Presented by: Michele A. Huntoon, CPA Associate Vice President

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Committee of Practitioners March 19, Even Start Application 2. Homeless Education 3. Migrant Education Program 4. ED Monitoring 5. SES Appeals.
Advertisements

NEPTUNE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
1.  Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – Circular A-87  US Department of Education ◦ Delegates authority for indirect cost rate determination to.
Maintenance of Effort IV-B Funding LEA Level Special Education Services Kansas Department of Education Special Education Services.
ARRA Education Funds 101. ARRA & Purpose American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Unprecedented effort to jumpstart economy. Save and create.
UNDERSTANDING SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING How to account for IDEIA funds.
Budget Study Session Berryessa Union School District April 23, 2008.
©Education Service Center, Region 20 ED JOBS FUND -287 Education Service Center, Region 20 May 13, 2011.
1 State Budget and its Impacts on Mines Faculty Conference August 23, 2010 Kirsten M. Volpi, CPA Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration.
Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Excess Cost Presenter Patricia Holcomb-Gray Office of Special Education Programs NJ Department of Education June 3, 2015.
April 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) April 2009.
Education Jobs Fund Program 1. Agenda Overview Application Process Uses of Funds Maintenance of Effort Accountability and Reporting 2.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Infant Program Funding in Special Education – A Refresher.
FY 14 Special Education Funding Issues Illinois ASBO Annual Conference May 16, 2013 Illinois State Board of Education Funding and Disbursement Services.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) Impact on Districts Receiving Title I, Part A Funds JoLynn Berge – Cal Brodie – Petrea Stoddard.
1 South Dakota Department of Education – Grants Management Rob Huffman – Administrator Mark Gageby – Special Education Fiscal Kim Fischer – Fiscal Monitoring.
Escondido Union School District Budget Update The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
Connecticut State Department of Education Bureau of Special Education American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA): Creating Educational Opportunity in.
Title I, Part A Fiscal Requirements for Comparability FY Oklahoma State Department of Education Office of Title I, IIA, VI, & X December 2012.
Ramona Unified School District First Interim Report December 17, 2009.
Excess Costs IDEA-B Requirement Texas Education Agency (TEA)
Presented by Raaj Kurapati and Charlene Hart. Introduction  The Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 was enacted to streamline and improve the effectiveness.
1 MERA May 17, 2011 Mike Radke, Director, Office of Field Services, Michigan Department of Education.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Maintenance of Effort Danna Sanders Phone:
Title 1, Part A Local Consolidated Plan (LCP) Application May 2009.
December 8, st Interim Report BUDGET CALENDAR June Adopted Budget presented to and approved by the Board September.
SPECIAL EDUCATION MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT (MOE). MOE REQUIREMENT Federal law requires that each local education agency (LEA) receiving federal funds pursuant.
State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Update to Arizona Association of School Business Officials July 22, 2009 Arizona Office of Economic Recovery Janice K.
Maintenance of Effort Office of Special Education Fall Forum 1.
1 Connecticut State Department of Education American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA): Bureau of Special Education Teleconference May 21, 2009.
Arkansas Association of Federal Coordinators September 23, 2011.
TITLE I, PART A ESEA ROLLOUT SPRING 2013 Version Title I, Part A Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
1 State Funding for Education and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 New York State Education Department ■ April 6, 2009 Webcast.
Consolidated Fiscal (OCFO) Requirements: Special Education and Federal Programs Components Spring Fiscal WorkshopsSpring Fiscal Workshops.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Federal Stimulus Package for Education – Overview  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provides approximately.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 IDEA Recovery Funds Reform and Restore: Implementing the ARRA Michigan Institute of Educational Management.
What Business Managers Need to Know About Presented by: Cindy Rhoads, Regional Coordinator Division of Federal Programs PA Department of Education
WE ARE LAUSD BUDGET OVERVIEW OCTOBER 5, 2010.
Local Education Agency (LEA) Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Requirements under IDEA.
1 Division of Public Schools (PreK -12) Florida Department of Education Florida Education: The Next Generation DRAFT March 13, 2008 Version 1.0 NCLB: 2009.
Budget Message Fiscal Year Presented by Kelly Muzzey.
SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT TESTS District Level: Maintenance of Effort School Level: Comparability of Services Child Level: Educational.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 IDEA Recovery Funds for Services to Children and Youths with Disabilities.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) Title 1, Part A Recovery Funds for Grants to Local Education Agencies.
1 Connecticut State Department of Education American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA): Strategic Planning, Community Consensus Mark K. McQuillan Commissioner.
IDEA Grants Application: Maintenance of Effort. 2 What is Maintenance of Effort? IDEA regulation (34 CFR § ) which directs districts, for each grant.
Unaudited Actuals September 12, Agenda 2  Basic Aid vs. State Funded Overview  Funding Factor Components  General Fund Revenue and Expense.
Second Interim Financial Report
PAPFC Annual Conference May 3-6, 2015 Presented By: Cindy Rhoads Division of Federal Programs Pennsylvania Department of Education.
School-wide Consolidation: LEA Panel
A Principal’s Guide to Title I, Part A and LAP Requirements
Changes to the eGrants system 2017
Governor’s budget proposal For California Fiscal year
Excess Costs IDEA-B Requirement
Impact Aid Training September 25, 2017.
Every Student Succeeds Act
FY2007 Billing Rate Proposal Preparation (Part I)
Introduction to LEA MOE Tool
State Categorical Flexibility and Federal Funds Webcast
Rehabilitation Services Administration
Excess Costs IDEA-B Requirement
ARRA Reporting and Applications
LEA Maintenance of Effort and Excess Cost Calculation
Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund
RIM OF THE WORLD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
IDEA Maintenance of Effort
RIM OF THE WORLD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
University of Pittsburgh
SPECIAL EDUCATION FINANCE UPDATES
SPECIAL EDUCATION FINANCE UPDATES
Presentation transcript:

Presented by: Michele A. Huntoon, CPA Associate Vice President American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Accountability and Reporting Presented by: Michele A. Huntoon, CPA Associate Vice President

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Largest funding sources include: State Fiscal Stabilization Funds (SFSF) – $4.9 billion, including a portion for higher education Revenue limit cut Categorical cut Title I – $1.1 billion Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) – $1.3 billion Special Education Local Plan Areas (SELPAs) are the direct recipients, with LEA members as the subrecipients

SFSF The state has distributed $2.5 billion of the anticipated $3.2 billion for K-12 education This funding was provided based on the 2008-09 level of reductions to revenue limits and categorical programs There was approximately $700 million remaining, but the method that is used to allocate the funds will depend in part on the outcome of ABX3 56 regarding the Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) funding issue Depending on how the QEIA situation works out, this could mean fewer resources for all school agencies

SFSF ABX3 56 includes the reduction of $355 million in federal SFSF funds that would have been used to offset previous reductions to revenue limits and categorical programs to hold the General Fund harmless for the QEIA obligation Estimated loss to districts of roughly $59 per ADA if the bill is passed An additional $165 million in federal Title I funds may offset this loss by freeing up General Fund support for QEIA This would reduce the net loss to all districts from $59 to $32 We will be watching ABX3 56 as it moves to the Assembly for a vote

SFSF Resource code established by the state for tracking as a federal funding source – Resource Code 3200 Utilize the mandatory components of the standardized account code structure (SACS) to track and report revenues and expenditures Locally designated fields can also be used to track expenditures for reporting purposes that will: Save jobs Stimulate the economy Improve academic outcomes and support school reform

SFSF SFSF has the broadest flexibility in terms of expenditures See the “Allowable Uses Matrix” located in the Appendix Expenditures should be charged directly to Resource Code 3200 Classified salaries charged to Resource Code 3200 will be subject to the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) Reduction in Object 8092 This is the only federal resource that the PERS Reduction will apply, because the funding is not subject to the supplement, not supplant guidelines

Title I 40% of the funds were issued as of June 2009 The release of the funds was accelerated to ensure that the funds were being distributed for use by the LEAs

Title I The ARRA Title I funding amounts are based on formulas used for Targeted and Education Finance Incentive Grant formulas for Title I funding These two funding streams require a minimum formula count of ten students and a poverty rate greater than or equal to 5% of the student population

Title I Follow existing Title I rules when determining how to use the new Title I ARRA funds A general rule to follow – Title I funds may be used only at Title I schools and targeted to the needs of Title I-eligible students for activities that are supplemental to the core program This could include supplemental support, such as pre-K, after school, summer school, and other support programs

Title I Funding must be used and accounted for consistent with current rules Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars A-87 and A-133 Complete Consolidated Application Part I to determine Title I school eligibility Carryover limited to 15% of entitlement Set asides required for Title I also apply: 1% Parent Involvement Homeless Children Private Schools (if requested)

Title I In addition, the set asides apply, but the California Department of Education (CDE) has applied for a waiver of the following requirements: 5% Highly Qualified Teachers (if 100% of teachers are not Highly Qualified) 10% Professional Development (Program Improvement districts and/or sites) Up to 20% Supplemental Education Services and Choice (Program Improvement schools)

Title I The CDE has established specific Resource Codes for the revenues and expenditures to be tracked: Resource 3011 – NCLB: ARRA Title I, Part A, Basic Grants Low Income and Neglected In addition to activity and reporting requirements noted from all ARRA funds, per-pupil expenditure reporting for all Title I schools will be required First report of such data due from the CDE to the USDE by March 31, 2010 Reports from the sub recipients (California LEAs) to CDE is by December 1, 2009

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) CDE issued the first 20% of the grant award upon receipt of the signed assurance from the SELPA In order to comply with the state’s cash flow agreement with the federal government, subsequent payments to SELPAs are made based on evidence of expenditures The quicker a SELPA spends what’s been received, the quicker the cash will flow Quarterly expenditure reports will be used to evaluate whether SELPAs will get another payment CDE expects to have access to 100% of the funding by October

IDEA, Part B – Maintenance of Effort (MOE) There are two options for flexibility under IDEA – both are options, but only one may be used at a time Use up to 15% of IDEA funding for early intervention support Use up to 50% of “new” IDEA funding to offset local contributions

IDEA, Part B - MOE The 50% local contribution free-up option To use this provision, a district must meet all program compliance requirements Unfortunately, we still do not have reports from CDE regarding which districts are eligible When do we need them – now! When will we have them – soon? The “freed up” local general fund dollars must be directed to activities allowed under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) This also means that districts have 50%-100% of IDEA ARRA that must go towards new program costs

IDEA Each year, the level of local support provided to fund special education programs must be sustained – this calculation is formally referred as maintenance of effort (MOE) Special education MOE calculations/reports are required to be submitted at the SELPA level to the CDE However, the member districts must also meet the MOE requirements There are three tests to determine MOE: Expenditure comparison – compare current-year expenditures to prior-year expenditures, either in total or on a per-capita basis Expenditure comparison adjusted for “new” federal revenue – utilize up to 50% of “new” IDEA, Part B, funds as a reduction to state and local expenditures or local expenditures Expenditure comparison adjusted for allowed conditions

IDEA, Part B - MOE Step 1 – Determine if your district meets the eligibility requirements for using the 50% reduction to state and local expenditures or local expenditures under the IDEA Act of 2004 for IDEA, Part B, funds Step 2 – If you are eligible, calculate the 50% increase in new IDEA, Part B, funds To calculate the total funding, include both the regular entitlement and ARRA funds For MOE purposes, the ARRA funds received over the two years can be used only in the 2009-10 fiscal year calculation, even though the funding was received over two years (2008-09 and 2009-10)

IDEA, Part B - MOE Step 3 – Identify those expenditures in Special Education Resource Code 6500 that can legitimately be reduced and charged to IDEA ARRA funds (Resource 3313), which will reduce the local contribution on the natural Step 4 – Prepare a plan for the decrease in ARRA funds in 2010-11 and beyond and the impact on the MOE calculation

IDEA, Part B - MOE If the flexibility is used: This does not equate to transferring funds from ARRA Resource Code 3311 into Special Education Resource Code 6500 Expenditures in Resource Code 6500 must be reduced, which in turn reduces the local contribution In order to maintain the lower MOE, an LEA must sustain the lower state and local expenditures Otherwise the MOE will increase on the natural

IDEA, Part B - MOE The 50% should be used as a targeted goal to be able to maximize the reduction of the local contribution However, this may or may not be attainable depending on the expenditures in Resource Code 6500 and the dollar amount of the 50% No matter the level of reduction and the length of time the reduction is in place, LEAs should work to minimize the impact on the unrestricted program where possible This is one-time funding, so the impact on future budgets could be significant without a plan in place to ratchet the revenues down and the expenditures up in those programs supported by the ARRA funds

AB 602 State and Federal Funding IDEA $500,000 ARRA $1.0 million Local Contribution $3.5 million AB 602 State and Federal Funding $500,000 ARRA Offset $5.0 million $5.5 million $1.5 million $2.0 million $1 million ARRA Local G.F. Freed up $500,000 2008-09 2009-10 ARRA 2010-11 No ARRA Left If new costs are ongoing, local contributions will go up once ARRA funds are gone. This is also the case if LEAs reduce contributions – once ARRA is gone, if expenses remain, the contribution comes back!

IDEA The basic rule is that the funds can be used in any way that’s permitted under the non-ARRA portion of funding In other words, this means the funds must meet the following: Be used to support special education-specific program requirements This generally includes those expenses associated with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs); however, other program-related costs – such as staff development, equipment, and supplies – are options At this point, funds cannot be used for capital expenses such as facilities or vehicles, but there may be some flexibility coming through waivers

IDEA Examples of one-time investments: Staff development Support for instruction Credentialing and certification IEP development – focus on compliance and efficiency Short-term assistance Policies and procedures Developing new programs Technology Instructional Adaptive IEP management Assessments

IDEA Examples of other uses: Paying new excess costs Retaining program administrators Backfilling for reductions in transportation funding Supporting behavior intervention Transitioning support programs Providing academic coaching

IDEA The CDE has established specific Resource Codes for the revenues and expenditures to be tracked: IDEA – Special Education Resource 3313 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 611, Basic Local Assistance Resource 3314 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 611, Local Assistance Private School ISPs Resource 3319 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 619, Preschool Grants Resource 3322 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 611, Local Assistance Early Intervening Services Resource 3324 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 611, Preschool Local Entitlement Resource 3404 – Special Education: ARRA IDEA Part B, Sec 611, State Institutions

ARRA Now is the time to ensure that there is a good process and procedure set up for tracking and reporting the funds in order to withstand any reviews that could be completed by independent, state, and federal auditors The independent auditors have been given their marching orders relating to the auditing of the ARRA funds They are to leave no rock unturned All funding is considered high risk, no matter the dollar amount But it will be included in the annual audit for testing

ARRA Unfortunately, the deadlines are such that LEAs must plan ahead and know that the timeline locally will be pushed back a few days For example, the October 10 deadline is for the period ending September 30, but the deadline for LEAs is September 23 This timeline is before all of the final expenditures will actually be posted in the financial system Specifically, the payroll for the end of the month was not posted to the financial system on September 23, but LEAs should have included the expenditures in the report that they know would be posted in the financial system In addition, it will be important to maintain supporting documentation that will demonstrate the expenditures that were reported to the CDE This will be particularly important for future reporting periods

Time Limitation Funds must be fully expended and obligated by September 30, 2011 Encumbrances are not counted as obligations – plan on spending the funds by this date Each LEA determines whether it makes sense to spend 100% of the funds in 2009-10 or to spread them across 2009-10 and 2010-11

Thank you!