1. Migrant Education Program New State Directors’ Orientation Tutorial Module 10: Migrant Education Program Reporting
U.S. Department of Education
Office of Migrant Education
Tools for Program Improvement

2. Table of Contents Section Slide # Getting Started 3 What is Required 9
Overview of the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) 18
Child Counts 27
Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) Part II 40
Wrapping Up 61

3. Getting Started In This Section Tutorial Objectives
How to Use the Tutorial
Icons to Guide You
Key Readings and Resources

4. Tutorial Objectives Module 10 will enable new state directors to:
Understand the difference between Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts,
Understand the funding implications of collecting and reporting Child Count data accurately,
Plan strategies for ensuring data quality, and
Plan for annual Consolidated State Performance Reporting (CSPR).

5. How to Use the Tutorial
For optimal benefit from the tutorial, you should:
Allow sufficient time to read the slides, reflect on the information, and complete all activities on the slides or on the Quick Resource and Reflection Sheets (QRRS) that can be downloaded as worksheets;
Read each slide as well as the information referenced in the slides;
Engage with the “What Do You Think?” slides to facilitate interaction with the information (Answers will be provided directly following each of these slides.);

6. How to Use the Tutorial
For optimal benefit from the tutorial, you should (cont.):
Pause to reflect on your state program at the “Check-in” slides (A QRRS document will typically accompany these.);
Complete the “Pop Quiz!” slides to reinforce key concepts;
Review your state’s Migrant Education Program (MEP) documents and reports as directed;
Develop an action plan using the worksheets provided;
Add actionable items to your MEP planning calendar (See QRRS 14.2.); and
Contact your MEP Officer for follow-up questions.

7. Q! Icons to Guide You What Do You Think?
The following icons will guide you in making best use of this tutorial:
What Do You Think?
Check-in
Pop Quiz!
Quick Reference & Reflection Sheet (QRRS)
Action Planning
Calendar Item Q!
QRRS

8. Key Readings and Resources
You should have these documents readily available while completing the module, as the module will refer to these documents for more complete information on various topics.
MEP Guidance on the Education of Migratory Children under Title I, Part C of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Chapter IX, Program Performance and Child Counts Reporting
Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) Part II – form for annual MEP state reporting
Copy of the prior year’s submitted CSPR Part II

9. What is Required In This Section
Migrant Education Program (MEP) Annual Performance Reporting
Key Terms

10. Migrant Education Program Annual Performance Reporting
The U.S. Department of Education requires state education agencies (SEAs) to submit specific information about their MEP on an annual basis. This information is reported with information on other formula grant programs on the Consolidate State Performance Report (CSPR).

11. Migrant Education Program Annual Performance Reporting
Each year, states must provide MEP specific program performance information through the CSPR, as well as:
Their annual count of migrant children and
Other data that in the form of narrative and check boxes describe the procedures the state follows to obtain and verify the Child Counts.
The MEP specific section of the CSPR is contained in the CSPR’s Part II.
Section 9303 of the ESEA

12. Migrant Education Program Annual Performance Reporting
Reporting through the CSPR simplifies the reporting process and reduces the reporting burden on the state by combining reporting on multiple programs into a single reporting instrument.
In general, the state Child Count data are collected and reported on the CSPR to:
Determine the number of migrant children in each state, and
Have the state confirm that it used the appropriate, required processes and procedures to determine these numbers.
Sections 1303(e) and 1304(7) of the ESEA, as amended

13. Check-in
The eligible migrant child data reported in the MEP section of the CSPR are designed to promote accountability for the implementation of the state MEP.
The Child Count data reported in the MEP section of the CSPR have implications for MEP funding for each state.
See QRRS 10.1 – Review Your Prior Year’s CSPR

14. Key Terms
For the purposes of the MEP, a child is eligible for the program if he/she meets the following statutory definition of a migratory child (as well as applicable regulatory definitions at 34 CFR § ):
A child who is, or whose parent or spouse is, a migratory agricultural worker, including a migratory dairy worker, or a migratory fisher, and who, in the preceding 36 months, in order to obtain, or accompany such a parent or spouse, in order to obtain, temporary or seasonal employment in agricultural or fishing work—
Has moved from one school district to another;
In a State that is comprised of a single school district, has moved from one administrative area to another within such district; or
Resides in a school district of more than 15,000 square miles, and migrates a distance of 20 miles or more to a temporary residence to engage in a fishing activity.
Children who are determined to be eligible for the program must have their eligibility documented on a state-approved Certificate of Eligibility (COE). Specific terms are further defined in the program regulations.
Section 1309(2) of the ESEA, as amended

15. Key Terms
For purposes of the MEP and state reporting, a state’s Child Count is the total unduplicated number of eligible migrant students statewide who can be counted for funding purposes.
An unduplicated count is one in which an individual child is included in a state's count only once, regardless of how many places within the state that child may have resided or was served by the MEP. Each SEA is required to submit unduplicated Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts.

16. Key Terms
The Department collects from each state two separate migrant Child Counts, known as the Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts:
The Category 1 Child Count is the 12-month unduplicated statewide total of children who are eligible to be counted for funding purposes. It consists of all of the migrant children ages 3 through 21 who meet the statutory and regulatory definition of a migratory (i.e., migrant) child, and thus who, within three years of a qualifying move, resided in the state for one or more days during the September 1 to August 31 performance period.
The Category 2 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide total count of eligible migratory (migrant) students who participated in one or more of the state’s MEP summer or intersession projects. It consists of all of the migrant children who were served for one or more days in MEP-funded summer or intersession programs in the state during the September 1 – August 31 performance period.

17. Key Terms
The statutory provision for Continuation of Services allows SEAs discretion in determining whether to extend eligibility for MEP services beyond the period for which they meet MEP eligibility requirements. Specifically, it permits:
A child who ceases to be a migratory child during a school term to continue to be eligible for services until the end of such term;
A child who is no longer a migratory child to continue to receive services for one additional school year, but only if comparable services are not available through other programs; and
Secondary school students who were eligible for services in secondary school to continue to be served through credit accrual programs until graduation.
Section 1304(e) of the ESEA, as amended

18. Overview of the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR)
In This Section
Purpose
Performance Goals of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended
U.S. Department of Education Use of Performance Data
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Measures
The Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR)

19. Purpose The purpose of the CSPR is to
Promote consolidated cross-program data collection,
Reduce the burden on SEAs and streamline reporting requirements in order to promote efficient program administration,
Establish a uniform program reporting deadline, and
Promote accountability for implementation of State Consolidated Applications.

20. Performance Goals Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended
After enactment of the current authorization of the ESEA in the No Child Left Behind Act, ED established five overall goals under the ESEA. They are:
By SY , all students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics;
All limited English proficient students will become proficient in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics;
By SY , all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers;
All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning; and
All students will graduate from high school.

21. U.S. Department of Education Use of Performance Data
ED uses the data collected in the CSPR for a number of purposes, including gathering information about program performance required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).
GPRA requires Federal departments and agencies to clearly describe the goals and objectives of their programs, identify resources and actions needed to accomplish goals and objectives, develop a means of measuring progress, and report regularly on achievement.
ED analyzes CSPR data to assist in determining the effectiveness of the MEP based on the GPRA measures.
ED advises States to use data submitted in the CSPR for program improvement purposes.

22. Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Measures
The four MEP GPRA measures ED has adopted for the MEP are:
Percentage of MEP students who scored at or above proficient on their state’s annual reading/language arts assessments in grades 3-8 and high school;
Percentage of MEP students who scored at or above proficient on their state’s annual mathematics assessments in grades 3-8 and high school;
Percentage of MEP students who were enrolled in grades 7-12 and graduated or were promoted to the next grade level; and
Percentage of MEP students who entered 11th grade and had received full credit for Algebra I.

23. The Consolidated State Performance Report
The CSPR consists of two parts, CSPR Part I and CSPR Part II.
In Part I, states submit information related to the five ESEA Goals that ED established in June 2002 for the content of Consolidated State Applications, and for information required for the Annual State Report to the Secretary, as described in Section 1111(h)(4) of the ESEA (in Title I, Part A).

24. The Consolidated State Performance Report
Part II of the CSPR consists of information related to state activities and outcomes of specific ESEA programs.
While the information varies from program to program, ED needs the specific information States must submit for MEP reporting to learn about MEP performance and for other program needs. The reported data provide information about program outcomes or results.
The Migrant Child Counts and other MEP reporting items became part of the CSPR Part II, beginning with SY reporting.

25. The Consolidated State Performance Report
MEP reporting generally requires the submission of information about:
The unduplicated annual counts of the number of migrant children eligible for formula funding purposes (Child Counts 1 & 2),
The numbers and characteristics of children participating in MEP services,
The types of services provided, and
The number of participating children by age/grade level.

26. The Consolidated State Performance Report
In Section 2.3 of the CSPR Part II, states submit data on implementation of the MEP for the performance period September 1st through August 31st of the preceding year. Collected data include:
Numbers of eligible migrant children (by age/grade level);
Participation data of migrant children served during either the regular year, summer/intersession term, or program year*;
School data;
Project data; and
Personnel /MEP-paid staff data.
* NOTE: Beginning with the data collected for the SY, MEP participation data (other than Child Count Category 2) will be reported for the program year only.

27. Child Counts In This Section Child Counts Defined
Accuracy of Child Counts Data
Migrant Child Counts

28. Child Counts Defined
For the purposes of the MEP, a Child Count is the state’s numeric calculation of the total of unduplicated number of eligible migrant students statewide who can be counted for funding purposes.
The accuracy of the Child Counts data is extremely important as it has implications for state funding allocations.
See Module 3: Funding Allocations for a review of how Child Counts are used to consider adjustments in the state funding allocation calculation.

29. Accuracy of Child Counts Data
The SEA must have sufficient procedures in place to ensure that it is counting only once those children who are eligible for the MEP.
Such procedures are important to protecting the integrity of the state’s MEP, and permit the early discovery and correction of eligibility problems and thus help to ensure that only eligible migrant children are counted for funding purposes and are served.
34 C.F.R. § (c) and (d)

30. Accuracy of Child Counts Data
Each state must have procedures in place to ensure that the Child Counts:
Are accurate,
Are unduplicated,
Reflect only eligible migrant children, and
Are sufficiently well documented so that an outside reviewer who is unfamiliar with the MEP would understand the process.
If an SEA has reservations about the accuracy of its Child Counts, it must inform the Department of its concern and explain how and when it will resolve them.

31. Accuracy of Child Counts Data
An SEA official must certify that, to the best of his/her knowledge, Child Counts and information contained in the CSPR are true, reliable, and valid and that any false statement provided is subject to fine or imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C
34 C.F.R. §

32. Migrant Child Counts
Child Counts are collected in two separate categories:
Category 1
Consists of all of the eligible migrant children ages 3 through 21 who meet the statutory and regulatory definition of a migratory (i.e., migrant) child, and thus who, within 36 months of a qualifying move, resided in the state for one or more days during the September 1st through August 31st performance period and
Category 2
Consists of all of the eligible migrant children who were served for one or more days in MEP-funded summer or intersession programs in the state during the September 1st through August 31st performance period.

33. Migrant Child Counts
Migrant Child Count Category 1 collects data on eligible migrant children residing in the state for at least one day:
Age 3-5 (pre-kindergarten);
In each grade level K-12 (e.g., K, grade 1, grade 2, etc.);
Ungraded; and
Out-of-school.
If there are increases or decreases in these counts exceeding 10% compared to the prior year, the SEA must provide an explanation of the change.

34. Migrant Child Counts
Migrant Child Count Category 2 collects data on eligible migrant children served by the MEP during a summer/intersession term:
Age 3-5 (pre-kindergarten) ;
In each grade level K-12 (e.g., K, grade 1, grade 2, etc.);
Ungraded; and
Out-of-school.
If there are increases or decreases in these counts exceeding 10% compared to the prior year, the SEA must provide an explanation of the change.

35. Migrant Child Counts
ED asks SEAs to respond to questions and to provide assurances about their migrant Child Count data and validation procedures as well as the state’s quality control processes. Areas include:
The statewide student information system the SEAs used,
Data collection procedures related to the required National Certificate of Eligibility (COE),
Assurance of the accuracy of the submitted Child Counts,
Assurance of the accuracy of Child Count data transmitted to EDFacts,
Use of Migrant Student Information Exchange(MSIX) data, and
Quality control processes for ensuring that determination of eligibility procedures are effective and counts are accurate.
See Module 2: Eligibility and Identification & Recruitment

36. Pop Quiz!
Instructions: Determine whether the following statements are true or false.
Statement
True
False 1.
If a migrant child becomes eligible for MEP services after the regular school year has ended, but participates in a following summer MEP literacy program, that child is counted in both Category 1 and Category 2 Child Count data. 2.
If a student ceased to be an eligible migrant child on November 1st of a regular school year, the child should be included in the Category 1 Child Count data. 3.
If a student ceased to be an eligible migrant child on April 15th during the regular school year and is enrolled in an MEP summer reading program after the end of that school year because no other literacy programs are available, he/she should be counted in both Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts data. 4.
An eligible migrant child attended MEP math tutoring sessions during each of the three scheduled intersessions at a year-round school. The child should be counted three times in the Category 2 Child Count. 5.
Juan was an eligible migrant child for the entirety of the school year. His family lived in two different school districts across the state as a result of moving to work different crop harvests. Since Juan received services in two districts, he should be entered twice in the Category 1 Child Count.

37. Pop Quiz! – Response
# 1 is TRUE. The Category 1 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide total number of eligible migrant children who were residents in a state for one or more days during the September 1 – August 31 performance period. The Category 2 unduplicated count of eligible migrant children served in MEP summer/intersession projects is a subset of the larger Category 1 Count. #2 is TRUE. The Category 1 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide total number of eligible migrant children who were residents in a state for one or more days during the September 1 – August 31 performance period.

38. Pop Quiz! – Response
#3 is FALSE. The migrant child should be counted in the Category 1 Child Count, because he/she was an eligible migrant child during the regular school year. However, the child cannot be included in the Category 2 Child Count because his/her period of eligibility ended prior to the summer (even though he/she may have received services during the summer under the “Continuation of Services” authority; see Slide 17). #4 is FALSE. The child should be included only once in the Category 2 Child Count since this is an unduplicated count, and participation in multiple MEP intersession projects during a year-round school year is counted as one receipt of service.

39. Pop Quiz! – Response
#5 is FALSE. An unduplicated count is one in which an individual child is included in a state's count only once, regardless of how many places within the state that child may have resided or was served by the MEP. In this case, the SEA must ensure that Juan is entered only once in the Category 1 Child Count data (and Category 2 Child Count data if he participated in a summer/intersession term).

40. The Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR), Part II
In This Section
Overview
Step 1: Communicate with Data Staff
Step 2: Review Data Requirements
Step 3: Set Timelines
Step 4: Follow up with Local Operating Agencies (LOAs) & Local Education Agencies (LEAs)
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Step 6: Complete the Report

41. Overview
There are key steps that the state director can take each year to prepare for and conduct the MEP data collection and reporting process. Steps include:
Communicate with data staff;
Become familiar with the data requirements;
Identify key data collection and submission timelines;
Communicate with local operating agencies (LOAs) & local education agencies (LEAs);
Monitor data for timeliness and accuracy; and
Include narratives that accurately, comprehensively, and concisely address the question/criteria.

42. Step 1: Communicate with Data Staff
Establish and maintain contact with the SEA’s EDFacts coordinator and CSPR coordinator.
The EDFacts coordinator is responsible for transmittal of the state’s collected data to the EDEN Submission System (ESS).
The EDFacts coordinator is usually in the SEA’s information technology department.
The CSPR coordinator has oversight responsibility to ensure the preparation, submission, and certification of data and comments entered into the CSPR. Please note that in some states, the MEP director may be responsible for inputting the data manually.
The CSPR coordinator may be the same person as the EDFacts coordinator, or may be someone in the state’s federal programs office.

43. Step 2: Review Data Requirements
Become familiar with questions, guidance, and definitions pertaining to data to be collected as described in the CSPR Part II.
Note how data for each question are to be submitted to ESS. Ascertain any changes to questions, file specifications, and other data-submission requirements for the submission. Consult the resources below for additional information:
EDFacts File Specifications
Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbooks
The EDFacts coordinator will have further information regarding how assessment data are to be submitted according to the Consolidated State Accountability Workbook the SEA has prepared and submitted to ED.
Individual state workbooks and EDFacts File Specifications may be found on the ED website.

44. Step 2: Review Data Requirements
The CSPR Part II requests additional reporting on a number of components related to the state’s eligible migrant children and MEP projects, including data about:
Priority for services (PFS);
Schools and MEP enrollment;
Limited English proficient;
Children with disabilities;
Schoolwide programs;
Qualifying arrival date (QAD);
MEP project data; and
Referrals;
MEP staff, including state director and staff, teachers, counselors, recruiters, paraprofessionals, record transfer staff, and administrators.
Academic status;
Dropouts;
High School Equivalency Diploma (HSED);
Continuation of services;
Instructional services;
Counseling services;

45. What Do You Think?
List ten possible actions related to MEP reporting for the CSPR that should go on your MEP planning calendar.
Action Item
Deadline 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.

46. Step 3: Set Timelines
Planning for CSPR Part II reporting should begin early in the September 1st –August 31st so that you can plan and monitor data collection and quality. Begin by determining and coordinating data collection, quality review, and submission timelines.
Be mindful of the ED annual data collection timeline.
Ascertain from the EDFacts coordinator how data collection for submission to ESS is done in your state (via the statewide longitudinal database, online, paper collection, etc.). Discuss external and internal agency timelines for data submission to ESS.
Confer with the CSPR coordinator regarding specific aspects of your state data collection and submission methods, as well as state-specific timelines and deadlines.

47. What Do You Think? – Reflection
Action Item
Deadline 1.
CSPR Part II is due by 5:00 EST
Feb 13, 2015 2.
CSPR Part II is open for pre-fill data 3.
Check accuracy of EDFacts data prior to CSPR Part II open date 4.
Review re-interview process results 5.
Meet with external re-interview team to review procedures, methodology, and timeline for quality control check of COEs. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.
Above are only a few suggestions of actions to be taken during the course of the performance period to ensure that MEP data are accurate and submitted on time. What other action items need to occur?
See QRRS 10.2 – Planning for the CSPR Part II

48. Step 4: Follow Up with Local Operating Agencies and Local Education Agencies
Communicate with LOAs and LEAs on a regular basis throughout the year regarding data collection questions, definitions, data collection methods, and all other pertinent information. Make sure all deadlines for data collection and submission are communicated and met.
Follow up with LOAs and LEAs that fail to report data, or report unreasonably high or low counts of migrant children compared to past migratory trends .
Check to see if LOAs’ and LEAs’ migrant Child Counts are within 10% of the submitted count for the same period the previous year.
If not, meet with LEAs to determine the reason for the change.

49. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Monitor data collected and aggregated through ESS.
Data for questions that have file specifications and are submitted through ESS must be submitted annually by 5:00 PM EST in mid-February (specific date varies annually). Data will appear in the CSPR tool in an aggregated form when it opens in November prior to the report due date.

50. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
The EDFacts Coordinator can provide a pre-fill report of the aggregated data upon request.
This report shows data submitted to EDFacts but not yet pre-populated into the CSPR. State directors should obtain this report and verify the aggregated data, particularly student counts, based on their own records. It is best to verify these data well in advance of the opening of the CSPR to allow time for any necessary revisions.
Compare LEA data provided this year to data reported for the previous year to identify unexplained discrepancies.

51. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Data collected through EDFacts can only be corrected through the ESS. Corrections to these data cannot be made manually through the CSPR data submission tool. The state EDFacts coordinator should be contacted for assistance with any necessary revisions.

52. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Oversee collection and submission of data not collected by the ESS.
The responsibility to oversee and facilitate the collection of all data on migrant children served by LOAs with MEP subgrants is likely that of the state director. The CSPR coordinator can provide further information specific to your state’s data collection system and should be consulted regarding the collection of this data.
The state director may also be responsible for facilitating collection and submission of relevant data from non-subgrantee LEAs that respond to CSPR questions. The CSPR coordinator can provide further information pertaining to these data collections.

53. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Oversee collection and submission of data not collected by the ESS.
It is likely that the EDFacts coordinator will want access to the data that are not collected online well in advance of the opening of the CSPR in November to provide adequate time for data preparation and entry. Establish a deadline by which LOAs must submit their data that allows ample time for the EDFacts coordinator to prepare the data for entry when the CSPR opens.
* NOTE: that any revisions to data not collected through the ESS system must be made through the CSPR tool.

54. Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
If there is conflicting information between the various state data collection systems, the SEA’s MEP office should be the authoritative source of state data on migrant students and MEP programs in all systems.

55. Step 6: Complete the Report
Not all information requested on the CSPR Part II is collected through the statewide data system and uploaded to ESS.
In some cases, states may manually collect certain information, particularly about MEP projects, from LOAs and LEAs.
Having LOAs and LEAs report this information on a regular schedule, multiple times per year, can help alleviate last minute efforts to submit data.
The ongoing and regular practice of submitting data allows time for quality checks of data periodically, as well as the use of data for formative review of the MEP.

56. Step 6: Complete the Report
Understanding the ESS file transfer system format will also help identify how LOAs and LEAs should submit required data to reduce the burden of entering data manually.
Ensuring that LOA and LEA staff understand the importance of accurately reporting MEP data and the expectations for reporting purposes will help as well.
Provide training to LOA and LEA staff as needed (e.g., when there is significant turnover in staff, or quality data checks indicate a need).
Ensure staff understand key terms and definitions.

57. Step 6: Complete the Report
Most MEP questions in the CSPR Part II include a narrative component. These types of questions typically relate to:
Increases/decreases (of more than 10%) from Child Counts data submitted in the prior year,
State reporting systems,
Data collection and management procedures, and
Data quality processes.

58. Step 6: Complete the Report
The CSPR Part II field for MEP narrative responses is limited to 8,000 characters. When responding to these questions:
Be comprehensive, yet accurate and concise in addressing the question;
Review these questions in advance so that you can meet with others who may need to contribute to this response; and
Try setting up a Word or Excel file to capture responses in advance so that you can review, edit, and format them before copying and pasting responses into the system.

59. Step 6: Complete the Report
Allow time to review all data and narrative prior to the submission of the CSPR Part II.
Migrant Child Count data have implications for state funding.
Quality Processes and Procedures for ensuring the accuracy of Child Count data and other data on eligible migrant child must be included in the report.

60. Step 6: Complete the Report
Work with your state’s EDFacts and CSPR coordinators to ensure that all MEP data are collected and transmitted accurately and timely.
Communicate with LOAs and LEAs to ensure that everyone involved in data collection and reporting understands the importance of accuracy and timeliness in providing migrant Child Count data as well as other data collected on MEP services and activities.

61. Wrapping Up
In This Section
Key Points
Action Planning
Resources

62. Key Points
Each year, states must provide MEP specific program performance information through the CSPR.
MEP reporting generally requires the submission of information about:
The unduplicated annual counts of the number of migrant children eligible for formula funding purposes,
The numbers and characteristics of children participating in MEP services,
The types of services provided, and
The number of participating children by age/grade level.
Accuracy of Child Count data is critical, as it has implications for state funding.

63. Action Planning
Consider the following questions to help you prepare for MEP data reporting through the CSPR.
How are the required data being collected?
Are all data being collected through state data systems, or are some data being collected manually?
Are all data being collected in the correct format for easy upload to the CSPR Part II form?
What procedures are in place to ensure that the Child Count data are correct?
How much variance was there in Child Count data across the two previous years?
See QRRS 10.3 – MEP Performance Reporting
Add any actionable items to your MEP planning calendar.

64. Resources for Migrant Education Program Reporting
MEP Guidance on Education of Migratory Children under Title I, Part C, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 – explanation of guidelines to implement the laws and regulations related to the MEP
EDFacts Initiative website – ED performance data system overview and resource guides
MEP Officers – list of OME contact information
Glossary of Terms – alphabetical listing of key terms applicable to migrant education (see Module 1)

65. New State Directors’ Orientation Tutorial
This tutorial was developed by The SERVE Center at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro under contract number ED-08-CO-0111.
Content for this tutorial was developed through a review, compilation, and synthesis of
Authorizing statutes and regulatory guidance,
Information and resources obtained from the and websites,
Other documents shared by the Office of Migrant Education,
State Migrant Education Program websites and related documents, and
Other websites supporting the educational welfare of migrant children and youth.
Note: Some links in this tutorial take the user to external websites provided by other organizations. The U.S. Department of Education cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information at these sites. The inclusion of these links is not intended to reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views or products of these organizations.
No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred.
Note: All images included in this tutorial are used with appropriate licensing agreement, or are copyright cleared or open source.