1. A Multi-tiered Framework for Monitoring ESEA & IDEA Programs
ESEA Directors Institute
August 2016

2. Dr. Alyson F. Lerma Director of Monitoring Consolidated Planning & Monitoring (615)

3. Agenda

4. Agenda Overview of Monitoring On-site Monitoring in 2015-16
A New Framework for
Resources
Review & Questions

5. Session Objectives Outline states’ obligations to monitor & provide TA
Discuss principles, goals, & definition of monitoring
Review previous monitoring processes & models
Describe new multi-tiered monitoring framework
Selection of districts
Processes for each tier
Share resources

6. Monitoring Overview

7. Monitoring Responsibility
Federal requirements mandate that each state educational agency (SEA) oversee & monitor the implementation of compliant federal programs at least annually & provide performance reports. [EDGAR, ]
SEAs are also required to provide technical assistance (which can be informed by monitoring).

8. Characteristics of Successful Monitorings
What Monitoring IS
Focused on student outcomes
Oversight to ensure compliance
Opportunity to provide TA & collaborate with LEA partners
Dialogue on program effectiveness based on many data sources
Discussion of promising practices, needs, & unique circumstances of LEAs
What Monitoring is NOT
A “gotcha”
A biased review
A surprise
Based on a single data source
A static process

9. Categories of Official Monitorings
On-site visits
Programmatic or fiscal
Combination of programmatic & fiscal
Desktop
Competitive subgrants, such as McKinney-Vento
IEP Self-assessment via WBMS
Other
Specific grants or programs (eg. IDEA Discretionary, CEIS, etc.)

10. Continuous Improvement Cycle

11. Guiding Principles Use of risk-based analysis
Two LEAs chosen randomly
Monitoring for compliance of IDEA & ESEA programs
Focus on student outcomes & program effectiveness
Collaboration within TDOE, with districts & stakeholders
Clear communication
Standardized visits across districts
Dynamic process

12. Goals Provide an accurate, comprehensive review
Highlight successful initiatives & exemplary practices
Allow opportunities for partners to request assistance
Engage in meaningful & open dialogue
Provide individualized follow-up assistance
Reduce the number of findings of non-compliance
Empower districts & schools

13. On-site Monitoring

14. Identifying & Monitoring LEAs
Risk analysis to determine which LEAs would be monitored
More than 60+ factors related to: prior findings, staff turnover, OCR findings, amount of federal funds received, fiscal issues, audit findings, IDEA complaint findings, & more.
On-site monitoring of 20 LEAs in :
Seventeen were programmatic OR programmatic & fiscal
Three were fiscal
On-site monitoring visits to all large-urbans

15. Phases of On-site Monitorings
Pre-Visit
Visit
Post-visit & follow-up

16. A New Framework for

17. Enhancing & Expanding the Process
Implementing suggestions from
Based on survey results, focus groups, & other feedback
Soliciting input on proposed changes for
Divisions in TDOE
CPM Advisory Council
M.A.S.S. members
Responding to unexpected challenges
risk analysis used; will be updated in

18. Rationale for 2016-17 Changes
Implement feedback from a variety of stakeholders
Provide oversight of & tailored assistance to more LEAs
Support LEAs demonstrating low to no risk in monitoring
Utilize limited resources more effectively & efficiently
Closer alignment to Tennessee Succeeds
Further improve & streamline the process
Decrease number of findings of non-compliance
Assist in the transition to ESSA

19. Results-based Monitoring Framework
On-site monitoring
LEA self-assessment
ESEA & IDEA Self-assessment
IEP Self-monitoring via WBMS*
Desktop
monitoring

20. Three Tier Monitoring Process
On-site monitoring
10% of LEAs
Desktop monitoring
10% of LEAs
80% of LEAs
Self-assessment

21. Framework of Monitoring Processes
Self-assessment NEW
80% of LEAs will use a protocol to assess their ESEA & IDEA programs
CPM Monitoring Coordinator will review all submissions & report on patterns, TA needs for upcoming year
Will NOT result in corrective actions*
Desktop NEW
Two CPM consultants will review the submissions of required paperwork for monitoring an additional 10% of LEAs
Regional consultants who support monitored LEAs will provide TA, but not participate in monitoring
Can result in findings of non- compliance
On-site Teams will visit 10% of LEAs on-site to conduct monitoring
Large urbans will rotate each year
Increased standardization
Visit 10% of Title I schools in LEA
Regional consultants who support monitored LEAs will provide TA, but not participate in monitoring
Can result in findings of non- compliance

22. Self-assessment District programs demonstrating low or no risk
Required self-monitoring of ESEA & IDEA programs
Must include signed assurance re: accuracy of information
Does NOT result in corrective actions
Areas of non-compliance must be addressed & corrected
Completed document due March 1, 2017 in ePlan
Will be available on ePlan on Jan. 16, 2017
CPM will review all submissions & contact LEAs in summer for technical assistance

23. Desktop Monitoring Less intensive monitoring than on-site
District programs demonstrating elevated risk
15 districts (including two large urbans) in
Monitoring of programs & plans for
Documentation & completed report due in ePlan Nov. 15
Yes/No questions & open responses for each section
Must include signed assurance re: accuracy of information
Can result in corrective actions*
CPM monitors will review & complete the process by Feb. 1

24. On-site Monitoring District programs demonstrating significant risk
26 districts total in : 7 are fiscal only
Monitoring cycle is Sept.-March
Includes programmatic only, fiscal only, or both
CPM teams conduct interviews & visit selected school sites
Findings are shared with district leadership at exit meeting
Submit final monitoring report within 10 business days
Can result in corrective actions
**Large urbans: will be monitored each year but rotate between on-site and desktop

25. Monitoring Cycle ON-SITE MONITORINGS
On-site visits begin in mid-Sept. & end in March
No visits from Nov. 15 – Jan. 15
NEW DESKTOP MONITORINGS
Documentation due in ePlan by Nov. 15
Monitors will review & complete the process by Jan. 30, 2017
NEW SELF-ASSESSMENT OF ESEA & IDEA PROGRAMS
Completed document due by March 1, 2017 in ePlan
LEAs contacted in summer for technical assistance

26. Resources

27. Resources ePlan: www.eplan.tn.gov CPM monthly updates
TDOE Resources
CPM monthly updates
TDOE website:
CPM staff
Project directors
Regional consultants
Coordinated Spending Guide

28. Review

29. Review Outline states’ obligations to monitor & provide TA
Discuss principles, goals, & definition of monitoring
Review previous monitoring processes & models
Describe new multi-tiered monitoring framework
Selection of districts
Processes for each tier
Share resources

30. Questions

31. Questions?

33. Notifications can also be submitted electronically at:
FRAUD, WASTE, or ABUSE
Citizens and agencies are encouraged to report fraud, waste, or abuse in State and Local government.
NOTICE: This agency is a recipient of taxpayer funding. If you observe an agency director or employee engaging in any activity which you consider to be illegal, improper or wasteful, please call the state Comptroller’s toll-free Hotline:
Notifications can also be submitted electronically at: