New Jersey’s continued investment in high-impact tutoring reflects a growing consensus among educators that intensive, small-group instruction remains one of the most effective strategies for helping students recover academically following years of disrupted learning. Yet the latest round of state funding has also exposed a troubling contradiction at the heart of public education policy. While state leaders are directing millions of dollars toward districts struggling with reading and mathematics proficiency, one of New Jersey’s most academically challenged school systems—its own capital city—received none of the available funding.
Here is the breakdown of the 55 New Jersey school districts and charter schools that were awarded portions of the $7.5 millionHigh-Impact Tutoring Grant, along with a look at how these state-funded programs are legally and operationally structured.
Who Got the Funding?
The grant awards scaled based on a district’s overall student enrollment and performance data. Newark Public Schools and New Brunswick Public Schools received the maximum allocation of $400,000 each.
According to the official NJDOE Award Document, the complete list of recipients includes:
- Atlantic County: Absecon City
- Bergen County: Bogota, Englewood City, Palisades Park
- Burlington County: Pemberton Township
- Camden County: Berlin Borough, Camden City, Clementon Borough, Gloucester Township, Pennsauken Township, Stratford Borough, Mastery Schools of Camden
- Cape May County: Lower Cape May Regional, Lower Township, Wildwood City
- Cumberland County: Deerfield Township, Millville
- Essex County: Bloomfield Township, Newark
- Gloucester County: Clayton
- Hudson County: Bayonne
- Charter Schools: Paterson Charter School for Science & Technology, Middlesex Charter School (Perth Amboy), Empowerment Academy Charter School (Jersey City), Creativity Collaboratory Charter School (Salem County), Leap Academy University Charter School (Camden), Sussex County Charter School for Technology, Phillip’s Academy Charter School of Paterson
- Northwest NJ Districts: Vernon Township ($160K), Newton ($80K), Belvidere ($50K), Mine Hill Township ($40K), South Hunterdon Regional ($20K)
The outcome has generated renewed debate about how competitive education grants should be distributed, whether districts with the greatest academic needs should receive additional consideration regardless of administrative performance, and how taxpayers can be assured that education dollars ultimately reach the students they are intended to help.
Governor Mikie Sherrill and the New Jersey Department of Education recently announced $7.5 million in awards through the third round of the New Jersey Learning Acceleration Program, an initiative specifically designed to expand evidence-based tutoring programs across the state. The grants focus on intensive, small-group instruction in mathematics and English Language Arts, with an emphasis on accelerating learning among students who continue to struggle with grade-level proficiency.
The program reflects an educational strategy that has gained widespread support among researchers and policymakers. Rather than relying exclusively on larger classroom interventions, high-impact tutoring provides students with consistent, personalized instruction delivered in small groups over an extended period. Numerous studies have concluded that this approach can significantly improve student performance when implemented effectively and consistently.
Demand for the program, however, dramatically exceeded available funding.
Approximately 300 New Jersey school districts met the state’s eligibility requirements by recording less than 50 percent proficiency among students in grades three through eight. Yet available appropriations were sufficient to fund only 55 districts. State education officials have indicated that nearly $32 million would have been required to provide grants to every qualifying applicant, leaving many districts competing for a limited pool of resources.
Among the most notable districts left without funding was Trenton Public Schools.
The decision has attracted particular attention because few districts demonstrate a greater need for academic intervention. Recent state assessment results continue to illustrate the scale of the educational challenges facing New Jersey’s capital city. Reading proficiency remains alarmingly low among elementary students, while mathematics achievement continues to lag far below statewide averages. According to publicly available assessment data, only a small percentage of Trenton students currently meet grade-level expectations in core academic subjects despite annual per-pupil expenditures exceeding $24,000.
Those statistics have intensified questions surrounding why one of New Jersey’s highest-need districts failed to secure funding specifically created to address learning loss.
According to the Department of Education, the Learning Acceleration Program operates as a competitive grant initiative rather than a formula-based allocation. Applications are evaluated using established criteria that examine program design, implementation readiness, staffing capacity, instructional planning, and alignment with evidence-based tutoring practices. Districts receiving the highest overall scores are awarded funding until available appropriations are exhausted.
State officials have indicated that Trenton’s proposal simply did not score high enough during the competitive review process.
The rejection, however, appears to involve more than the quality of the district’s most recent application.
Education officials and legislators have pointed to an earlier round of tutoring funding that has continued to cast a shadow over the district’s current efforts. In 2024, Trenton Public Schools received more than $700,000 through an earlier tutoring initiative intended to strengthen student achievement in reading and mathematics. Yet the district ultimately returned approximately $550,000 of those funds after failing to fully implement the program.
The decision to return nearly eighty percent of an award specifically intended to improve academic performance has become one of the most closely scrutinized aspects of the current controversy.
While education leaders have offered limited public explanation regarding why such a substantial portion of the earlier grant went unused, many observers believe that history inevitably influenced the state’s evaluation of Trenton’s latest application. Competitive grant programs frequently consider an applicant’s demonstrated ability to successfully administer previous awards, particularly when demand significantly exceeds available funding.
That reality has created a difficult policy dilemma.
On one hand, state officials have a responsibility to ensure taxpayer dollars are directed toward districts capable of implementing programs effectively and producing measurable results. Grant accountability remains an essential component of responsible public administration, particularly when education budgets continue facing competing demands across multiple priorities.
On the other hand, critics argue that students should not bear the consequences of administrative shortcomings. The children attending Trenton Public Schools did not design previous grant applications, manage district operations, or determine how earlier funding was utilized. Yet they now find themselves without access to additional tutoring resources specifically intended for communities experiencing the greatest academic challenges.
The situation has fueled broader discussions regarding how New Jersey balances accountability with educational equity.
Supporters of the current competitive process maintain that limited funding requires difficult decisions and that awarding grants based on demonstrated implementation capacity provides taxpayers with the greatest likelihood of measurable academic improvement. They argue that successful execution matters just as much as documented need, particularly when evidence-based tutoring programs require careful coordination, staffing, scheduling, and ongoing performance monitoring.
Others contend that districts facing the deepest educational challenges require additional technical assistance rather than exclusion from funding opportunities. Instead of denying grants outright, they suggest the state should work more directly with struggling districts to strengthen applications, improve administrative capacity, and ensure future funding can be implemented successfully.
The controversy also highlights a larger issue confronting public education across New Jersey. While high-impact tutoring has emerged as one of the state’s preferred strategies for addressing learning loss, demand continues to outpace available resources. Hundreds of eligible districts remain in competition for a program that currently lacks sufficient funding to reach every community demonstrating substantial academic need.
Recognizing that imbalance, Governor Sherrill has proposed increasing Learning Acceleration Program funding to $15 million as part of the Fiscal Year 2027 budget. If approved by the Legislature, the expansion would significantly increase the number of districts eligible to receive support while providing another opportunity for communities that were unsuccessful during this latest funding cycle.
For Trenton, however, additional funding alone may not resolve the underlying issues. Future success will likely depend not only upon increased state appropriations but also on the district’s ability to demonstrate strong planning, operational readiness, financial stewardship, and a credible strategy for delivering measurable academic improvement.
The broader lesson extends well beyond a single district. New Jersey continues investing heavily in educational innovation, targeted intervention, and student recovery initiatives, yet the effectiveness of those investments ultimately depends upon successful execution at the local level. Competitive grants can provide valuable resources, but only when school systems possess the administrative capacity to transform funding into meaningful classroom results.
As policymakers continue debating future education budgets and academic recovery strategies, the situation in Trenton serves as a reminder that educational equity involves more than appropriating money. It also requires building systems capable of ensuring that every dollar appropriated ultimately reaches the students whose futures depend upon it. For New Jersey’s capital city, the challenge now extends beyond securing future funding. It is restoring confidence that those resources can be effectively managed, fully utilized, and translated into stronger academic outcomes for the children who need them most.
