Gifted students by US state, 2026

01 Key findings

1. 7.0% of US public-school students (3,368,632) were enrolled in gifted and talented programs in 2023-24, up from 6.6% in 2017-18, in the federal Civil Rights Data Collection.IQ Metrics Research from the Civil Rights Data Collection 2023-24
2. Maryland has the highest share of students in gifted programs (21.0% in 2023-24); Vermont the lowest, with 1 student of 72,803. Vermont, the District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Michigan and New Hampshire report under 1%.IQ Metrics Research from the Civil Rights Data Collection 2023-24
3. Massachusetts has the largest share of students scoring Advanced on NAEP 2024 (12.1%) but only 0.3% in gifted programs; Oklahoma has 13.6% in gifted programs and 3.4% scoring Advanced. Across states the two measures are unrelated (r = 0.07).IQ Metrics Research from CRDC 2023-24 and NAEP 2024
4. Students in low-poverty schools were 2.3 times as likely to be in a gifted program as students in high-poverty schools in 2023-24 (10.9% vs 4.8%; Arkansas’s whole-school counts left out).IQ Metrics Research from CRDC 2023-24 and NCES Common Core of Data lunch counts
5. In the 25 states whose law mandates gifted services, 9.1% of students were in gifted programs in 2023-24; in the 22 states and DC without a mandate, 4.2%.IQ Metrics Research from CRDC 2023-24 and NAGC, State of the States 2022-23

02 Statistics to quote

03 What percentage of students are gifted in each state?

In 2023-24, 7.0% of public-school students in grades K-12 were in a gifted and talented program, by the federal definition: programs during school hours for students who show high ability ^[3]. The share runs from 21.0% in Maryland to almost none in Vermont, the District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Michigan and New Hampshire. The median state is at 4.6%. These are counts from every public school, reported to the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights ^[1], so they measure who is in a program, not who could be.

Figure 1

Share of public-school students in gifted programs, by state, 2023-24

Percent of K-12 students enrolled in a gifted and talented program. Blue: above the US share (7.0%). Hover or tap a state.

12% or more9 to 12%7 to 9%5 to 7%3 to 5%1 to 3%Under 1%Not ranked (whole-school counts)

Figure 2

Students in gifted programs, every state ranked, 2023-24

Percent of K-12 public-school students. Dotted line: the US share, 7.0%. Arkansas (33.3% reported, mostly whole-school counts) is not ranked.

Maryland21.0%

South Carolina14.5%

Virginia14.3%

Oklahoma13.6%

Kentucky12.8%

North Carolina12.5%

Georgia12.0%

Indiana11.3%

Nebraska11.2%

Ohio10.3%

Minnesota9.1%

New Jersey9.0%

Texas8.8%

Iowa8.3%

Colorado8.1%

Washington7.2%

Alabama6.3%

Mississippi6.3%

Oregon5.9%

Florida5.7%

Utah5.0%

California4.8%

Illinois4.8%

Wisconsin4.8%

Arizona4.6%

Maine4.6%

Missouri4.0%

New Mexico4.0%

Alaska3.9%

Idaho3.9%

Louisiana3.9%

Montana3.6%

South Dakota2.9%

Pennsylvania2.8%

North Dakota2.6%

Nevada2.4%

Delaware2.3%

Kansas2.2%

Wyoming2.2%

Connecticut1.8%

West Virginia1.8%

New York1.7%

Tennessee1.7%

Michigan0.7%

New Hampshire0.7%

Hawaii0.5%

Massachusetts0.3%

Rhode Island0.1%

District of Columbia0.0%

Vermont0.0%

Ranks need no margin of error: the figures are counts from every school, not a sample (the publisher adds or removes a student here and there to protect privacy, which cannot move a state’s share at one decimal) ^[2]. States that print the same share share a rank. What does move the ranks is how each state defines and counts gifted students, explained below.

Table 1

Every state: gifted programs, access, NAEP Advanced and change

Click a heading to sort. Gifted % = share of K-12 students in a gifted program, 2023-24. Schools % = regular schools with at least one student in a program. Advanced % = NAEP 2024, average of grades 4 and 8 in mathematics and reading. Per Advanced = gifted % divided by Advanced %. Change = points since 2017-18 (n/c = not comparable). Poverty quarters = gifted % in the state's lowest- / highest-poverty quarter of students. Mandate = state law or rule (NAGC 2022-23). * = flagged, see "Why states differ".

Rank	State	Gifted %	Students	Schools %	Advanced %	Per Advanced	Change	Poverty quarters	Mandate
1	Maryland	21.0	182,692	97	9.0	2.34	+2.5	31.2 / 7.2	Yes
2	South Carolina	14.5	105,086	91	6.5	2.23	-0.8	25.2 / 7.2	Yes
3	Virginia	14.3	175,651	95	7.5	1.89	+0.7	20.9 / 9.7	Yes
4	Oklahoma	13.6	90,873	94	3.4	3.99	-0.4	19.2 / 10.1	Yes
5	Kentucky	12.8	82,886	95	6.5	1.97	-0.5	16.1 / 9.6	Yes
6	North Carolina	12.5	189,604	91	7.5	1.66	+2.0	–	Yes
7	Georgia	12.0	203,832	93	6.6	1.83	+1.4	21.2 / 5.2	Yes
8	Indiana	11.3	113,739	82	8.0	1.42	-0.7	18.6 / 7.4	Yes
9	Nebraska	11.2	35,035	76	6.1	1.84	+0.2	–	No
10	Ohio	10.3	168,289	76	7.8	1.31	+2.4	–	–
11	Minnesota	9.1	78,340	38	7.2	1.27	+0.9	12.8 / 7.1	No
12	New Jersey	9.0	118,186	70	11.3	0.79	+3.7	12.0 / 6.8	No
13	Texas	8.8	467,035	91	6.1	1.45	+0.9	12.3 / 6.9	Yes
14	Iowa	8.3	39,573	92	5.4	1.52	-1.6	7.7 / 7.9	Yes
15	Colorado	8.1	67,565	93	8.7	0.93	+0.7	13.6 / 3.9	Yes
16	Washington	7.2	76,219	79	8.2	0.87	+1.6	11.2 / 4.0	Yes
17	Alabama	6.3	46,170	78	4.9	1.30	+0.2	8.4 / 4.4	Yes
17	Mississippi	6.3	26,816	68	4.8	1.31	-0.1	8.2 / 3.6	Yes
19	Oregon	5.9	32,107	77	5.5	1.07	-0.5	11.5 / 3.5	Yes
20	Florida	5.7	160,767	92	6.9	0.82	-0.5	9.8 / 2.6	Yes
21	Utah	5.0	33,601	31	7.8	0.65	-0.3	5.9 / 7.2	No
22	California	4.8	276,358	50	7.1	0.67	-1.3	5.5 / 4.0	No
22	Illinois	4.8	85,766	24	8.4	0.58	+1.2	–	No
22	Wisconsin	4.8	37,188	43	7.8	0.62	+0.1	7.0 / 3.3	Yes
25	Arizona	4.6	50,526	55	6.2	0.75	0.0	–	No
25	Maine	4.6	7,364	58	5.1	0.89	-0.9	5.3 / 3.6	No
27	Missouri	4.0	34,673	57	5.0	0.79	+0.2	6.2 / 3.2	Yes
27	New Mexico	4.0	11,597	70	3.0	1.34	-0.7	6.8 / 2.0	Yes
29	Alaska	3.9	4,874	39	4.4	0.88	-0.9	4.2 / 1.7	Yes
29	Idaho	3.9	12,413	56	6.7	0.59	+0.1	5.8 / 2.7	Yes
29	Louisiana	3.9	24,942	77	5.4	0.72	+0.2	7.2 / 1.6	No
32	Montana	3.6	5,403	25	6.7	0.54	+0.3	5.5 / 2.1	Yes
33	South Dakota	2.9	4,043	9	5.9	0.49	+1.1	3.2 / 1.8	No
34	Pennsylvania	2.8	47,740	82	8.1	0.35	-0.5	–	No
35	North Dakota	2.6	3,126	16	5.0	0.53	+0.9	1.8 / 4.9	No
36	Nevada	2.4	11,104	56	5.8	0.41	0.0	4.0 / 1.1	No
37	Delaware	2.3	3,170	38	5.2	0.44	+0.8	1.4 / 2.2	No
38	Kansas	2.2	10,317	72	5.4	0.42	n/c	3.7 / 1.1	Yes
38	Wyoming	2.2	2,036	29	6.5	0.34	-0.5	3.8 / 1.1	Yes
40	Connecticut	1.8	8,883	29	9.7	0.19	-0.2	2.3 / 1.0	No
40	West Virginia	1.8	4,140	72	3.7	0.48	-0.1	3.1 / 1.1	Yes
42	New York	1.7	40,353	10	7.6	0.22	0.0	3.3 / 0.5	–
42	Tennessee	1.7	16,781	51	7.6	0.23	+0.2	3.3 / 0.8	No
44	Michigan *	0.7	9,799	5	5.2	0.14	-0.6	1.4 / 0.2	No
44	New Hampshire *	0.7	1,153	4	7.6	0.09	-0.2	2.2 / 0.1	No
46	Hawaii *	0.5	821	21	6.6	0.07	-0.7	0.8 / 0.5	No
47	Massachusetts *	0.3	2,691	2	12.1	0.03	-0.1	0.0 / 0.5	No
48	Rhode Island *	0.1	117	1	8.0	0.01	-0.1	0.4 / 0.0	No
49	District of Columbia *	0.0	9	0	8.5	0.00	0.0	0.0 / 0.0	No
49	Vermont *	0.0	1	0	5.9	0.00	-0.1	0.0 / 0.0	No
–	Arkansas *	33.3	157,178	89	4.8	6.97	n/c	24.8 / 36.4	–

04 How many schools have a gifted program?

62% of the country’s 87,783 regular public schools had at least one student in a gifted program in 2023-24; the other 33,534 had none ^[1]. Nearly every regular school takes part in Maryland (97%), Virginia (95%) and Kentucky (95%); almost none do in Rhode Island (1%), the District of Columbia (1 of 219 schools) and Vermont (1 of 288 schools). Regular schools here exclude special-education, alternative and justice-facility schools.

Figure 3

Regular schools with at least one student in a gifted program, 2023-24

Percent of regular public schools in each state. Dotted line: the US share, 62%.

Maryland97%

Virginia95%

Kentucky95%

Oklahoma94%

Colorado93%

Georgia93%

Iowa92%

Florida92%

South Carolina91%

North Carolina91%

Texas91%

Indiana82%

Pennsylvania82%

Washington79%

Alabama78%

Louisiana77%

Oregon77%

Nebraska76%

Ohio76%

West Virginia72%

Kansas72%

New Mexico70%

New Jersey70%

Mississippi68%

Maine58%

Missouri57%

Nevada56%

Idaho56%

Arizona55%

Tennessee51%

California50%

Wisconsin43%

Alaska39%

Minnesota38%

Delaware38%

Utah31%

Connecticut29%

Wyoming29%

Montana25%

Illinois24%

Hawaii21%

North Dakota16%

New York10%

South Dakota9%

Michigan5%

New Hampshire4%

Massachusetts2%

Rhode Island1%

District of Columbia0%

Vermont0%

05 Do the students labelled gifted match the students who score highest?

Nationally, yes in size, no in place. 7.0% of students are in gifted programs and 7.1% scored Advanced on NAEP 2024, averaged over grades 4 and 8 in mathematics and reading ^[9]. But across states the two shares are unrelated (correlation 0.07): Massachusetts has the most students scoring Advanced (12.1%) and almost none in gifted programs (0.3%), while Oklahoma has 4.0 students in gifted programs for every one scoring Advanced. Linked, not cause: NAEP Advanced is a test result in two subjects, and gifted programs pick students by many routes and in different grades.

Figure 4

Gifted programs vs NAEP Advanced, by state

Each dot is a state. Across: % scoring Advanced on NAEP 2024 (average of four tests). Up: % of students in gifted programs, 2023-24. Above the dashed line, a state has more students in gifted programs than scoring Advanced. Arkansas not shown.

% of K-12 students in gifted programs, 2023-24

0%5%10%15%20%

Same shareAKALCOCTDCDEFLGAHIIAIDILINKSKYMEMIMNMSMTNCNDNENJNMNVNYOHORPARISCSDTNTXUTVAVTWAWIWVWYMAMDOK

0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%

% scoring Advanced, NAEP 2024 (grades 4 and 8, mathematics and reading, average)

Above the dashed line are states that place more students in gifted programs than score Advanced; Oklahoma, Maryland, South Carolina, Kentucky and Virginia have the most per Advanced student. Furthest below it are Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, Connecticut, Rhode Island and New Hampshire, where many more students score Advanced than are in programs. Every state’s ratio is in the table and in your state.

06 Do students in poorer schools get the same access?

No. In low-poverty schools, where 25% or fewer students are eligible for reduced-price or no-cost school lunch (the FRPL measure), 10.9% of students were in a gifted program in 2023-24. In high-poverty schools, where more than 75% are eligible, 4.8% were, less than half as often ^{[1] [7]}. High-poverty schools teach 27% of the students with lunch data but hold 18% of the gifted seats. The gap is not about having a program: 32% of students in low-poverty schools and 32% in high-poverty schools attend a school with none. It is about who gets in where a program exists: 16% of students in low-poverty schools with a program are in it, against 7% in high-poverty schools with one. Linked, not cause.

Figure 5

Who holds the gifted seats: students in gifted programs by school poverty, 2023-24

Students in gifted programs, by the share of their school's students eligible for reduced-price or no-cost lunch (FRPL). Schools with lunch data, 89% of students; Arkansas left out (whole-school counts).

3.05Min programs

• Low-poverty schools (25% or fewer students eligible)745,19624%
• Mid-low poverty (25 to 50% eligible)962,54532%
• Mid-high poverty (50 to 75% eligible)796,42126%
• High-poverty schools (more than 75% eligible)544,89218%

Figure 6

Access to gifted programs by school poverty, 2023-24

All K-12 students in each band of schools: in a program, in a school that has one, or in a school with none. Bands: share of a school's students eligible for reduced-price or no-cost lunch, 25% or fewer, 25 to 50%, 50 to 75%, over 75%. Arkansas left out.

In a gifted programIn a school with a program, not in itIn a school with no program

Low-poverty schools10.9% in a program11%57%32%

Mid-low poverty8.1% in a program62%30%

Mid-high poverty6.5% in a program67%27%

High-poverty schools4.8% in a program63%32%

Inside states the gap holds too. Sorting each state’s students by their school’s poverty and comparing the richest quarter with the poorest, the share in gifted programs is higher in the richest quarter in 37 of the 44 states we could measure; the gap is widest in Maryland (31.2% vs 7.2%) and South Carolina (25.2% vs 7.2%). Where a state reports lunch counts for too few schools, or most schools offer every student a no-cost meal, we used its direct-certification counts instead (students certified through SNAP and similar programs); 6 states have neither.

07 Is access different in cities, suburbs, towns and rural areas?

A little, nationally (Arkansas’s whole-school counts left out): 7.6% of students in suburban schools are in gifted programs, 7.0% in cities, 5.7% in rural schools and 5.1% in towns (NCES locale codes ^[8]). The state picture is sharper and runs both ways. In Minnesota, 17.2% of city students are in a program against 2.9% of rural students; in New Jersey it is the reverse, 4.3% in cities and 10.3% in rural schools.

Figure 7

Access to gifted programs in cities, suburbs, towns and rural areas, 2023-24

All K-12 students by the location of their school (NCES locale). Arkansas left out.

In a gifted programIn a school with a program, not in itIn a school with no program

City7.0% in a program58%35%

Suburb7.6% in a program62%30%

Town5.1% in a program62%33%

Rural5.7% in a program62%32%

08 Has the share changed since 2017-18?

Slightly up. The national share was 6.6% in 2017-18, dipped to 6.1% in 2020-21, the first pandemic year, was 6.3% in 2021-22 and stood at 7.0% in 2023-24 (6.8% without Arkansas’s whole-school counts) ^{[6] [4] [5] [1]}. The biggest rises since 2017-18 were in New Jersey (+3.7 points), Maryland (+2.5) and Ohio (+2.4); the biggest falls in Iowa (-1.6), California (-1.3) and Alaska (-0.9). Kansas reported 14.7% in 2017-18, mostly whole-school counts, and 2.2% now, so its change is not comparable; neither is Arkansas’s.

Figure 8

US share of students in gifted programs, by CRDC year

Percent of K-12 public-school students, all states and DC, as reported. The CRDC is collected every two years; the 2019-20 round was not collected. Without Arkansas, 6.8% in 2023-24.

6.6%2017-18

6.1%2020-21

6.3%2021-22

7.0%2023-24

Figure 9

Change since 2017-18, by state

Percentage points, 2023-24 minus 2017-18. Arkansas and Kansas left out: one of their two years is mostly whole-school counts.

New Jersey+3.7

Maryland+2.5

Ohio+2.4

North Carolina+2.0

Washington+1.6

Georgia+1.4

Illinois+1.2

South Dakota+1.1

Minnesota+0.9

Texas+0.9

North Dakota+0.9

Delaware+0.8

Virginia+0.7

Colorado+0.7

Montana+0.3

Alabama+0.2

Missouri+0.2

Nebraska+0.2

Louisiana+0.2

Tennessee+0.2

Wisconsin+0.1

Idaho+0.1

Arizona0.0

New York0.0

District of Columbia0.0

Nevada0.0

Mississippi-0.1

Rhode Island-0.1

West Virginia-0.1

Massachusetts-0.1

Vermont-0.1

New Hampshire-0.2

Connecticut-0.2

Utah-0.3

Oklahoma-0.4

Kentucky-0.5

Oregon-0.5

Pennsylvania-0.5

Wyoming-0.5

Florida-0.5

Michigan-0.6

Indiana-0.7

Hawaii-0.7

New Mexico-0.7

South Carolina-0.8

Maine-0.9

Alaska-0.9

California-1.3

Iowa-1.6

09 Why do states report such different numbers?

Because there is no national rule. Each state decides whether to define giftedness, whether schools must look for gifted students and whether they must serve them. In the latest national survey, 46 of 50 state agencies that answered had a definition, 35 of 50 required identification and 25 of 48 had a law or rule mandating gifted services ^[11]. In those 25 mandate states, 9.1% of students were in gifted programs in 2023-24; in the 22 states and DC without one, 4.2% ^[1]. Linked, not cause: states with a mandate also tend to fund and count programs.

The federal count adds one more difference. It covers programs during regular school hours, for students who show high ability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields ^[3]. A state that serves able students another way, through advanced classes or acceleration, can report few or none.

• Under 1%: Vermont, the District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Michigan and New Hampshire report almost no students in gifted programs. They are ranked, at the bottom, but the number says more about how they serve able students than about the students.
• Arkansas is listed, not ranked. It reported 33.3% in 2023-24, up from 8.3% in 2020-21, but 80% of its gifted seats were in 344 schools that listed more than 90% of all students as gifted: whole-school enrichment, not identified students.
• Maryland also has whole-school counts: 22 schools listed more than 90% of their students as gifted, 21% of its gifted seats. Without them its share is 17.3%, still the highest.
• Kansas’s 2017-18 figure (14.7%) was 82% whole-school counts, so its change since then is not comparable.

10 How do the states compare, school by school?

Five more ways to read the same federal data. First, the national path from enrolment to a gifted seat: 67.8% of K-12 students attend a school that runs a gifted program, and 10.4% of those students are in it, which is how the US ends up at 7.0% ^[1].

Figure 10

From every student to a gifted seat, US, 2023-24

All 50 states and DC, as reported. Counts from the school-level split used in the poverty and locale charts (it holds 319 fewer gifted students than the state totals).

All K-12 public-school students47,912,607all

67.8% of all students

At a school with a gifted program32,498,80067.8% of all

10.4% of the students at those schools

In a gifted program3,368,3137.0% of all

Second, each state’s gifted share next to the share of its students scoring Advanced on NAEP 2024 (the average of four tests). In 17 of the 50 places the gifted share is the larger one; in 33, more students score Advanced than are in gifted programs ^{[1] [9]}. Two different yardsticks: a gifted label is a school decision, NAEP Advanced is a test result.

Figure 11

In gifted programs vs scoring Advanced on NAEP, by state

Percent of public-school students, 2023-24 (gifted programs) and 2024 (NAEP Advanced, average of four tests). Ordered by the gifted share. Arkansas left out (whole-school counts).

In gifted programsNAEP 2024 Advanced

Maryland9.0%21.0%

South Carolina6.5%14.5%

Virginia7.5%14.3%

Oklahoma3.4%13.6%

Kentucky6.5%12.8%

North Carolina7.5%12.5%

Georgia6.6%12.0%

Indiana8.0%11.3%

Nebraska6.1%11.2%

Ohio7.8%10.3%

Minnesota7.2%9.1%

New Jersey9.0%11.3%

Texas6.1%8.8%

Iowa5.4%8.3%

Colorado8.1%8.7%

Washington7.2%8.2%

Alabama4.9%6.3%

Mississippi4.8%6.3%

Oregon5.5%5.9%

Florida5.7%6.9%

Utah5.0%7.8%

California4.8%7.1%

Illinois4.8%8.4%

Wisconsin4.8%7.8%

Arizona4.6%6.2%

Maine4.6%5.1%

Missouri4.0%5.0%

New Mexico3.0%4.0%

Alaska3.9%4.4%

Idaho3.9%6.7%

Louisiana3.9%5.4%

Montana3.6%6.7%

South Dakota2.9%5.9%

Pennsylvania2.8%8.1%

North Dakota2.6%5.0%

Nevada2.4%5.8%

Delaware2.3%5.2%

Kansas2.2%5.4%

Wyoming2.2%6.5%

Connecticut1.8%9.7%

West Virginia1.8%3.7%

New York1.7%7.6%

Tennessee1.7%7.6%

Michigan0.7%5.2%

New Hampshire0.7%7.6%

Hawaii0.5%6.6%

Massachusetts0.3%12.1%

Rhode Island0.1%8.0%

District of Columbia0.0%8.5%

Vermont0.0%5.9%

0%5%10%15%20%25%

Third, how each state’s rank moved across the four federal collections. Five states climbed 5 places or more since 2017-18: New Jersey (24th to 12th), Illinois (31st to 22nd), South Dakota (39th to 33rd), Delaware (43rd to 37th) and Washington (21st to 16th). Apart from Kansas (not comparable), no state fell that far; the biggest drop was Alaska’s, 25th to 29th. Kansas is drawn dashed: its 2017-18 figure was mostly whole-school counts ^{[6] [4] [5] [1]}.

Figure 12

Each state's rank on the gifted share, 2017-18 to 2023-24

Rank among the 50 places ranked in 2023-24 (1 = highest share; equal shares at one decimal share a rank). Blue: states that climbed 5 places or more since 2017-18. Hover a line for every year.

Climbed 5+ placesOther states

2017-18'172020-21'202021-22'212023-24'23

Maryland 1South Carolina 2Virginia 5Oklahoma 4Kentucky 6North Carolina 9Georgia 9Indiana 7Nebraska 8Ohio 13Minnesota 12New Jersey 24Texas 13Iowa 11Colorado 15Washington 21Alabama 19Mississippi 16Oregon 16Florida 18Utah 22California 19Illinois 31Wisconsin 26Arizona 28Maine 22Missouri 30New Mexico 26Alaska 25Idaho 29Louisiana 31Montana 34South Dakota 39Pennsylvania 33North Dakota 39Nevada 36Delaware 43Kansas * 3Wyoming 35Connecticut 37West Virginia 38New York 41Tennessee 41Michigan 44New Hampshire 46Hawaii 45Massachusetts 47Rhode Island 48District of Columbia 50Vermont 49

1 Maryland2 South Carolina3 Virginia4 Oklahoma5 Kentucky6 North Carolina7 Georgia8 Indiana9 Nebraska10 Ohio11 Minnesota12 New Jersey13 Texas14 Iowa15 Colorado16 Washington17 Alabama17 Mississippi19 Oregon20 Florida21 Utah22 California22 Illinois22 Wisconsin25 Arizona25 Maine27 Missouri27 New Mexico29 Alaska29 Idaho29 Louisiana32 Montana33 South Dakota34 Pennsylvania35 North Dakota36 Nevada37 Delaware38 Kansas *38 Wyoming40 Connecticut40 West Virginia42 New York42 Tennessee44 Michigan44 New Hampshire46 Hawaii47 Massachusetts48 Rhode Island49 District of Columbia49 Vermont

* Kansas: its 2017-18 share was mostly whole-school counts, so its first rank is not comparable.

Fourth, inside the schools. Among the 54,205 US regular schools that run a gifted program and have at least 20 students, the typical (median) school has 6.3% of its students in it, and the middle half of schools sit between 2.8% and 11.7% ^{[1] [7]}. Kentucky’s typical school is highest (11.9%) and Hawaii’s lowest (1.1%); Illinois and Minnesota spread widest.

Figure 13

Share of students in the gifted program, school by school, 2023-24

Regular public schools that run a gifted program and have at least 20 students. Box = the middle half of schools, line = the median school, whiskers = the 10th to 90th percentile. Left out: Arkansas (whole-school counts) and places with fewer than 30 such schools (New Hampshire, Rhode Island, District of Columbia and Vermont).

Middle halfMedian10th to 90th percentile

Kentucky1,106 schools11.9%

Oklahoma1,645 schools11.5%

Minnesota668 schools11.3%

Massachusetts41 schools11.0%

Maryland1,279 schools10.2%

North Carolina2,359 schools9.9%

Illinois890 schools9.4%

Nebraska711 schools9.4%

Virginia1,739 schools9.3%

South Carolina1,031 schools9.2%

Indiana1,471 schools9.2%

Ohio2,527 schools9.1%

Georgia2,148 schools8.9%

Iowa1,169 schools7.7%

New York444 schools7.6%

Mississippi580 schools7.3%

New Jersey1,626 schools7.3%

Texas7,370 schools7.2%

Alabama1,033 schools6.5%

North Dakota79 schools6.5%

Utah303 schools6.4%

Montana192 schools6.2%

Michigan135 schools6.0%

South Dakota58 schools5.4%

Maine319 schools5.2%

Wisconsin879 schools5.1%

Colorado1,600 schools5.0%

Washington1,568 schools4.9%

Delaware75 schools4.9%

Alaska182 schools4.8%

Idaho379 schools4.7%

Arizona1,014 schools4.6%

Missouri1,200 schools4.5%

California4,397 schools4.4%

Connecticut282 schools4.0%

Florida3,136 schools3.6%

Oregon952 schools3.4%

New Mexico551 schools3.0%

Nevada388 schools2.9%

Wyoming89 schools2.8%

Louisiana957 schools2.5%

Pennsylvania2,310 schools2.3%

Kansas957 schools1.8%

Tennessee901 schools1.5%

West Virginia459 schools1.4%

Hawaii62 schools1.1%

0%10%20%30%40%

Dotted line: the median US school with a program, 6.3%.

Fifth, poverty inside each state. Each state’s students are split into four equal quarters by the poverty of their school, from the lowest-poverty quarter to the highest. In 33 of the 37 states shown, the lowest-poverty quarter has the larger gifted share; in 26 the share falls at every step ^{[1] [7]}. Quarters are drawn within each state, so a quarter in one state is not the same level of poverty as in another.

Figure 14

Gifted share by school-poverty quarter, state by state, 2023-24

Percent of K-12 students in gifted programs in each quarter of the state's students, sorted by school poverty (reduced-price or no-cost lunch, or direct certification where lunch counts are incomplete). Ordered by the gap between the lowest- and highest-poverty quarter. Not shown: Arizona, Illinois, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania (no usable poverty measure), Michigan, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, District of Columbia and Vermont (under 1% in programs) and Arkansas.

Fewer in programsMore

Lowest povertyLowest2nd2nd3rd3rdHighest povertyHighestMaryland31.2%25.5%20.4%7.2%South Carolina25.2%16.5%11.3%7.2%Georgia21.2%12.9%8.7%5.2%Indiana18.6%10.7%9.0%7.4%Virginia20.9%15.8%10.4%9.7%Colorado13.6%9.3%6.4%3.9%Oklahoma19.2%14.3%10.9%10.1%Oregon11.5%5.2%4.0%3.5%Florida9.8%6.3%4.1%2.6%Washington11.2%7.8%5.8%4.0%Kentucky16.1%13.3%12.0%9.6%Minnesota12.8%8.7%8.0%7.1%Louisiana7.2%4.5%2.3%1.6%Texas12.3%8.7%7.2%6.9%New Jersey12.0%10.0%7.3%6.8%New Mexico6.8%4.2%2.9%2.0%Mississippi8.2%6.9%6.7%3.6%Alabama8.4%6.7%5.8%4.4%Wisconsin7.0%4.5%4.6%3.3%Montana5.5%3.6%3.2%2.1%Idaho5.8%5.1%3.4%2.7%Missouri6.2%3.7%2.7%3.2%Nevada4.0%2.7%1.9%1.1%New York3.3%1.8%1.5%0.5%Wyoming3.8%2.5%1.9%1.1%Kansas3.7%2.2%2.1%1.1%Alaska4.2%5.0%4.9%1.7%Tennessee3.3%1.6%1.5%0.8%West Virginia3.1%1.6%1.3%1.1%Maine5.3%4.5%4.9%3.6%California5.5%4.8%4.8%4.0%South Dakota3.2%3.9%2.8%1.8%Connecticut2.3%1.7%1.8%1.0%Iowa7.7%8.9%8.5%7.9%Delaware1.4%3.5%1.9%2.2%Utah5.9%4.1%2.9%7.2%North Dakota1.8%2.0%2.2%4.9%

11 Your state, in one sentence

Pick a state to see its share, its rank, its schools and how it compares with NAEP. Every state has its own link and a card you can download or share.

12 Is being in a gifted program the same as having a high IQ?

No. A school places a student in a program by its own rules, which may use ability tests, achievement tests, grades or teacher referrals, and the cut-offs differ by district. This study counts programs, not test scores, and says nothing about any state’s intelligence. For the scores schools use, see gifted cut-off scores, CogAT and NNAT scores explained, IQ testing for children and the IQ classification ranges; on how screening changes who is found, see universal screening for gifted programs. For state school results, see the state skills index.

13 How was this study built?

1. 01

   Count every school

   From the 2023-24 Civil Rights Data Collection school files ^[1] we summed each school’s students in gifted and talented programs (the male, female and nonbinary totals; no group breakdowns) and its K-12 enrolment, for the 50 states and DC. Values the publisher withheld (reserve codes) count as not reported ^[2].

2. 02

   Share and access

   Gifted share = students in programs / K-12 students, every school. Access = regular schools with at least one student in a program (the CRDC indicator) / all regular schools, from the NCES school type ^[7].

3. 03

   Check against the publisher

   The same steps on the 2017-18 files reproduce NCES’s own state figures (Digest table 204.90) to one decimal in every state NCES prints a figure for, for 2017-18 and 2020-21, and the national 6.6% and 6.1% ^[10].

4. 04

   Poverty and place

   Schools were matched to NCES by the publisher’s crosswalk; poverty = share of a school’s PK-12 students eligible for reduced-price or no-cost lunch (FRPL), in NCES’s four bands ^[7]; place = the NCES locale code (city, suburb, town, rural) ^[8].

5. 05

   NAEP Advanced

   The average of the % at Advanced in grade 4 and grade 8 mathematics and reading, NAEP 2024, from the NAEP Data Service ^[9].

6. 06

   Flags and ranks

   A state is not ranked when most of its gifted seats are in schools listing more than 90% of all students as gifted (Arkansas). States under 1% are ranked and flagged. Ranks are by the share printed to one decimal; ties share a rank.