For several years, federal pandemic relief funds helped school districts across the United States dramatically expand "high-impact" or "high-dosage" tutoring programs that proved remarkably effective at driving student learning and helping make up for pandemic-era setbacks. Now that the main source of that federal funding has expired, education leaders nationwide are scrambling to figure out how to keep those vital programs afloat without pulling the plug on academic recovery efforts.
Between March 2020 and March 2021, Congress allocated nearly $190.5 billion to public education through the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) fund. Representing the largest one-time federal investment in K-12 education in United States history, the money was designed to help schools navigate the operational and academic turbulence of the COVID-19 pandemic. That unprecedented funding ended in phases between 2022 and 2024, though certain districts managed to secure temporary liquidation extensions from federal authorities to stretch their remaining dollars a bit further.
In response to the fiscal cliff, school districts have taken varied paths. Some have been forced to pause or significantly scale back their tutoring operations, while others are working tirelessly to save the programs by weaving them directly into their core academic systems and standard operating budgets. A 2026 analysis of 35 districts conducted by the National Student Support Accelerator (NSSA) revealed a split landscape: eight districts had significantly reduced their tutoring offerings, and another eight had experienced a distinct pause or disruption after ESSER funding officially sunsetted. However, 19 districts—representing more than half of the institutions studied—managed to successfully preserve or even expand their tutoring initiatives.
Extensive educational research shows that high-impact, or high-dosage, tutoring has served as the single most powerful intervention to recover lost ground from pandemic-era learning disruptions. Typically structured to occur at least three times a week, high-impact tutoring provides hyper-targeted academic instruction that coordinates closely with regular classroom work. According to data from the NSSA, programs featuring frequent sessions over a duration of at least 10 weeks—delivered either individually or in small groups using data-driven instruction—can generate anywhere from three to 15 months of additional academic learning for participating students.
Despite those proven gains, financial realities present a steep hurdle. Research from the Annenberg Institute at Brown University estimates that high-impact tutoring costs between $1,200 and $2,500 per student annually. Without the cushion of ESSER funds, meeting these recurring expenditures has proven exceptionally difficult for districts trying to balance tightening budgets.
For schools that heavily invested in these interventions during the pandemic and are now striving to retain their long-term benefits, the primary challenge is cementing tutoring as a standard institutional fixture rather than a temporary fix. Devon Wible, vice president of teaching and learning at Catapult Learning, an organization that provides tutoring programs to schools, notes that districts across multiple states are increasingly reframing tutoring as a foundational layer of permanent academic support.
"A few years ago, when ESSER funds were here, the conversation was, ‘Let’s see if it works,’" Wible observes. "Now it’s, ‘How do we sustain this?’"
Building Tutoring Into Existing Systems
One of the primary ways school districts are attempting to make tutoring last is by embedding it directly into the regular school day and aligning it with existing academic-support systems. While this structural shift does not completely eliminate the financial cost of providing instruction, it is significantly less expensive and logistically simpler than creating entirely separate, extracurricular after-school programs that require distinct transportation and staffing arrangements.
Wible explains that various districts have introduced dedicated intervention periods or "WIN" (What I Need) blocks directly into their master schedules. These designated times give students space to receive targeted academic support without pulling them away from core classroom instruction. Furthermore, this integrated design encourages much tighter collaboration among regular classroom teachers, specialized tutors, and school intervention staff, all of whom can share real-time student data and coordinate their efforts toward common academic goals.
The tutoring itself is intentionally designed to reinforce classroom instruction rather than operate in a vacuum. A student struggling with grade-level reading, for instance, might receive targeted coaching on foundational phonics and decoding skills while continuing to engage with complex grade-level texts alongside their peers during standard class time. Schools rely on ongoing student assessment data to identify emerging needs, adjust instructional approaches dynamically, and determine precisely when a student has mastered a concept and is ready to exit the tutoring program.
"Ultimately, our shared goal is that students experience classroom instruction, intervention and tutoring as one coherent learning experience," Wible says.
Wible has witnessed the tangible impact of this integrated model firsthand. A recent Catapult analysis tracking roughly 700 students in kindergarten through third grade across 12 different Massachusetts school districts found that participating children made substantial literacy gains after receiving high-impact tutoring, with some achieving up to five additional months of reading progress over expected benchmarks.
In one specific Massachusetts district, the results were particularly striking. Following just 12 weeks of structured tutoring, the proportion of kindergarten and first-grade students performing at or above grade level in reading jumped dramatically from 11% to 55%, according to Wible’s data.
Protecting What Works
While finding alternative revenue streams is a major priority, education policy experts warn that an equally pressing concern is what happens to program quality when cash-strapped schools are forced to cut spending. David Blazar, an associate professor of education policy at the University of Maryland, suggests that the most insidious threat to student progress may not be the complete elimination of tutoring, but rather the gradual erosion of the specific design features that make it effective in the first place.
Blazar recently co-authored a University of Maryland study examining tutoring programs across all 24 of Maryland’s school districts to understand how local education agencies were designing and scaling their academic supports. The analysis revealed that 18 districts offered tutoring featuring key markers of strong implementation, such as small-group formats, high session frequency, and delivery during regular school hours.
Although that specific research centers on Maryland, it offers a revealing window into the broader dilemmas facing districts nationwide as they attempt to sustain tutoring in a post-ESSER era. Blazar anticipates that as budgets tighten, districts may be tempted to increase group sizes, reduce the frequency of sessions, or pivot to lower-cost, lower-quality providers rather than outright canceling their programs.
"The more likely change is quieter and, in some ways, more consequential: erosion of the design features that make tutoring work," Blazar says. "When you have to find savings, dosage — and other components of quality, including how many students work with the same tutor simultaneously — are very likely to change."
When reviewing implementation plans submitted under the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future from 2024 to 2027, Blazar found that local districts actively planned to restructure daily schedules to keep tutoring afloat. Because tutoring serves as a core statutory mandate of Maryland’s landmark state education policy, he expects local systems to maintain their commitment to the strategy.
"I think they will continue because it is a core part of the Blueprint, and there is growing consensus that tutoring is a critical resource for improving student outcomes, so it is money well spent," Blazar notes.
For school districts everywhere trying to stretch limited local and state dollars, the ultimate challenge lies in figuring out where to trim administrative or operational costs without weakening the core pedagogical elements that render high-impact tutoring successful in the first place.
One District’s Approach
West Feliciana Parish Schools in Louisiana provides a clear example of a school system successfully identifying alternative funding sources to institutionalize tutoring within the regular school day. While the district already had basic intervention and tutoring practices in place prior to 2024, it dramatically expanded and formalized its school-day, high-dosage tutoring program during the 2024-25 school year by leveraging state funding made available through the Louisiana Department of Education’s Accelerate: High-Dosage Tutoring initiative.
To accommodate the program, the district engineered a schoolwide master schedule incorporating a daily 30- to 50-minute block during which core instruction pauses. Within this window, students are divided into targeted, skill-based cohorts and report either to their regular classroom teacher or a dedicated interventionist for high-dosage tutoring, according to Jodi Lemoine, director of accountability at West Feliciana Parish Schools.
Students who are not scheduled for tutoring during that block remain in the classroom to work independently on educational software or read library books. For older students, such as fourth and fifth graders, the district incorporated online tutoring delivered through external virtual providers.
This systemic reorganization vastly expanded the reach of the district’s academic intervention efforts. Before the rollout of the initiative, the local reading intervention program served approximately 96 students a week. Lemoine notes that participation surged to more than 430 students within a single year.
"From the get-go, our philosophy was: This is gonna require good teaching, not just programs," Lemoine says.
The district closely monitors student academic progress every two to three weeks, making real-time adjustments to student groupings and instructional focus as needed. Performance data tracked between the fall and spring assessments of the 2025-26 school year demonstrates clear upward trajectories. According to measures from the Northwest Evaluation Association, the district recorded notable performance jumps across multiple grade levels.
West Feliciana’s achievements did not go unnoticed; the Louisiana Department of Education recognized the district as a Model of Excellence for its innovative approach to high-dosage tutoring. By December 2024, more than 45% of its elementary students in kindergarten through fifth grade were actively receiving tutoring—more than double the prior participation rate. Furthermore, roughly 60% of participating students successfully reached established benchmarks on their targeted literacy skills by their very first progress-monitoring checkpoint.
"We have figured out a way to use the resources we have smarter," Lemoine reflects. "Our high-dose tutoring program is truly an example of that: Work smarter, not harder."
While the district relies on a blended mix of state and local funds to keep the initiative running, leadership remains deeply committed to sustaining the program over the long term. Superintendent Hollis Milton emphasizes that West Feliciana’s success proves that effective academic interventions do not simply have to vanish the moment a temporary federal funding stream dries up.
"If something’s working, you find the will, and then you’re gonna find the way," Milton says.