A Closer Look at The Phase Two Race to the Top Scores

Reactions to the recently announced winners of Phase Two Race to the Top grants – new federal grants to fund education reform at the state level – have ranged from excitement to shock and dismay. Not all policymakers and stakeholders approve of all of the winning states and some supposed shoe-ins were denied grants entirely. Of the 19 finalists in Phase Two, nine states and the District of Columbia won grants. These states include Massachusetts, New York, Hawaii, Florida, Rhode Island, Maryland, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio.

This means that previously favored states like South Carolina and Illinois, both of which scored well in Phase One, did not win grants. In fact, the final scores for Phase Two applications differed dramatically from those for Phase One, indicating that some states significantly improved their applications. For example, Massachusetts, which received the highest score in Phase Two at 471 out of 500 points, ranked 13^th among the 16 finalists in Phase One with 411 points. New York, the second highest scoring state in Phase Two, ranked 15th in Phase One and improved on its original score of 409 by 56 points. And Hawaii, which didn’t even make it as a finalist in Phase One, ranked third in Phase Two, increasing its total score by 97 points to 465.

Arizona earned the highest point increase between Phases One and Two – 195 points. However, this jump from 240 to 435 points was not enough to win the state a Race to the Top grant.

Some states dropped in the rankings in Phase Two, like South Carolina, which fell from 6th to 14th and Illinois, which fell from 5th to 15th. Pennsylvania and Kentucky even lost points, two and seven respectively, between Phases One and Two and ended up ranking 18th and 19th among the 19 finalists.

What happened in Phase Two that made for such different results?

Based on breakdowns of each state’s Race to the Top Phase One and Two scores, it looks like states that made major improvements to the “Great Teachers and Leaders” section of their proposals were more likely to receive Phase Two grants. In Phase One, this section proved to be the downfall for many states because it comprises the most points of all of the sections and seems to be the most complex. Massachusetts only received 73 percent of the possible 138 points under this section in Phase One, but received 92 percent of the possible points in Phase Two. This increase can be attributed to major improvements in its plan to improve teacher effectiveness using performance measures, equitably distribute teachers, and improve teacher preparation programs. Hawaii and Florida also made major improvements to their applications in these areas, earning themselves 94 and 83 percent of the total possible points in Phase Two, respectively.

States that did not make improvements to the “Great Teachers and Leaders” section of their Race to the Top application did not fare well in Phase Two. Louisiana, for example, received 89 percent of the possible points in Phase One compared to 80 percent in Phase Two. Pennsylvania received only 69 percent of the possible points in this section in Phase Two, down from 77 percent in Phase One. Neither of these states received grants in Phase Two.

Improvements in other sections also pushed some states’ proposals over the top. For example, Massachusetts made improvements to its “Standards and Assessments” plan, increasing its total points earned from 77 percent to 100 percent of the possible 70 points partially because it agreed to implement the Common Core Standards. Florida and DC made improvements to their “State Success Factors” sections by increasing LEA participation and improving their capacity to implement and scale up their plans. These changes earned each of them 90 percent of the possible 125 points in this section in Phase Two compared to 80 percent for Florida and 76 percent for DC in Phase One.

In the end, the states that left their Race to the Top Phase Two applications largely the same as their Phase One applications, like Pennsylvania and Kentucky, lost out on Race to the Top grants. Even Ohio, which was the lowest scoring state to receive a grant, gained 22 points due to improvements in its second round application. Similarly, states that made only incremental changes, like Illinois and South Carolina, did not receive the score bump necessary to win them a grant. Instead, states that made dramatic changes, like Massachusetts, New York, and Hawaii, gained enough momentum to win a Phase Two Race to the Top grant.

Now that the winners have been announced, funds will soon be distributed and states will begin to implement the programs they set out in their applications. Once that happens, we can begin to collect evidence on the actual impact of Race to the Top – changes in student outcomes as a result of the programs and projects implemented with the federal funds.

To download a complete breakdown of each state’s Race to the Top scores, click here.