The relationship between school improvement grant funding allocations and student achievement in California's persistently lowest achieving schools
The federal government, through the School Improvement Grant (SIG) program of 2009, provided millions of dollars for states to bring about immediate and sustainable academic growth to schools that were designated as persistently lowest achieving. This study examined the budgets of the 128 California schools that participated in the first 2 years of the SIG program and analyzed the relationship between budgetary allocations and student achievement scores as measured by the Academic Performance Index (API). Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that SIG budgetary allocation percentages designated for certificated personnel, classified personnel, instructional materials, parent education, professional development, technology, extended time, consultant services, incentives, and allocation percentages designated for inside or outside the classroom were not predictive of API scores. A Pearson r correlation showed no relationship between allocation percentages designated for staff incentives and API scores. An independent samples t-test showed no statistically significant difference between Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 API scores. Finally, an independent samples t-test revealed a statistically significant difference in mean API scores favoring those schools that were eligible to participate in the SIG program but did not receive funding over those that received SIG funding.