Project Activities
Research plan
- What activities did the RELs undertake to fulfill the missions specified in ESRA?
- What were the technical quality and relevance of REL Fast Response Project reports published by IES and of the corresponding proposals?
- What were the technical quality and relevance of REL impact study reports published by IES and of the corresponding proposals?
- How relevant and useful were the REL technical assistance products to the needs of the states, localities, and policymakers in their regions?
Structured Abstract
Research design and methods
This descriptive study relied on a combination of extant data, Fiscal Year 2010 interviews with REL directors, and Fiscal Year 2012 surveys of potential REL customers from state and local educational agencies. Panels of experts met during Fiscal Year 2010 and Fiscal Year 2012 to rate the quality and relevance of REL Fast Response Project proposals and final reports, as well as REL impact study proposals and final reports.
Key outcomes
- REL staff members reported activities under each of the ten missions of the REL program specified in ESRA. The statement of work (SOW) for the REL contracts in place between 2006 and 2011 aligned explicitly with six of the ten statutory missions for the REL program. Four additional statutory missions were not explicitly in the SOW for the RELs, but RELs reported activities under those missions as well.
- The IES-published FRP reports received an average quality rating of 3.81 on a 5-point scale, while the corresponding proposals received an average quality rating of 3.24. Both of these averages fell between the categories of "adequate" and "strong" quality.
- The IES-published FRP reports received an average relevance rating of 3.64 on a 5-point scale, while the corresponding proposals received an average relevance rating of 3.39. Both of these averages fell between the categories of "adequate" relevance and "relevant."
- Expert panelists rated 8 (out of 24) impact study reports produced by the RELs and published by IES, on average, between "strong" and "very strong" in quality (4.10 on a 5-point scale, with 5 being the highest value), and between "relevant" and "very relevant" (4.06 on a 5-point scale).
- Eighty-six percent of state educational agency administrators and 52 percent of school district administrators reported being "very familiar," "somewhat familiar," or "a little familiar" with the REL program, based on a survey administered during the 2011–12 school year.
- Fifty percent of state administrators and 26 percent of district administrators who were at least "a little familiar" with the REL program were "very satisfied" with it, based on a survey administered during the 2011-12 school year.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Products and publications
The final report, titled Evaluation of the Regional Educational Laboratories: Final Report, was released in April 2015.
Other publications from this study are listed below.
- Evaluation of the Regional Educational Laboratories: Interim Report (September 2013)
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.