Phyllis Veith Assistant Director Office of Special Programs Program Improvement Professional Development
Superintendent West Virginia Department of Education Support Services Curriculum & Instruction Instruction Technical & Adult Ed. System of Support Legal Communi- cations Human Resources School Finance Finance Internal Operations Information Systems
Pat Homberg Executive Director Office of Special Programs OSPDataOSPTargetedPrograms OSPMonitoring OSPFiscal OSP Communi- cations OSP Professional Development OSP Program Improvement OSPAccountability
New Directors Legal Foundations Data Collection Resources Staffing Finance Professional Development
Office of Special Programs (OSP) Organizational Chart Office of Special Programs (PreK-12) Executive Director: Pat Homberg Fiscal/ Data/ Targeted Programs Program Improvement/ Professional Development Monitoring/ Accountability Assistant Director: Sandra McQuain Assistant Director: Phyllis Veith Assistant Director: Ghaski Browning Coordinators: Annette Carey Lanai Jennings Ruth Ann King Vickie Mohnacky Betsy Peterson Coordinators: Francie Clark Mary Pat Farrell Ginger Huffman Kathy Knighton Ellen Oderman Linda Palenchar Karen Ruddle Allen Sexton Valerie Wilson Coordinators: Debbie Ashwell Matt Dotson Loraine Elswick Kathy Hudnall Ann Monterosso Allen Sexton Vacant
WV Policy 2419 Indicator Checklist Full Instructional Day Classrooms in proximity to age appropriate peers Classrooms adequate/ comparable Child Find activities Developmental/ sweep screening 3-5 year olds with timelines Summary of Performance on file Reevaluation/ Annual Reviews within timelines Clearly documenting EC Data Students served with age-appropriate peers
Transfer of rights provided 1 year prior to 18 File reviews meet 80% compliance Per period caseload limits are met Discipline procedures followed when it is not change of placement Discipline procedures followed when it is change of placement All services on IEP implemented Reports submitted on time Confidentiality requirements followed Procedural Safeguards provided Prior Written Notice provided
OSPData OSPTargetedPrograms OSPFiscal OSP Communi- cations OSP Professional Development OSPAccountability OSP Program Improvement OSPMonitoring
Dr. Sandra McQuain Assistant Director Office of Special Programs FiscalData Targeted Programs
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Fourteenth Amendment Section 1
Brown v. Board Of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954) PARC v. Commonwealth – 1972 All children can learn Denial of due process Equal protection - FAPE; equal opportunity for ed/training appropriate to childs capacity Differing resources for differing objectives 343 F. Supp. 279 (E.D. Pa. 1972), Early Legal Foundations of Special Education
Failure to provide education to exceptional students Excluding, suspending, reassigning without due process (hearing) Compulsory attendance laws presuppose availability of education Interest in educating children must outweigh preserving financial resources 348 F.Supp. 866 (D. DC 1972) Mills v. D.C. Bd. Of Educ. (1972)
U.S. Constitution Federal Statutes Public Law United States Code (42 USC) Federal regulations Code of Federal Regulations (34 CFR §300 ) Federal Case Law U.S. Supreme Court (U.S or Sup. Ct.) U.S. Court of Appeals – 4 th Cir.; F. 2d; F 3d U. S. District Court – S.D. WVa.; F. Supp. Hierarchy of Law
WV Constitution WV State Courts WV Code - §18-20-1 Administrative Regulations: WV Board of Education Policy Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities Policy 4350: Procedures for the Collection, Maintenance and Disclosure of Student Data Hierarchy of Law
Free appropriate public education (FAPE) Zero reject Due process Protection in evaluation Least restrictive environment Parent participation Confidentiality of student records Education for All Handicapped Children Act PL 94-142 – EHA (1975)
Access to general curriculum Extended school year Accountability for student progress Positive behavior interventions/discipline More emphasis on parent participation Requirements added IDEA 97
Began to align IDEA with ESEA Assessment for all students Special education teachers must be highly qualified Schoolwide programs Special rule for eligibility determination Requirements added IDEA 2004
Changed eligibility for SLD Provide a special rule for eligibility determination. A child must not be determined to be a child with a disability under 34 CFR Part 300 if the determinant factor for that determination is lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the ESEA);lack of appropriate instruction in math; or limited English proficiency. [34 CFR 300.306(b)(1)] [20 U.S.C. 1414(b)(5)] IDEA 2004
Discipline Added unilateral removal for serious bodily injury Changed definition of manifestation – caused by or direct/substantial relationship to the disability Disproportionality Race/ethnicity identification Suspension Coordinated Early Intervening Services Funding http://idea.ed.gov/explore/home IDEA 2004
Special education and related services: At public expense Meets state standards - IGOs, assessment Includes preschool, elementary, secondary Provided in accordance with an IEP Under IDEA 97: Includes students removed from school Includes extended school year Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U. S. 176, 1982 Irving Ind. Sch. Dist. v. Tatro J.H. ex rel. J.D. v. Henrico County School Board, 326 F.3d 560 (4th Cir. 2003) ESY Free Appropriate Public Education
ALL STUDENTS CAN LEARN ALL STUDENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO EDUCATION Timothy W. v. Rochester, N.H. Sch. Dist., 875 F. 2d 954 (1 st Cir., 1989) Zero Reject
Nondiscriminatory methods and materials Use more than one measure Validated for use Given in native language/mode of communication Protection in Evaluation
Notice and consent Notice of/opportunity to attend meetings; placement or FAPE re: identification, evaluation, educational Notice of proposal/refusal to initiate/change placement or FAPE re: identification, evaluation, educational Consent - initial evaluation/reevaluation, initial placement Parents right to revoke consent Due Process and Parent Participation
Independent Educational Evaluation Surrogate parent Complaints Due process hearings Mediation Access to records Discipline Unilateral placement by parents Civil actions/attorney fees Additional Procedural Safeguards
To the maximum extent appropriate, students with disabilities are educated with those who are not disabled. Removal from regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with supplementary aids/services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. Least Restrictive Environment
Determined annually, based on IEP As close as possible to students home Continuum of alternative placements Consideration of harmful effects on the child/quality of services Not removed solely because of needed modification in general curriculum Placement
Board of Educ. v. Rowley Timothy W. v. Rochester, N.H. Sch. Dist. Irving Ind. Sch. Dist. v. Tatro Cedar Rapids Comm. Sch. Dist. v. Garret F. Burlington Sch. Comm. v. Dept. of Educ. Mass. Florence Co. Sch. Dist. v. Carter Hartmann v. Loudoun Co. Bd. Of Educ. Hartman v. Loudoun County Bd. of Educ., 118 F.3d 996, 1000-01 (4th Cir. 1997). Honig v. Doe – removal up to 10 days for immediate threat; TRO for more days Selected Special Education Cases
Dr. Sandra McQuain Assistant Director Office of Special Programs FiscalData Targeted Programs
Agenda Distribution of IDEA entitlement funds Allowable costs/use of funds High Cost Fund – IDEA Out-of-State/Out-of-County (state aid) Assistive technology Excess cost Maintenance of effort Coordinated Early Intervening Services Private schools Federal grants management and compliance Timely liquidation Budget transfers Inventory management Time and effort
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES IDEA 2004 Special Education Section 611, Part BSection 619, Preschool Students 3-21Students 3-5 School Age Preschool CFDA: 84.027CFDA: 84.127 1)children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate education (FAPE) 2)protect rights 3)assist agencies, districts with the education of students with disabilities (SWDs) with disabilities 4)assess and ensure effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities
IDEA Regulations: DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS Distribution of funds (34 CFR §§300.704-300- 705; 300.812-300.817) High risk pool (34 CFR §300.704(c)) Formulas and process for state and LEA allocations Allocations Children placed in private schools by their parents (34 CFR §300.133) Least restrictive environment (LRE) (funding mechanisms) (34 CFR §300.114) High Cost Expenditure Fund
LOGISTICS – Flow Through December December-OSP submits projected IDEA funding amounts to Finance February 1 February 1 – Annual Performance Report March- March-LEAs complete CSADA as part of needs assessment for strategic plans/LEA application April/May April/May-Instructions for completion of on- line plan and funding amounts for the upcoming year are distributed to LEAs June-July- June-July-LEA on-line plans due to OSP for review. July-ongoing July-ongoing- Submitted applications are reviewed & upon approval grants are issued. NOTE: SEA receives federal awards in July and October. LEA may obligate up to 25% of total award prior to October 1.
LEA Entitlement - Flow Through Entitlement Amount = Base + Population + Poverty Base Allocation (students with disabilities 1998/1996) Population/Poverty Amount = Entitlement – Base Population Amount = 85% [Entitlement – Base] (allocated to LEAs based on most recent public and private school enrollment) Poverty Amount =15% [Entitlement – Base] (allocated to LEAs based on most recent count of students eligible for free/reduced lunch)
Allowable Cost § 300.202 Use of amounts. Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part. Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities. Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds.
Additional Allowable Cost Considerations in IDEA/ARRA May use IDEA funds for special education, related services and supplementary aids and services for students with disabilities in the general education classroom or other settings; incidental benefit to other students who are not students with disabilities is allowed 15% of total IDEA and IDEA ARRA May use up to 15% of total IDEA and IDEA ARRA (school age and preschool) funds for Coordinated Early Intervening Services for students not identified with disabilities
Additional Allowable Cost Considerations in IDEA 2004 High cost consortia To purchase technology for data/IEP case management To purchase technology for data/IEP case management For schoolwide Title I/IDEA program; limited to per pupil allocation x number of students with disabilities in the program Must spend calculated proportionate amount of IDEA funds on students parentally placed in private schools within the district calculated on total IDEA and IDEA ARRA amount. Must spend calculated proportionate amount of IDEA funds on students parentally placed in private schools within the district calculated on total IDEA and IDEA ARRA amount.
IDEA Regulations - Use of Funds Maintenance of state financial support (34 CFR §§300.163-300.164) Local educational agency (LEA) maintenance of effort (34 CFR §§300.203300.204) Non-supplanting (state-level) (34 CFR §300.162(c)) Excess cost (34 CFR §§300.16 and 300.202) Use for allowable costs of special education and related services (34 CFR §300.202) Commingling (34 CFR §300.162(b)) Early intervening services (34 CFR §300.226) 48
High Cost Fund For the purpose of assisting districts in addressing the needs of high need students with disabilities, each State has the option to reserve for each fiscal year 10% of the amount it reserves for State- level activities. Each State must: develop and make available a high cost plan consult with districts develop a funding mechanism and schedule for fund distribution 50
High Cost Expenditure Fund Stakeholder involvement Definition: Individual application for an eligible SWD who: is 3-21 years of age has a current IEP lives within the LEA requesting funds or receives special education and related services within the LEA cost is equal to or greater than $45,000 per year 51
High Cost Expenditure Fund FY 2010 - $761,148 (IDEA) and $240,000 State High Acuity Distributed semi-annually based upon the submission and approval of an application for reimbursement. One half total amount available each semester. If requests exceed the amount available, reimbursements will be pro-rated. If a balance remains after first semester, the balance will be carried forward and will be added to the distribution available in the following semester.
High Cost – Eligible Expenses Costs required to provide direct special education and related services, as identified in the students IEP. Personnel (teachers, aides, service providers) Including extended school year Evaluations recommended by IEP team and documented on IEP Supplementary classroom materials for specially designed instruction Assistive technology services or devices identified on the students IEP Equipment (mats, prone stander) Construction (ramp, handicap accessible bathroom) Special transportation
High Cost – Excluded and Included Categories for Eligibility Excluded – Out-of-State Placements Students with disabilities placed out-of-state by a district may not be submitted for reimbursement through the High Cost Expenditure Fund. Included – Out-of-County Placements Students placed into a district by another agency (i.e. foster care and emergency shelters), but all aforementioned criteria must also be met. Reimbursement will not be provided under both high need and out-of-county funding reimbursement mechanisms. Must be one or the other.
High Cost Expenditure Fund continued Criteria for LEA Participation (for FY 2011) Approved FY-11 Application Approved Policies and Procedures Approved Corrective Action Plans and/or Improvement Plans Other funds have been expended No expiring or returned federal or state funds 55
High Cost – FY 11 Semesters SemestersDue Dates July 1, 2010 – Dec. 31, 2010mid Feb. 2011 Jan. 1, 2011 – June 30, 2011mid Aug. 2011 FY 2010 2nd Semester application for period January 1, 2010 – June 30, 2010 due August 12, 2010.
Other Funding Available through OSP Out-of-State Reimbursement Out-of-County Reimbursement Assistive Technology Reimbursement
$300,000 – State Funds Funds are divided equally between two semesters and are disbursed based on the number of districts requesting reimbursement per semester, but in no case exceed the total request made for reimbursement by the district. LEAs submit application for reimbursement for students placed out of the state by determination of the IEP process. Memo and application from OSP mailed electronically in November of each year and applications are due in January and March (depending on semester). Receipts for costs are then due in February and April.* *Also posted on website each year when updated for current year.
Funds for Reimbursement for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities Placed by Other State Agencies (Out-of-County) $558,935 – State Funds Funds are prorated based on the individual countys request to the sum of all requests received. LEAs submit application for reimbursement for students who have been placed in by DHHR or the Department of Corrections in counties that are not the students home counties. Memo and application from OSP mailed electronically in March of each year and applications are due the last Friday in the month of April.* *Also posted on website each year when updated for current year.
$100,000 – IDEA Funds Applications may be submitted at any time throughout year. Contact Kathy Knighton for additional information. Application is available on the OSP website. email@example.com * Also posted on website each year when updated for current year.
Excess Cost The excess cost requirement prevents an LEA from using funds provided under Part B of the Act to pay for all of the costs directly attributable to the education of a child with a disability, subject to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section. Excess costs are those costs for the education of an elementary school or secondary school student with a disability that are in excess of the average annual per student expenditure in an LEA during the preceding school year for an elementary or secondary student.
Excess Cost – Elementary vs. Secondary Section 602(8) of the Act and §300.16 require the LEA to compute the minimum average amount separately for children with disabilities in its elementary schools and for children with disabilities in secondary schools. The formula for these calculations is provided in 34 CFR, Appendix A to Part 300. The form and calculations to meet this requirement are under the Compliance Section of the LEAs on-line strategic plan.
66 Part B LEA MOE LEA MOE Requirement: Eligibility In order to determine an LEAs eligibility for a Part B allocation, the SEA must ensure that: With certain exceptions, an LEA budgets for the education of children with disabilities at least the same total or per capita amount of either local, or State and local, funds as it spent from those same sources in the most recent prior year for which the information is available See 34 CFR §300.203(b)(1) 66
67 Common Audit Finding Maintenance of Effort (MOE) (LEA) Audit standard: Funds provided under Part B of the Act must not be used to reduce the level of expenditures...below the level...of the preceding year: Local funds only OR State and local funds (year to year) (34 CFR §300.203(a))
Part B LEA MOE Requirement: Doing the Math Eligibility: LEA expends $900,000 in FY 2009 and budgets $1,000,000 in FY 2011; therefore, the LEA meets the IDEA MOE eligibility requirement for an FY 2011 grant award Compliance: LEA expends $900,000 in FY 2008 and expends $950,000 in FY 2009; therefore, the LEA complied with the MOE requirement from FY 2008 to FY 2009 68
Allowable Reasons for Reducing MOE 34 CFR §300.204 provides exceptions for: Voluntary departure, by retirement or otherwise, or departure for just cause, of special education or related services personnel; Decrease in the enrollment of children with disabilities; Termination of costly expenditures for long-term purchases, such as the acquisition of equipment or the construction of school facilities; Termination of an exceptionally costly obligation to a particular child with a disability because the child: Has left the jurisdiction; Has reached the age at which the obligation to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the child is terminated; or No longer needs the program of special education or Assumption of cost by a high cost fund operated by the SEA under 34 CFR §300.704(c);
71 Part B LEA MOE Requirement: Supplement/Not Supplant Funds under Part B must be used to supplement State, local and other Federal funds and not to supplant them See 34 CFR §300.202(a)(3) If an LEA maintains its fiscal effort, it will only be using Part B funds to supplement local, or State and local, funds, and not to supplant them IDEA does not require a particular cost test 71
Coordinated Early Intervening Services use up to a maximum of 15% A LEA may use up to a maximum of 15% of the amount such agency receives under Part B of the Act for any fiscal year to develop and implement coordinated early intervening services for students in kindergarten-12 (emphasis on K- 3), who have not been identified as needing additional academic and behavioral support to succeed in the general education environment. Reporting Requirements-number of students served and number of students who receive special education and services after two years and expenditures. NOTE: Any amount set aside for early intervening must be reduced by amount used to reduce local effort under MOE, if any.
CEIS Required If the state determines that an LEA has a significant disproportionality based on race or ethnicity with respect to identification as children with disabilities or their placement in particular settings, the SEA must require the LEA to reserve the maximum amount of funds for early intervening services, particularly students in those groups that were significantly over-identified. 74
75 What are the requirements for determining significant disproportionality? Review data related to: 1) Identification of children with disabilities; 2) Identification of children as children with a particular disability; 3) Placement of children with disabilities in particular educational settings; and 4) Incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary actions, including suspensions and expulsions. (CEIS Memo – Question 11, 34 CFR §300.646)
76 What must States consider in the collection and examination of disciplinary data? Incidence – number of times children with disabilities ages 3-21 were subject to disciplinary actions. Duration – length of suspensions or expulsions. Type of disciplinary action – at a minimum, data on both in-school and out- of-school suspensions and expulsions (CEIS Memo – Question 15)
Uses of CEIS Funds Activities Professional development Providing educational and behavioral evaluations, services, and supports, including scientifically-based literacy instruction Providing educational and behavioral evaluations, services, and supports including scientifically based literacy instruction 77
Coordination with ESEA - Title I Funds made available to carry out this section may be used to carry out coordinated, EIS aligned with activities funded by, and carried out under the ESEA if those funds are used to supplement, and not supplant, funds made available under the ESEA for the activities and services assisted under this section 78
Private Schools 34 CFR §§300.130-300.144 LEA where the private schools are located is responsible for child find and provision of services Amount to be expended by the LEA for the provision of those services shall be equal to a proportionate amount of Federal funds made available under Part B. LEA is responsible for maintaining a count LEA is responsible for maintaining a count of eligible students parentally placed in private schools to be used in the calculation of proportionate share.
81 Private School Students No individual right to special education and related services Equitable participation based on a process that includes timely and meaningful consultation with representatives of private schools/parents regarding plan for using the proportionate share. Proportionate share of Part B funds must be spent on this population (Chart of Accounts program/function code 51510) and cannot be transferred to other purposes. Proportionate share of Part B funds must be spent on this population (Chart of Accounts program/function code 51510) and cannot be transferred to other purposes. Program offered to children designated to receive services is through a services plan - not an individualized education program (IEP)
82 Consultation The LEA must consult with representatives of private schools/parents regarding its plan for the following: Child find Determining the proportionate share of IDEA funds available Determining the consultation process to be used How, where, and by whom services will be provided Disagreement process for LEA LEA maintains documentation of consultation
Preschool private school that meets the definition of elementary school in 34 CFR §300.13 Children aged 3-5 are considered to be parentally-placed private school children with disabilities enrolled by their parents in private, including religious, elementary schools, if they are enrolled in a private school that meets the definition of elementary school in 34 CFR §300.13 34 CFR §300.133(a)(2)(ii) 83
Elementary School Elementary school means a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public elementary charter school, that provides elementary education, as determined under State law. 34 CRF §300.13
Expenditures 85 Number of eligible children with disabilities In public schools In private schools 300 + 20 320 Federal Part B Flow- Through $$ LEA receives $152,500 320 $476.57 a student x 20 students $9,531.25 for proportionate share
Expenditures/ Proportionate Share Funds must be spent and may not be transferred to another purpose Funds must be spent and may not be transferred to another purpose State and local funds may supplement but not supplant federal funds for this population 34 CFR §300.133(d) Cost of child find may not be considered in proportionate share obligation 34 CFR §300.131(d) 86
Federal Grants Management and Compliance Considerations Timely Liquidation Budget Transfers Inventory Management Time and Effort
Federal Programs Compliance Common federal grants management rules apply to all federal education funds Specific program (e.g. IDEA) rules apply District and state financial procedures apply Federal and state monitoring may review compliance with all of the above Special attention paid to procedures used when ARRA funds are involved
U.S. Dept. of Ed Requirements EDGAR – Education Department General Administrative Regulations Gives authority to OMB circulars General Education Provisions Act - GEPA Office of Management and Budget (OMB) OMB Circular A-133 – Single Audit Compliance Supplement Part 4 OMB Circular A-87
WVDE Requirements http://wvde.state.wv.us/finance/ Policy 8200 – Purchasing Capital Assets Manual (inventory) Chart of Accounts (budget codes)
Section 618 Determinations Fiscal management a monitoring focus of OSEP for states and districts Timely and accurate submission of data and LEA application Timely liquidation Time and effort documentation Audit findings
Project Financial Reports Select county Select project 02 – state special education 43 – IDEA funds Select fiscal year May select specific months http://wveis.k12.wv.us/surveys/genledger_projects_years.cfm?action=go
Timely Liquidation Availability of IDEA Funds FY 09 Obligation period July 1, 2008 – September 30, 2010 Ending liquidation date December 31, 2010December 31, 2010 FY 10 Obligation period July 1, 2009 – September 30, 2011 Ending liquidation date December 31, 2011 FY 11 Obligation period July 1, 2010 – September 30, 2012 Ending liquidation date December 31, 2012
Timely Liquidation Cash Management LEAs should draw down cash from grant awards to pay expenses only as they are incurred. Interest earned on federal cash draws held in excess of three days require the remission to the SEA of interest earned on that excess. Exhaust FY 10 funding before using FY 11 funding. Check balances of FY 09 funding obligation date is September 30, 2010 Check balances of FY 09 funding – Ending obligation date is September 30, 2010 and ending liquidation date is December 31, 2010.
Budget Transfers When are budget transfers required? What is the process? WVDE forms 11-20-12 and 11-20-13 Who do you contact? When are online plan revisions required? OSP Budget Revisions Memo – February 2010 OSP Budget Revisions Memo – February 2010
Inventory Management-EDGAR §80.32(c)-(e) Equipment Federal definition of Equipment (OMB Circular A-122) Tangible personal property Useful life of more than one year Acquisition cost of $5,000 or more For purposes of maintaining IDEA Inventory As above, except Useful life of more than one year, regardless of acquisition cost Example: PDAs, Computers, Cell phones, Copiers, Projectors, Digital Cameras, Etc. See also WVDE Capital Assets Manual
Inventory Management-Equipment Must have adequate controls in place to account for: Location of equipment Custody of equipment Security of equipment LEA should have procedures in place and documentation to track and account for the location and assignment of equipment at all times A tracking system must be implemented for requesting and signing out equipment to be used off-site
Inventory Management-Equipment Must protect against unauthorized use May use for other projects as long as use is incidental and does not interfere with authorized use When property is no longer needed, must follow disposition rules Transfer to another federal program Over $5,000 – Keep or sell, but must pay a share based on the percentage of federal ED participation at initial acquisition Under $5,000 – May keep, sell, or dispose of it with no obligation to ED When property is lost, damaged or stolen Follow procedures in the WVDE Procedures Manual Capital Asset System (Send copy of documentation to SEA)
102 Common Audit Finding Personnel Largest expenditure category in special education budgets : Personnel Time and effort documentation Audit Standard: Must be able to document amount of time under each grant Policies/procedures to determine percentages of time devoted to individual Federal programs and awards Time and effort certifications
If federal funds are used for salaries time distribution records must be kept Must demonstrate that employees paid with federal funds actually worked on the specific federal program Type of documentation depends on the number of cost objectives the employee worked on These cost objectives must be connected to the employees salary source
What is a cost objective? A specific grant award, or other category of costs, that requires the grantee to track specific cost information If an employee works on a single cost objective: Semi-Annual Certification Signed by employee and supervisor every six months Example: I hereby certify that for the period January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2010 one-hundred percent (100%) of my time and effort was spent on IDEA, Part B Administration.
If an employee works on multiple cost objectives then a Personnel Activity Report (PAR) must be maintained: After-the-fact-record Completed at least monthly Must include total activity for which the employee is compensated Signed and dated by employee (supervisor may also sign)
Quarterly comparisons of actual costs to budgeted distributions If a variance of 10% or greater exists Adjust expenditures to reflect costs of the actual time reported. In order to minimize future differences, adjust estimated distributions for future payrolls to activity performed in the previous quarter. This should help minimize the difference in actual wages paid to time recorded. If difference is less than 10%, may make adjustment annually
Report On The ARRA Grant Funds Report FTE jobs funded with ARRA IDEA funds Report project status (activities) Report quarterly on the expenditure of ARRA IDEA funds Enter in Five Year Online Strategic Plan – ARRA Reporting by end of each quarter Report vendors receiving payments $25,000 and over, including name, product description
Contacts Janice Hay firstname.lastname@example.org (304) 558-2686 Coordinator Office of Internal Operations Sandra McQuain (304) 558-2696 email@example.com Assistant Director Office of Special Programs
Vickie Mohnacky Coordinator Office of Special Programs Gifted Education Medicaid
Medicaid and Education Timeline U.S. Legislation 1988 IDEA WV Code 18-2-5b Medicaid State Plan Amended 2000 1988 2000 1990 Only Students with IEPs Only Therapies Added IEPs, Care Coor, Sp. Trans. Personal Aides
Each School District Therapy Provider # 00XXXXXXXX Audiology # OT # PT # SLP # RN # Psychology # Each School District – 2 nd # Cost-Based Provider # 15XXXXXXXX - New Initial/Triennial IEP Annual IEP Personal Care (full) Personal Care (part) Sp. Trans. Vehicle Sp. Trans. Aide Care Coordination
Source Data Element Calculation WVEIS Certified List of Personnel WVEIS FY2001 WVDE Office of School Finance WVEIS FY 2001 2000-2001 Average Base Salary FY 2001 Fringe Benefit Rate (Fringe Costs/ Payroll Costs) FY 2001 Operating Rate (Operating Costs/Payroll Costs) 2000-2001 Unrestricted Indirect Cost Rate Total Payroll Cost FTE Payroll Costs Plus Operating Costs Fully Loaded Costs/FTE Ave. Base Salary X Fringe FTE Payroll X Operating% Rate Payroll Costs & X ICR Operating Costs - IDEA funding
Business Models Medicaid - Fee for Service IDEA - Entitlement +$25 $100 -$25 $0 -$25 +$25
RESA County Molina and Bureau of Medical Srvcs BMS Remittance Advice Denial/pending Electronic claim Billing Form or WVEIS Entry Supporting Documentation: IEP Progress Note Attendance Record Payment – Direct Deposited
Documentation Student Related Documentation Treatment goals – i.e. IEP goals and objectives Comments/notes/outcome re: student progress and prognosis progress The IEP form The Care Coordination form Personal Care form Billing Documentation Maintain documentation in the students individual cumulative file in a centralized location.
Freedom of Choice Freedom to choose services from providers outside the school system Medicaid cannot cover duplicate services Establish in writing that the School System is not to seek reimbursement for services that are provided by an outside agency.
Allen Sexton Coordinator Office of Special Programs Professional Development Program Improvement Phyllis Veith Assistant Director Office of Special Programs Valerie Wilson Coordinator Office of Special Programs Ellen Oderman Coordinator Office of Special Programs MonitoringProfessional Development GSEG Professional Development Instructional Technology Professional Development
Using the Quick Reference Guide Preview practice questions Form small groups of 4 to 8 Use the links provided and experience to answer as many of the questions as time permits. Be sure to note where in the QRG the answers can be found. Share answers with the large group
Practice Questions 1. When a student moves into a district from out of state, what timelines are followed for initiating services? 2. What are the required data sources for verifying compliance Indicator 1.10? 3. What is the process for ensuring your district has agency participation at the age of transition? And, what agency resources are available in your area? 4. What was my districts performance on the Annual Performance Targets for Indicator 5 in 2008-2009? And, did my district improve its performance on Indicator 5 in 2009-2010, based on the publicly reported educational environments data for my district?