The federal government has had a long-standing commitment to ensuring access of English Learner (EL) students to a meaningful education. As early as 1968, the "Elementary and Secondary Education Act" ("ESEA") contained provisions for supporting the education of EL students and in its 1974 landmark decision, "Lau v. Nichols," the U.S. Supreme Court declared, "There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education" ("Lau v. Nichols" 1974). In 2001, when "ESEA" was reauthorized as the "No Child Left Behind Act" ("NCLB"), the law substantially strengthened the federal focus on the relationship between English language proficiency (ELP) and academic success. In particular, Title III added provisions intended to "promot[e] English acquisition and help English language learners meet challenging content standards" (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs [NCELA] 2008a). Under Title III, for the first time, districts were held accountable for the progress of EL students both in acquiring English and in achieving states' challenging academic standards. Federal Title III funding was $730 million in fiscal year 2009 and was $750 million in fiscal year 2010 (U.S. Department of Education 2011). Drawing on data collected through interviews with Title III officials from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, a nationally representative survey of Title III district administrators, and case studies of 12 Title III districts, this report provides a picture of how states, districts, and schools were implementing the Title III provisions as of the 2009-10 school year. This report also presents findings based on the most recent Consolidated State Performance Reports (2008-09) that were available at the time of the data collection and provides some data from 2006-07 from an evaluation of "NCLB" in order to provide historical context on some of the issues discussed in the report. This report documents the variation across states regarding standards for ELP, assessments to measure ELP, targets for the achievement of districts' EL students, and consequences for districts that do not meet their targets. This report also examines how state policies translate into district practices around identifying EL students and exiting students from the EL subgroup, the various instructional models and strategies districts are implementing to serve ELs, and state and district capacity to implement the law's provisions and to meet the needs of this growing and important student population. Appended are: (1) Supporting Materials on Methodology; (2) Supporting Materials on Identification and Exit of English Learners; (3) Supporting Materials on Instructional Programming and Placement; (4) Supporting Materials on Standards and Assessments; and (5) Supporting Materials on Accountability; and (6) Supporting Materials on State and District Capacity to Implement Title III. (Contains 108 exhibits and 126 footnotes.) [For Appendix G, "National Evaluation of Title III Implementation: Report on State and Local Implementation. Appendix G: Data Collection Instruments," see ED531983.]