1. Maintenance of Effort, Comparability & Supplement, Not Supplant
2016 ESEA Directors Institute
August 23, 2016

2. Janet Michelle Mansfield Regional Consultant Division of Consolidated Planning & Monitoring (731)

3. Session Overview Overarching rule for expenditure of Title I funds
Review of the three tests to ensure compliance:
Maintenance of Effort
Comparability
Supplement, not Supplant
Discuss several scenarios to determine appropriateness of expenditures
Questions

4. Overarching Title I Requirement
Title I funds must be used to:
provide services in addition to the regular services normally provided by a LEA for participating children.
State and local funds must be used to provide the regular services normally provided to participating students.

5. Important Considerations
Questions to ask…
What are the regular services normally provided to all students with state and local funds?
Are participating students receiving those regular services from state and local funds AND are services in addition to those regular services from Title I funds?
In the absence of Title I funds, would the services supported with Title I funds be provided?

6. Ensuring Compliance
Three tests are used to ensure the proper expenditure of Title I funds.
All of the tests are fiscal requirements related to the expenditure of state and local funds.
Maintenance of effort
Comparability
Supplement, not supplant

7. Maintenance of Effort (MOE)

8. Test #1: MOE Rule
A LEA may receive Title I funds only if the following is true:
The combined fiscal effort per student or the aggregate expenditures of the LEA from state and local funds from preceding year must not be less than 90 percent of the second preceding year.
Several keys to understanding the requirement

9. Measuring LEA Fiscal Effort
Considers ONLY state and local funds expended by the LEA
Compares state and local expenditures from the preceding year to the second preceding year
Per student OR
Aggregate
The preceding year expenditures may not be more than 10 percent less than the second preceding year.

10. Expenditures to Include
Expenditures from state and local funds for free public education
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

11. Expenditures to Exclude
Funds from federal government
USDE, USDA, HHS, etc.
Community services
Capital outlay
Debt service
Supplemental expenditures made as a result of a Presidentially declared disaster

12. Measuring LEA Fiscal Effort
To measure compliance for FY17:
FY16 is the preceding year
FY15 is the second preceding year
Fiscal Year
Aggregate LEA Expenditure
Per Student Expenditure
Fiscal Year 2015 (second preceding)
$1,000,000
$6,100
Fiscal Year 2016 (preceding)
$850,000
$5,200

13. Measuring LEA Fiscal Effort
FY16 MUST be at least 90 percent of the FY15 amount to meet MOE requirements.
Fiscal Year
Aggregate LEA Expenditure
Per Student Expenditure
Fiscal Year 15 (second preceding)
$1,000,000
$6,100
90 percent of second preceding
$900,000
$5,490
Fiscal Year 16 (preceding)
$850,000 (85%)
$5,200 (85.2%)

14. Consequences of Failing to Meet MOE
All ESEA formula grant awards MUST be reduced.
Based on the percentage of failure:
use the amount (aggregate or per pupil) that is the closest to meeting the requirement.
Fiscal Year
Aggregate LEA Expenditure
Per Student Expenditure
Fiscal Year 16 (preceding)
$850,000 (85%)
$5,200 (85.2%)
Percentage Shortfall (90 percent required) 5%
4.8%
All FY17 ESEA Formula Grants to be reduced by 4.8%

15. Possible USEd Waiver
Exceptional or uncontrollable circumstances such as natural disaster OR
Precipitous decline in financial resources of the LEA

16. Comparability

17. Test #2: Comparability Rule
A LEA may receive Title I funds only if the following is true:
The LEA uses state and local funds to provide services in Title I schools that, taken as a whole, are at least comparable to the services provided in non-Title I schools.
All schools in the LEA are Title I schools and all Tile I schools are substantially comparable.
What are the state and local funds supporting in ALL schools?
Is it comparable across ALL schools?

18. Determining Comparability
A LEA assures that is has established and implemented:
a district-wide salary schedule;
a policy to ensure equivalence among schools in teachers, administrators, and other staff; and
a policy to ensure equivalence among schools in the provision of curriculum materials and instructional supplies.
Annually calculate and compare the state and locally funded average staff/pupil ratios of schools to demonstrate the effectiveness of established policies.

19. Comparability Calculations
Determine the total number of staff to be counted in each school.
ALL state and locally funded, licensed instructional staff must be include.
Educational assistants/paraprofessionals, may be included but must be done consistently across schools.
Do not include preschool personnel.
Do not include non-instructional staff.

20. Comparability Calculations
Divide the total number of staff above by the current school year enrollment in each school.
There is an average of 8.08 students for every state/locally funded staff person in Fantastic Elementary School.
School Name
Staff Count (state/local)
Current Year Enrollment
Staff/Pupil Average
Fantastic Elementary School 46
372
8.08

21. Comparing Schools Compare like grade span groups OR
Compare all schools together district-wide
Comparisons must be:
Non-Title I schools to Title I schools; and/or
Title I schools to Title I schools (only if no non-Title I schools are in the grade span group or in the district)
Schools’ staff/pupil average may not exceed 110 percent of the comparison schools’ staff/pupil average.
NOTE: There are several comparison options and alternate methods for demonstrating compliance. All are described in the comparability guidance document located in TDOE Resources.

22. Consequences of Not Being Comparable
Staffing adjustments must be made by December 1 if schools are found to be out of compliance with comparability requirements.
Moving more state/locally funded into schools with staff/pupil averages that are not comparable
Changing the funding sources of staff in order to support more/less staff with state/local funds

23. Supplement, Not Supplant

24. Test #3: Supplement, Not Supplant Rule
An LEA and its schools may use Title I funds only to supplement, and in no case supplant, the funds that would, in the absence of the Title I funds, be available from non-federal sources for the education of participating students.
Funds cannot be used to meet state laws or state requirements.

25. Supplement, Not Supplant in Targeted Schools
Title I targeted assisted schools must:
show that Title I funds are used in the school are supporting additional services that would not be otherwise provided;
demonstrate that Title I funds are used only for Title I participating students; and
track Title I funds separately from all other funds within each school.

26. Supplement Not Supplant, in School-wide Schools
Title I school-wide schools must:
use Title I funds to supplement the total amount of funds that it would receive from state/local sources, in the absence of Title I funds.
No individual program or expenditure review
All students are Title I participating students, so no student expenditure review

27. Activity

28. Scenario #1
The state requires the implementation of RTI in all schools. A district uses Title I funds to pay the salary of an RTI Director to implement the tier model in all of the schools in the district. Is this a violation of any of the three rules discussed? Defend your answer.

29. Scenario #2
A Title I school-wide school utilizes Title I funds to pay the salary/benefits of an instructional coach who was paid from state and local resources in the prior year. Is this a violation of any of the three rules discussed? Defend your answer.

30. Scenario #3
A district assigns state/locally funded guidance counselors to each school based on the numbers of students enrolled. This year, School A is entitled to one full time guidance counselor, but the school just began participation in Title I and now has enough federal funds to support the full time guidance counselor. The state/local funds for the guidance counselor are redirected to other more needy schools in the district. Is this a violation of any of the three rules discussed? Defend your answer.

31. Questions

32. Important CPM Contacts
CPM - Nashville
Regional Consultants
(Northwest)
(Upper Cumberland)
(First Tennessee)
(South Central)
(East)
(Southwest)
ePlan Help

34. 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: