Committee of Practitioners Title III March 30, 2012 Robert Crawford Mami Itamochi

Agenda TransAct Usage Data & Renewal Title III Consortium Model Title III Program Checklist

TransACT Background Parent Notification of ESEA Title I, Section 1118(f) and Title III, Part C, Section WVDE Subscription - TransACT GenEd Parent Notifications - TransACT NCLB Parent Notifications - TransACT State Masters Special Programs Legally Reviewed

Audience Participation How are you currently using TransACT to support the work of Federal Programs? How might your county utilize TransAct in the future? What might be some effective ways to increase statewide usage?

Consortia SEC Within-State Allocation (b) LIMITATION. – A State educational agency shall not award a subgrant from an allocation made under subsection (a) if the amount of such subgrant would be less than $10,000.

Consortia – Current Structure The current consortia model utilizes a RESA approach to allocating subgrants. Essentially the RESA is a fiscal agency to transfer funds to LEA’s. – No accountability is established at the RESA level for monitoring or strategic planning. The alignment of LEA’s in the current consortia model does not correspond directly with the established WV geographical grouping of district in RESA’s. – Currently RESA 4 and RESA 6 are functioning as a fiscal agency

Consortia Model Virginia – ograms/esea/applications/title3/title3_ part-a_consortium_agreemt.xls ograms/esea/applications/title3/title3_ part-a_consortium_agreemt.xls California – sortia.asp sortia.asp

Boone 4 $ $ 1, Braxton 0 $ $ -4 Fayette 6 $ $ 1, Greenbrier 32 $ $ 9, Lincoln 2 $ $ Logan 6 $ $ 1, Mason 12 $ $ 3, Mercer 17 $ $ 5, Mingo 2 $ $ Nicholas 7 $ $ 2, Pocahontas 0 $ $ -4 Wayne 24 $ $ 7, Webster 1 $ Wyoming 1 $

Proposal for Restructure Subgrant allocation is allotted to a regional educational center that services multiple LEA’s (RESA). – Fiscal agent for the grant and issues subgrants to the individual LEA’s that do not meet the $10,000 minimum. – RESA retains a portion of federal allocation from each LEA Meaningful professional development Additional technical assistance

Audience Participation What do you see as the positives of the restructured model? What challenges might exist? What suggestions do you have regarding the proposal?

Risk Factor Technical Assistance Tool Self-monitoring Other States – Illinois – Oregon – North Carolina

Risk Factor Sheet County Does your county hire (contract) ESL certified teacher for your ESL students? Does your county send any teachers to ESL MU Cohort? Did you submit Monitoring Response by due date? Barbour Berkeley Boone Braxton Brooke

Audience Participation What do you see as the benefit of this self-assessment checklist and how might it be used? What challenges might this document create? What additional questions or factors should be considered or addressed in this document or the process?

Any Questions? Robert Crawford Mami Itamochi Phone