1. 1 Title I Part A Fiscal Requirements Section 1120A Title I/Federal Programs Spring Conference 2010 Participants, Ohio Department of Education Ed Peltz, Consultant Elena Sanders, Consultant Karl Koenig, Management Analyst Federal Programs: 614-466-4161 Presentation available for download at www.oaasfep.net

2. 2 Maintenance of Effort (MOE) 1120A(a) and 9521 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 34 CFR 299.5

3. 3 MOE (continued) Section 9521 provides that an LEA may receive funds under a covered program for any fiscal year only if the SEA finds that either the combined fiscal effort per student or the aggregate expenditures from state and local funds for the preceding fiscal year was not less than 90 percent of the combined fiscal effort or aggregate expenditures for the second preceding fiscal year.

4. 4 In addition to Title I, Part A, MOE requirements of section 9521 apply to the following ESEA programs: Title I, Part B, Subpart 3, Even Start Title I, Part D, Neglected, Delinquent Title I, Part F, Comprehensive School Reform Title II, Part A, Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Title II, Part D, Educational Technology State Grants Title III, Part A, English Acquisition State Grants Title IV, Part A, Safe & Drug-Free Schools/Communities Title IV, Part B, 21 st Century Learning Centers Title VI, Part B, Subpart 2, Rural Education MOE (continued)

5. 5 Failure to Meet the Requirement The SEA must reduce the amount of the allocation of funds under a covered program in any fiscal year in the exact proportion by which an LEA fails to maintain effort by falling below 90 percent of both the combined fiscal effort per student and aggregate expenditures (using the measure most favorable to the LEA).

6. 6 Failure to Meet Requirement (continued) For a year in which effort was not maintained, the lesser amount shall not be used for computing maintenance of effort in subsequent years.

7. 7 Waiver The Secretary may waive the maintenance of effort requirements if it is determined that such a waiver would be equitable due to Exceptional or uncontrollable circumstances such as a natural disaster; or A precipitous decline in the financial resources of the LEA.

8. 8 Expenditures In determining whether an LEA has maintained fiscal effort, the SEA must consider the LEA’s expenditures from state and local funds.

9. 9 Expenditures include: Administration Instruction Attendance and health services Pupil transportation services Operation and maintenance of plant Fixed charges Net expenditures to cover deficits for food services and student body activities

10. 10 Expenditures exclude: Community services Capital outlay Debt service Expenditures made from funds provided by the federal government for which the LEA is required to account to the federal government directly or through the SEA Supplemental expenses made as a result of a Presidentially declared disaster

11. 11 Data Sources ADM (average daily membership) EMIS period N reporting GF (general fund) EMIS period H reporting EFM (expenditure flow model) USAS fund codes: 001 and 494

12. 12

13. Web-Based Comparability System System query will send a message to the LEA Superintendent and Treasurer if the LEA is required to submit a Comparability Report.

14. Comparability of Services 1120A(c) and (d) of ESEA 34 CFR 200.79 Title I Fiscal Issues Non-Regulatory Guidance, U.S. Dep’t. of Ed., Revised, February 2008 14

15. Purpose of Comparability To validate that Title I dollars are being used to supplement rather than supplant funds for local services and programs and to ensure that services are equitably provided by the LEA prior to the use of federal funds based on one of the following methods: student/instructional staff ratio, per pupil expenditure or student/instructional staff salary ratios. 15

16. 16 General Consider ations Comparability: … is a precondition for receiving funds. … is about fairness, equitable services. … looks only at state and local resources. … may exclude schools with 100 or fewer students.

17. General Considerations (continued) … compares each Title I school to the average of non-Title I schools, or, if all schools are Title I, to each other. … is an annual requirement because Title I allocations are made annually. 17

18. 18 … excludes any instructional staff paid with federal funds from instructional staff calculations. … includes only instructional staff paid with state and local funds. (Instructional staff paid with both federal and state/local funds may only include the full time equivalency paid with state and local funds.) General Considerations (continued)

19. … requires current school year data, based on the method used to demonstrate comparability, for instructional staff, pupil count, monies budgeted for curriculum materials and instructional supplies, and base instructional staff salary expenditures, to be collected within a relative period of time. 19 General Considerations (continued)

20. 20 General Considerations (continued) The comparability requirement does not apply if the school district has only one building in each grade span, e.g., K-5, 6- 8, 9-12. Eight or more grades above kindergarten may be grouped as a separate grade span, for example, K-8, K-9 or 5-12.

21. 21 Comparability - Criteria Comparability: … compares each Title I school to the average of non-Title I schools using 10 percent tolerance; … compares each Title I school to the average of the Title I schools with the lowest low income percentage, up to half of the group, if all the schools are Title I schools using 10 percent tolerance, or

22. Comparability - Criteria (continued) …determines if each Title I school falls within a range that is between 90 and 110 percent of the average if all Title I schools within the grade span are served. 22

23. 23 Documenting Compliance One-of-a-kind served school per grade span – no comparison necessary. If grade spans overlap by at least two grade levels, the comparability requirement applies unless there are three or more grade levels outside of the overlap, either above or below but not combined.

24. 24 Grade span grouping (most common) District-wide as a whole (less common) Large-school and small-school groupings (two times enrollment of smallest in the grade span) Comparability Flexibility

25. Access Users must have a SAFE Account & one of the following roles in OEDS-R: Superintendent Treasurer Data Entry Funding-CCIP Coordinator-Title I Programs 25

26. Comparability System Homepage System automatically determines if the district is required to complete comparability and places a message at the top of the homepage.

27. Getting Started To Access the Comparability System from the homepage, click on “Comparability Report” link. Directions can be accessed at any time by clicking on the “Help” link in the left menu bar.

28. (1) Workflow mirrors CCIP (Not Start  Draft Started  Draft Completed  District Representative Approved  ODE Approved) (2)After changing the status to “Draft Started,” click on “Comparability Data Verification.” (1) (2)

29. System Generated Data Data Verification Page will populate Building IRN, Name and Grade Span from OEDS; low income percentage and Title I served or not served from CCIP Building Eligibility Page. 29

30. Populates from OEDS-RPopulates from CCIP Comparability Data Verification 30

31. EMIS System Generated Data EMIS Report Option will populate current SY EMIS October Report Period pupil enrollment and instructional staff full time equivalency in determining comparability based on student instructional staff ratio method. 31

32. 32 Populates from EMIS October Reporting period when using the EMIS Data Option Comparability Data Verification EMIS Report Option After reviewing the data, click Save to come back to it later or click “Check Comparability” to test comparability.

33. 33 EMIS Reporting Teacher Codes Position Codes: 230 Teacher Assignment Areas: –999370 General Education –999414 Special Education –999380 Gifted and Talented –999800 Career-Technical Programs/Career Pathways

34. 34 EMIS - Reporting Teachers Fund Source-Valid Options include: –A State Auxiliary Funds –B Other State Funds –I State Poverty-Based Assistance Funds (formerly DPIA) –L Local Funds and/or State Foundation Funds –T Private/Tuition –U State Unit Funding (use funds source “Z” for preschool special education unit staff)

35. EMIS Report Steps Click Comparability Data Verification to verify data. Click on Check Comparability to test comparability. Cannot Save Report prior to EMIS officially closing. Click Return Without Saving. 35

36. EMIS Report Steps (continued) After EMIS officially closes in February, check Comparability Verification Data Page again for updates. Next, click Check Comparability. Save if report is correct to generate PDF Reports. 36

37. EMIS Report Steps (continued) Change status to draft completed. Superintendent or treasurer signs off on assurances and changes status to district representative approved. ODE reviews and approves or returns. 37

38. Self Report Option - System Generated Data Data Verification Page will populate Building IRN, Name and Grade Span from OEDS; low income percentage and Title I served or not served from CCIP Building Eligibility Page. 38

39. 39 Self-Report Option (Choose One Method to Report) Student/Instructional Staff Ratio Method Per-Pupil Expenditures Method Student/Instructional Staff Salary Ratio Method 012345 023456 099999

40. Self Report Option (continued) LEA determines which method to report: student instructional staff ratio, per pupil expenditures, or student/instructional staff salary ratios (using base salary, not salary differential, for each position, e.g., teachers, instructional paraprofessionals, etc.) 40

41. Self Report Option (continued) Determine definition of instructional staff (include in written procedures). Determine the relative period of time to collect the data for the current school year, for example, October reporting period or a similar period (usually a 5 business day average or period of time). 41

42. Self Report Steps Click Comparability Data Verification to verify and enter data for the method being used to demonstrate comparability. Click on Check Comparability to test comparability. Save if report is correct to generate PDF Reports. 42

43. Self Report Steps (continued) Change status to draft completed. Superintendent or treasurer signs off on assurances and changes status to district representative approved. ODE reviews and approves or returns. 43

45. 45 Develop and implement procedures for compliance annually (sample template in Doc Library). Must be in writing. Include LEA’s timeline for demonstrating comparability. Identify the office responsible for making comparability calculations and include LEA organizational chart. Written Procedures

46. 46 Written Procedures (continued) Procedures: Identify the measure and process used to determine whether schools are comparable. Determine how and when the LEA makes adjustments in schools that are not comparable. Include local definition of instructional staff.

47. 47 Sample Report

48. 48 All served-used within range criteria Report also includes audit list.

49. PDF Reports and History Log 49 Final Status PDF Reports History Log for Communication Web-based System saves reports by fiscal year, which will eliminate auditor requests for lost or misplaced copies of past comparability reports.

50. 50 Keep a saved copy of completed report for audit purposes. Maintain records and source documentation e.g., low income data, payroll records, EMIS records, etc. for three years. Sign and date.  An early determination of comparability would allow an LEA to make adjustments with the least amount of disruption. Documenting Compliance (continued)

51. 51 Miscellaneous Paraprofessionals Whether paraprofessionals are included depends on procedures developed by the SEA or LEA, as appropriate. Consistent with Title I requirements, the paraprofessional may provide instructional support only under the direct supervision of a teacher.

52. 52 Paraprofessionals (continued) Carefully consider whether a paraprofessional supported with state and local funds should be considered equivalent to a teacher or other instructional staff member in comparability determinations. Exclude aides not involved in providing instructional support in the comparability determinations.

53. 53 Miscellaneous Curriculum Materials/Instructional Supplies These are state and local funds budgeted for curriculum materials and instructional supplies. These accounts are located between functions 1000 through 1900 in the Uniform School Accounting System ( USAS ) budget document.

54. 54 Miscellaneous Preschool Staff/Enrollment Generally, preschool is not considered a grade span for comparability purposes unless the state considers preschool to be part of the elementary and secondary school system.

55. 55 Miscellaneous Schoolwide Program School If the LEA does not consolidate its federal funds and continues to track expenditures of those funds to particular activities, the LEA would calculate comparability for its schoolwide program schools the same as it would for its targeted assistance schools.

56. 56 Schoolwide Program School (continued) The LEA may determine the percentage that federal funds constitute of the total funds available in a schoolwide program school. The LEA would assume that the same percentage of instructional staff in the school was paid with federal funds and delete those staff from its comparability determinations.

57. 57 Schoolwide Program School (continued) The LEA may use a different measure for determining comparability in schoolwide program schools that is not dependent on identifying instructional staff paid with state and local funds. In each case, the non-Title I schools compared would be the same, but the method used for comparison purposes would be different.

58. 58 Skipping an Eligible School When calculating whether Title I schools are comparable, an LEA must treat an otherwise eligible Title I school that is skipped as if it were a Title I school when determining comparability. Miscellaneous

59. 59 Note that an LEA would exclude any supplemental state and local funds expended in the school in its comparability calculations. Skipping an Eligible School (continued)

60. 60 Community Schools All schools within an LEA must be included. Community schools geographically located within an LEA but legally their own LEAs would not be included. An LEA may use a different method for determining comparability to account for differences between its charter schools and “regular” schools. Miscellaneous

61. 61 LEA may exclude state and local funds for language instruction educational programs (bilingual education for LEP children), and excess costs of providing services to children with disabilities, as determined by the LEA. Exclusion of Funds

62. 62 Supplemental state or local funds may be excluded in any school for programs that meet the intent of Title I Part A (Targeted or Schoolwide) or Title I Part C (Migrant Education). Exclusion of Funds

63. 63 Exclusions An LEA need not include unpredictable changes in student enrollment or personnel assignments that occur after the beginning of a school year in determining comparability of services.

64. What if Comparability cannot be demonstrated? If comparability cannot be demonstrated with at least one of the three acceptable methods, the LEA must take immediate steps to reallocate resources as early in the school year as possible with minimum disruption to the learning environment. 64

65. Consequences of non- compliance Loss of a portion of the Title I funds for each school that is not comparable that the LEA would have to contribute to achieve comparability. Recovery of Title I allocation if unable to document compliance. 65

66. Reference Links 66 Web-based Directions Fiscal Guidance Procedures Template Q and A Document

67. 67

68. Supplement Not Supplant Considerations Supplant is very fact specific. Objective to increase awareness Contact your federal program consultant regarding fact specific situations. 68

69. 69 Supplement Not Supplant An LEA must: Use Part A funds to supplement, not supplant regular non-federal funds, NCLB 1120A (b).

70. 70 Supplement Not Supplant In general, the supplement not supplant requirement is intended to ensure that services provided with federal funds are in addition to, and do not replace or supplant, services that students would otherwise receive.

71. Presumptions of Supplanting “Required by Law” The Department assumes supplanting exists if - 1)An LEA uses federal funds to provide services that the LEA is required to make available under federal, state, or local law. 71

72. Presumptions of Supplanting “Prior Year” 2) An LEA used Title I funds to provide services that the LEA provided with non-federal funds in the prior years. 72

73. Presumptions of Supplanting “Same Services to Non-Title I Students or in Non-Title I Schools” 3) An LEA used Title I funds to provide services for children participating in a Title I program that the LEA provided with non- federal funds to children not participating in Title I. 73

74. Rebutting A Supplanting Determination Presumptions are refutable if – the district can demonstrate that it would not have been able to provide the services in question with non-federal funds had the federal funds not been available. 74

75. 75 Rebutting A Supplanting Determination The LEA must be able to: Demonstrate a loss of state and local funds from the prior year. Show an increase in standard operating costs. Demonstrate that state/local funds have not been redirected to a new activity.

76. 76 Rebutting A Supplanting Determination The LEA must be able to: Document that the board of education was on record to eliminate the activity under question unless a new source of funds was made available (in the absence of state and local funds). Document that the activities are consistent with the purposes of the federal program.

77. Exclusion from Comparability and Supplement, Not Supplant 1120A(d) of ESEA 34 CFR 200.79 An LEA may exclude supplemental state and local funds expended in any school attendance area or school from both supplement, not supplant and comparability determinations, as long as the expenditures are for programs that meet the intent and purposes of Title I, Part A. 77

78. Exclusion from Comparability and Supplement, Not Supplant Targeted Assistance-Like Programs A targeted assistance-like program meets the intent and purposes of Title I if the program: Serves only children who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s academic achievement standards; Provides supplementary services designed to meet the special educational needs of the children who are participating in the program; and Uses the state’s assessment system to review the effectiveness of the program. 34 CFR 200.79(b)(2) 78

79. Supplement Not Supplant Schoolwide Programs Schoolwide Program – not required to select and provide supplemental services to specific children identified as in need of services, NCLB, Section 1114. 79

80. Supplement Not Supplant Schoolwide Programs Schoolwide Program does not have to show that federal funds are paying for additional services that would not otherwise be provided; demonstrate that federal funds are used only for specific target populations; or separately track federal program funds once they reach the school. 80

81. Supplement Not Supplant Schoolwide Programs Schoolwide Program schools must use Title I funds only to supplement the amount of funds that would, in the absence of the Title I funds, be made available from non-federal sources for that school, including funds needed to provide services that are required by law for children with disabilities and children with limited English proficiency. 81

82. Exclusion from Comparability and Supplement, Not Supplant Schoolwide-Like Programs A schoolwide-like program meets the intent and purposes of Title I if the program: is implemented in a school with 40% or more poverty; is designed to promote schoolwide reform and upgrade the entire educational operation of the school; is particularly designed to meet the educational needs of at-risk students; and uses the state's assessment system to review the effectiveness of the program. 34 CFR 200.79(b)(1) 82

83. Possible Examples of Supplanting in a Schoolwide Program An LEA provides a literacy coach in each of its non- Title I schools but not in its Title I schoolwide schools, expecting those schools to use their Title I funds for literacy coaches. An LEA does not provide to a schoolwide school sufficient non-Federal funds to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities, as required by law, and instead relies on Title I, Part A funds to meet this requirement. 83

84. Supplement Not Supplant References Title I Fiscal Issues U.S. Department of Education Non- Regulatory Guidance, Revised February 2008Title I Fiscal Issues U.S. Department of Education Non- Regulatory Guidance, Revised February 2008 Supplement-Supplant 84

85. 85

86. Notice: The following examples apply to a Targeted Assistance School (TAS) program. 86

87. Example Local and Title I-A funds are used to provide a classroom math workbook for all students. Supplement or Supplant 87

88. Answer Supplant Title I-A funds may not be used to purchase materials for the general education program. 88

89. Example Local, Title I-A and Special Ed funds are used to purchase an assessment to be administered to all students for a variety of reasons, of which one reason is for Title I identification and selection. Supplement or Supplant 89

90. Answer Supplant. An LEA may not provide an assessment for non-Title I students with State and local funds while using Title I funds to provide the same assessment for Title I participating students. (This principle applies within a single Title I school, or across the district among Title I and non-Title I schools.) This would violate the supplanting prohibition because an LEA may not use Title I funds to provide services to Title I students that it provides with non-Title I funds for non-Title I students. In addition, for targeted assistance schools, it is the responsibility of the LEA to identify at-risk students from state or local sources. Once eligible children are identified, Part A funds may be used to identify those most in need or to identify their specific educational needs. 90

91. Example The district offers a Title I summer school and accepts non-Title I identified students because local funds also support the summer school. Supplement or Supplant 91

92. Answer: Supplant. By adding local funds to the Summer School program and opening it to all students, the Title I-A students are not receiving additional services. 92

93. Example Title I funds pay for a preschool for identified low-achieving students. Supplement or Supplant 93

94. Answer: Supplemental. As long as only Title I-A identified students participate in the programs, then they are receiving additional services. 94

95. Example Title I funds are used for a high school summer program where students who have failed a class receive this instruction and receive a new grade and credits, if passed. Supplement or Supplant 95

96. Answer: Supplant. Title I-A can provide supplemental tutoring services in the summer but may not be used to provide core instruction on which a grade or credit will be issued. 96

97. Example The district has chosen a new K-8 math curriculum. The district uses Title I funds to provide additional Staff Development after the core program staff development has been provided by the district. Supplement or Supplant 97

98. Answer: Supplement. As long as the district has already provided the core staff development required to implement the new program and offers Title I-A services in the content area, then Title I-A funds may pay for additional staff development to enhance instructional strategies directed at the needs of Title I-A students. 98