Upload
lily-grant
View
219
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Introduction to Title I, Part A
Fiscal Requirements
Presented by Kristen Tosh Cowan, Esq.
[email protected] & Manasevit, PLLC
Fall Forum 2011
Overview 1) LEA-to-School allocations2) Set asides3) Equitable Services allocation 4) Carryover 5) MOE6) Comparability7) Supplement not Supplant8) Reauthorization Predictions
2
Valuable Legal Resource
“Title I Fiscal Issues” Feb. 2008www.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/ fiscalguid.doc
Consolidating funds in schoolwide
programs, MOE, SNS, Comparability, Grantbacks, Carryover
3
LEA-to-School Allocations
“Ranking and Serving” Rules 1) Identify Eligible Schools 2) Rank Schools in Order of
Poverty 3) Serve Schools Strictly in
Accordance with Rank
4
Eligible School Attendance Areas
Percentage of children from low-income families who reside in area . . .
AT LEAST AS HIGH AS . . .
percentage of children from low-income families in LEA
6
LEA Discretion: Eligibility
“Grandfathering” option Continue if served last year But, only continue for one year
8
5 Poverty Measures:
1. Census data2. Free and reduced lunch3. TANF4. Medicaid eligibility5. Composite of above
9
Ranking and Serving Exceeding 75% poverty
Strictly by poverty Without regard to gradespan
At or below 75% poverty May rank by gradespan
11
Allocation to Schools NOTE: first, reserve set-asides
Allocate to schools based on total # of students from low income families residing in area (including nonpublic)
Discretion on amount of PPA Higher PPAs must be in higher schools on
ranked list
14
Allocations given without regard to schoolwide or
targeted assistance model
Title I funding . . . . . . To serve school based on
poverty. . . To serve student based on
academics
LEA MUST reserve specific percentage:
20% choice transportation and SES 1% parental involvement 10% professional development (if LEA ID)
17
LEA MUST reserve but not specific percentage: Administration (public and private) Homeless Neglected & delinquent
18
LEA MAY reserve:
Incentives to teachers in ID schools (<5%)
Professional development “other authorized activities”
Summer school Preschool Districtwide program
19
Funds for Supp Ed Services and Choice Transportation
Amount equal to 20% of LEA allocation
(unless lesser amount needed) To pay transportation for choice To satisfy all requests for SES
services Both
21
Credit for “Parent Outreach” Allow limited amount of funds for
“parent outreach” to count toward 20% Capped at 0.2% of LEA Part A grant May spend more for outreach, but only
0.2% counts toward 20% EX. – $1 million LEA grant;
20% = $200,000 0.2% = $2,000 can count toward
$200,000
22 22
What costs count as “parent outreach”?
Parent notices, communication through the media, internet, and community, displaying information on LEA’s website, and parent fairs
Allowance, not a requirement
23
To spend less than 20%, LEA must: 200.48(d)(2)(i)
1. Partner, to extent practicable, with outside groups (CBO, FBO, etc.)
2. Send timely, accurate notice to parents
3. Ensure SES sign-up forms given directly to all eligible students/parents
4. Ensure SES sign-up forms made widely available through broad dissemination (Internet, other media, public agencies) 25 25
5. Provide (at a minimum) two enrollment windows at separate points in school year of sufficient length
6. Ensure SES providers are given access to school facilities, using a fair, open and objective process, on same basis as others
26
LEA must document and notify SEA!
Before reallocating remainder of 20%, LEA must:
Maintain records demonstrating it has met criteria
Notify the SEA that it met criteria Notify SEA of amount of remainder
it intends to spend on other allowable activities
28
Set Aside for Parent Involvement
For LEAs with Part A allocations >$500,000
1% minimum reserved Proportional amount to private
students 95% of remainder to schools 5% of remainder kept at LEA
29
31
Equitable Services:Deriving Allocation
General Formula: Based on number of:
1. Private school students 2. From low-income families3. Who reside in Title I-participating
public school attendance areas
32
Calculate Allocation for Instruction:
1. Identify eligible school attendance areas2. Rank in order of poverty3. Strictly serve in rank order (i.e., ID who is
“Participating Public School”)4. Calculate PPA for each area5. Derive allocation amount for each area
must include nonpublic low-income #
6. Reserve nonpublic amount PPA x # of nonpublic low-income students who
reside in participating public sch area
33
Reservation for districtwide instruction
If LEA reserves for “districtwide instructional programs for public elementary and secondary”
Then proportional amount goes to nonpublic
34 CFR sect 200.64(a)(2)(i)(A)
34
Example
LEA reserves $500,000 for districtwide reading initiative
Of all low-income in LEA residing in participating attendance areas, 5% are private
5% of $500,000 to private allocation
35
Applies to: Summer school After school programs Reading coaches
DOES NOT APPLY TO: SES/Choice (20%) Preschool
36
Reservation for teachers and families
If LEA reserves funds for parental involvement or professional development
Then proportional amount to nonpublic
34 CFR sect 200.65(a)
37
Example LEA reserves 1% of $1,000,000
allocation for parental involvement ($10,000).
Of all low-income families residing in participating attendance area, 6% are private. Then 6% of $10,000 used for families of participating private school students ($600).
Carryover
General Rule: May carryover up to 15% of Title I, Part A
Reallocated by state if exceeds
Waiver by SEA once every 3 years NOTE: FY 2009 flexibility
39
Use of Carryover Funds
Flexible 3 Options:
1. Put back in LEA formula & redistribute2. Designate for particular LEA activities3. (Allow school to retain)
Cannot use in ineligible school
40
3 Pillars of Fiscal Accountability
1. Maintenance of Effort2. Supplement not
Supplant3. Comparability
The combined fiscal effort per student or the aggregate expenditures of the LEA
From state and local funds
From preceding year must not be less than 90% of the second preceding year
43
MOE: The NCLB Rule
Need to compare final financial data Compare preceding FY to second
preceding FY
EX: To receive FY 2011 funds (available July 2011), compare preceding FY (2009-10) to second PFY (2008-09)
44
MOE: Preceding Fiscal Year (PFY)
MOE: Failure under NCLB
SEA must reduce amount of allocation in the exact proportion by which LEA fails to maintain effort below 90%
Reduce all applicable NCLB programs, not just Title I
45
46
Aggregate expenditures
Amount per student
FY 08 1,000,000 6,100
FY09 – must spend 90%
900,000 5,490
09 –Actual amount
850,000 5,200
Shortfall -50,000 -290
Percent shortfall** reduction in all ESEA programs
-5.6% -5.3%**
USDE Secretary may waive for State Exceptional or uncontrollable
circumstances such as natural disaster
OR Precipitous decline in financial
resources of the LEA47
MOE: Waiver
July 2009 Draft Non-Regulatory Guidance SEA may apply for waiver on
behalf of LEAs http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/recovery/programs.html
48
An LEA may receive Title I, Part A funds only if it uses state and local funds to provide services in Title I schools that, taken as a whole, are at least comparable to the services provided in non-Title I schools.
If all are Title I schools, all must be “substantially comparable.”
50
General Rule- §1120A(c)
Guidance: Must be annual determination
Review for current year and make adjustments for current year
51
Timing Issues
LEA must file with SEA written assurances of policies for equivalence: LEA-wide salary schedule Teachers, administrators, and other
staff Curriculum materials and
instructional supplies Must keep records to document
implemented and “equivalence achieved”
52
Written Assurances
Student/instructional staff ratios; Student/instructional staff salary
ratios; Expenditures per pupil; or A resource allocation plan based
on student characteristics, such as poverty, LEP, disability, etc. (i.e., by formula)
53
How to show equivalence achieved?
Average of all non-Title I schools10:1
For example: Using student/ instructional staff ratios
Title I schools: Lincoln: 10:1 Washington: 9:1 Madison: 11:1 Jefferson: 12:1
55
Exclusions: Need not include
unpredictable changes in student enrollment or personnel assignments that occur after the start of a school year
58
Staff salary differentials for years of employment
59
Exclusions: LEA may exclude state/local funds expended for:
Consistent between Title I and non-Title I
Teachers (art, music, physical education), guidance counselors, speech therapists, librarians, social workers, psychologists
Paraprofessionals – up to SEA/LEA
60
Who is “instructional staff”?
Federal funds must be used to supplement and in no case supplant state and local resources
Supplement not Supplant
62
#1: Provided with non-federal funds in prior year
Auditors presume supplanting occurs if federally funded services were . . . .
65
Presumption Rebutted! If SEA or LEA
demonstrates it would not have provided services if the federal funds were not available
NO state or local resources this year!
66
What documentation needed?
Fiscal or programmatic documentation to confirm that, in the absence of fed funds, would have eliminated staff or other services in question
State or local legislative action
Budget histories and information
67
1. Actual reduction in state or local funds
2. Decision to eliminate service/position was made without regard to availability of federal funds (including reason decision was made)
Documentation must show:
68
#2. Required to be made available under state or local laws
Auditors presume supplanting occurs if federal funds were used to provide services . . .
69
USDE assumes state and local officials will work to find a way to comply with a state-mandated requirement.
“While it is conceivable that an SEA or LEA could demonstrate that its loss of revenue is so great that it cannot meet a legal requirement, we believe that it typically would be extremely difficult to do so”
“The bar for rebutting this presumption is very high”
Letter from Asst. Secretary Melendez to Leigh Manasevit, January 2011.
Can you rebut this presumption?
70
#3. Title I funds used to provide service to Title I students, and the same service is provided to non-Title I children using non-Title I funds.
Auditors presume supplanting occurs if . . .
71
Exclusion of Funds:
SEA or LEA may exclude supplemental state or local funds used for program that meets intents and purposes of Title I, Part A
EX: Exclude State Comp Ed funds
Exception: 1120A(d)
72
Statute 1114(a)(2)(B): Title I must supplement the amount of funds that would, in the absence of Title I, be made available from non-federal sources. E-18 in schoolwide guidance
The actual service need not be supplemental.
74
Supplement not Supplant
Reauthorization Predictions
Based on the “Harkin” Bill in Senate
Rank and Serve Priority to serve high schools
must use feeder pattern
76
Reservations “Early childhood education and care” Homeless – needs assessment,
transportation, liaison, support services
Choice/SES – Not mandated for all ID schools, but one option
Financial incentives for teachers and students
77
Reauthorization Predictions
Comparability Move to measuring non-federal
expenditures/student (personnel & nonpersonnel)
Eliminate loophole of excluding salary differential to reflect seniority
LEA must submit to SEA school level expenditure data
Beginning in 2015-201678
This presentation is intended solely to provide general information and does not constitute legal advice. Attendance at the presentation or later review of these printed materials does not create an attorney-client relationship with Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC. You should not take any action based upon any information in this presentation without first consulting legal counsel familiar with your particular circumstances.
81