation efforts that go beyond what Title I requires. Title III funds may be used in all schools for Title III authorized activities, regardless of Title I status.

Compliance

Supplanting is presumed if an LEA uses Title III, Part A or Title III, Immigrant Set-Aside funds for an activity that:

The LEA is legally required to carry out, or
Was funded with state, local, or federal funds in the prior year.

When an activity was funded with state, local, or federal funds in the prior year, an LEA may rebut the presumption of supplanting if it can demonstrate that the LEA is unable to continue supporting the activity with the prior funding source due to documented reductions in those funding sources. The LEA must be able to demonstrate through written, contemporaneous documentation (e.g., state or local legislative action, budget information, school board minutes, or other materials) that it would not be able to fund a particular activity in the absence of funds.

Title IV, Part A

General Rule

Title IV, Part A funds must be used by the LEA to supplement, and not supplant, non‑federal funds—including state, local, and private funds—that would otherwise be used to carry out activities authorized under Title IV, Part A. These funds may be used in all schools, regardless of Title I status.

Compliance

Supplanting is presumed if an LEA uses Title IV, Part A funds for an activity that:

The LEA is legally required to carry out, or
Was funded with state, local, or private funds in the prior year.

When an activity was funded with state, local, or private funds in the prior year, an LEA may rebut the presumption of supplanting if it can demonstrate that the LEA is unable to continue supporting the activity with the prior funding source due to documented precipitous reductions in those funding sources. The LEA must be able to demonstrate through written, contemporaneous documentation (e.g., state or local legislative action, budget information, school board minutes, or other materials) that it would not be able to fund a particular activity in the absence of funds.

Title V, Part B

General Rule

Title V, Part B funds, also known as the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP), must be used to supplement, not supplant other federal, state, or local education funds. These funds can be used for any activities authorized by Title I, Part A; Title II Part, A; Title III, Part A; Title IV Part B, or parent involvement activities.

Compliance

Supplanting is presumed if an LEA uses Title V, Part B funds for an activity that:

The LEA is legally required to carry out, or
Was funded with state, local, or federal funds in the prior year.

When an activity was funded with state, local, or federal funds in the prior year, an LEA may rebut the presumption of supplanting if it can demonstrate that the LEA is unable to continue supporting the activity with the prior funding source due to documented precipitous reductions in those funding sources. The LEA must be able to demonstrate through written, contemporaneous documentation (e.g., state or local legislative action, budget information, school board minutes, or other materials) that it would not be able to fund a particular activity in the absence of funds.

SNS Monitoring

Evidence of Compliance

The LEA must maintain documentation to demonstrate that the LEA allocated state and local funds to schools in accordance with its Title I, Part A SNS methodology. For all Titles, an LEA must keep records to show compliance with program requirements and facilitate an effective audit. (34 C.F.R. §§ 76.730-76.731). The LEA shall keep records that fully show:

The amount of funds under the grant or subgrant;
How the State or subgrantee uses the funds;
The total cost of the project;
The share of that cost provided from other sources; and
Other records to facilitate an effective audit.

Additional Considerations

Equitable Services

Title services must be in addition to and cannot replace or supplant services that would be provided by non-public schools to non-public school students. For example: A non-public school has reached out to ask if Title I, Part A funds can be used by the LEA to pay for computers for the non-public school’s Title I eligible students, but the non-public school already pays for computers for the non-Title I eligible students. This use of funds would not be allowable because the proposed use of funds is not in addition to services that would be provided by non-public schools.

Preschool

Supplement, not supplant requirements apply to any preschool program supported with ESEA funds. The specific expectations depend on the Title program under which the preschool is funded. LEAs should review the guidance associated with the relevant Title program to ensure the preschool’s use of funds aligns with that program’s SNS provisions.

Transferring Funds

If funds are transferred from one program to another, for example from Title IV, Part A to Title I, the funds must follow the SNS guidelines of the program they are being transferred into.

Allowability, Reasonableness, and Allocability Applies to Supplemental Costs

Just because a cost is not a supplanting issue, that cost does not automatically become allowable. All costs must be allowable, allocable, and reasonable under the applicable Title. Activities must be identified in the comprehensive needs assessment and included in the LEA’s comprehensive plan (e.g., UIP, SCAP, 90-Plan, etc.) and the schoolwide plan (as applicable).

Sample Scenarios

A district paid a stipend for a school’s family engagement coordinator with local funds the prior year. Would it be supplanting to use Title I, Part A funds to pay the stipend this year? No, it would not be supplanting as long as the school received its state and local funds in a Title I neutral manner according to the LEA’s SNS methodology. The expense must also be necessary, reasonable, and included in the needs assessment.
A district is planning to use Title II, Part A to fund their required induction program for new teachers. Is this supplanting? Yes. Using Title II, Part A to fund state-mandated induction programs would be supplanting. However, Title II, Part A could be used to fund supplemental induction initiatives if the need has been identified through a comprehensive needs assessment.
A district is purchasing a digital learning software for all students to engage in supplemental literacy intervention. The district wants to split-fund the software using state funds and Title III, Part A. In this scenario, the portion of the software used by English learners would be funded with Title III, Part A while the portion for all other students would be state funded. Is this supplanting? Yes. Using Title III, Part A funds to purchase the same resource for English learners that is purchased for other students from state, local, or other federal funds would be considered supplanting.
Last year, a district paid for a STEM summer enrichment program with local funds, but this year they want to use those funds for a different activity. If the district uses Title IV, Part A funds to pay for the STEM summer enrichment program, is it supplanting? Yes. Title IV, Part A funds may not be used for an activity that was funded with state, local, or private funds in the prior year. Title IV, Part A funds could be used for a summer enrichment program if it is a new activity.

Resources

Title I, Part A SNS Methodology Form

Contacts

For questions regarding compliance with the supplement, not supplant requirements, please contact your district's ESEA Regional Contact in the Federal Programs and Supports Unit.

Supplement, Not Supplant Under ESSA

What is Supplement, Not Supplant?

SNS Monitoring

Evidence of Compliance

Additional Considerations

Equitable Services

Preschool

Transferring Funds

Allowability, Reasonableness, and Allocability Applies to Supplemental Costs

Sample Scenarios

Resources

Contacts

Quick Links

Feedback & Requests for Assistance