Schoolwide Funding Flexibility – Extended Training Karen J.M. Seay, Director Federal Policy and ESEA Research Data September 21, 2015

September 17-18, 2015 Training New Schoolwide Guidance ( ) was presented –Flexibility identified in the new schoolwide guidance generated lots of questions and discussions at the September 17, 2015 Federal Programs Directors’ training; –Participants thought it would be helpful to have additional clarity specifically on the scenarios and on the guidance, in general.

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 1 An LEA proposes to use Title I funds for the salary of a principal in one of its schoolwide programs. The principal will serve as the school’s instructional leader and oversee the analysis of data from the school’s quarterly benchmark assessments. Is this allowable? Yes – let’s take a look at why…

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 1 Assumption 1: The school’s Title I funds supplement the State and local funds it receives. Fact: In a schoolwide program, only the funds, not activities must be supplemental. Assumption 2: The school’s annual needs assessment demonstrated the need for an instructional leader to support teachers with professional development and data analysis support for the purpose of increasing student achievement, especially for those students who are at-risk and low-achieving. Assumption 3: An end of year program evaluation will evaluate the effectiveness of this activity. Assumption 4: The expenditures for this activity were determined to be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the grant.

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 2 In , an LEA used state/local funds for the cost of an online credit recovery program in its high school that operates a schoolwide program. In , the LEA proposes to use a portion of the high school’s Title I allocation for the same program. Is this allowable? Yes – let’s take a look at why…

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 2 Assumption 1: The school’s Title I funds supplement the State and local funds it receives. Fact: In a schoolwide program, only funds, not activities must be supplemental. Assumption 2: The school’s annual program evaluation determined that the school’s online credit recovery program is successful and that this activity continues to be needed. This program is helping students, especially those students at-risk, meet achievement standards on the State’s annual assessment test and is helping students meet graduation goals. Assumption 3: An end of year program evaluation will evaluate the continued effectiveness of the online credit recovery program. Assumption 4: The expenditure for this activity was determined to be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the grant.

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 3 In a non-Title I school an LEA uses state/local funds to implement its one-to-one technology initiative. In a Title I schoolwide school, an LEA uses Title I funds to implement its one-to-one technology initiative. Is this allowable? Yes – let’s take a look at why…

Funding Flexibility, Scenario 3 Assumption 1: The school’s Title I funds supplement the State and local funds it receives. Fact: In a schoolwide program, only funds, not activities must be supplemental. Assumption 2: The school’s annual needs assessment demonstrated the need for one-on-one technology for the purpose of increasing student engagement and achievement, especially for those low-achieving students. Assumption 3: An end of year program evaluation will evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the one-on-one technology devices. Assumption 4: The expenditure for this activity was determined to be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the grant.

Role of the LEA Title I Director Purpose of schoolwide program is to upgrade entire educational program; however, the law (ESEA Sec. 1114(b)(1)) specifically protects two populations: –Low-achieving students –Historically underserved student populations The role of the Title I director is to ensure that the these populations are protected and that there is a program in place to help these children grow, meet State achievement standards, and graduate ready for college and career.

It’s important to remember… Implementing a Schoolwide program must include: –Effective methods and instructional strategies based on evidence; –Highly qualified teachers; –High-quality professional development for both teachers and paraprofessionals; –Increased parent involvement; –Annually reviewing and revising the effectiveness of the schoolwide plan based on a needs assessment.

Common Expenditures in a Schoolwide Program Based on the Needs Assessment Increased learning time; High quality preschool or full-day kindergarten; Evidence-based strategies to accelerate the acquisition of content knowledge for English Learners; Equipment, materials, and training need to compile and analyze data to monitor progress, alert the school to struggling students, and drive decision making; Devices and software for students to access digital learning materials and collaborate with peers, and related training for educators;

Common Expenditures in a Schoolwide Program Based on the Needs Assessment (cont.) Instructional coaches to provide high-quality school-based professional development; Evidence-based activities to prepare low-achieving students to participate successfully in advanced coursework; School climate interventions, e.g., anti-bullying strategies, positive behavior interventions and supports; Effective activities for increasing family and community engagement; Family literacy programs.

More questions? Please contact… Karen Seay: or Kathy Gauby: or For a copy of the new ESEA Schoolwide Guidance ( ), go to