Consequences of Rejecting of Federal Funding October 25, 2006 Presented by: Dr. Paul Johnson Dr. Robert Howell Glenn Gustafson.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
INTENT OF FUNDS. INTENT OF TITLE I A Title I Director salary and benefits Title I Administrative Assistant/Secretary salary and benefits Teachers Educational.
Advertisements

Title I & Title III Annual Parent Meeting
Cyber Schools in Idaho Challenges of serving diverse learners in cyber schools Marybeth Flachbart Idaho.
No Child Left Behind Act © No Child Left Behind Act ©Kristina Krampe, 2005 EDS 513: Legal Issues in Special Education.
Understanding No Child Left Behind (NCLB) NCLB Committee of Practitioners August, 2007.
2011 Bridge to Excellence Master Plan Annual Update Review Division of Student, Family, and School Support Office of Finance Division of Academic Reform.
Exercising Greater Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant Funds Nora Hancock, EdD Associate Commissioner Grants and Federal Fiscal Compliance Association.
REAP Districts Have Flexibility NCLB Strategist Training Spring 2006.
Rural Education Achievement Program(REAP) and Rural and Low-Income Schools Grant(RLIS)
Title III National Professional Development (NPD) Program Grantee Performance Reporting: A Webinar for FY2011 and FY2012 Grantees February 28, 2013 Prepared.
UNDERSTANDING SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING How to account for IDEIA funds.
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
BO MERRITT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS Federal Grants Planning Titles I, II, & III.
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
Los Angeles County Office of Education Division for School Improvement School Site Council (SSC) Training September 9 th 2008 Anna Carrasco From presentation.
Oregon Reading First Orientation Holiday Inn Portland Airport November 12, 2002 Oregon Department of Education.
RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ESE and Charter Schools.
ACADEMIC SERVICES DIVISION. ACADEMIC SERVICES In other words, Chapters 4, 5, and 6 of your charter.
CHARTER SCHOOLS & THE SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT CARD (SARC) Charter Operations Leader Meeting
Office of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students (OELA) Presented by:Margarita.
Mathematics and Science Education U.S. Department of Education.
RESPRO Area 1C Area 1C RESPRO Meeting RESPRO Area 1C November 24, 2009.
NCLB Federal Funding Planning Meeting Private Non Profit Schools LEA Date.
Federal Program Funding to Improve Student Outcomes Consolidated Application Spring Report District Learner Advisory Commitee (DAC) Meeting June.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
1 No Child Left Behind for Indian Groups 2004 Eva M. Kubinski Comprehensive Center – Region VI January 29, 2004 Home/School Coordinators’ Conference UW-Stout.
MIS DATA CONFERENCE 2012 JULY 23, 2012 Mississippi Department of Education Office of Federal Programs.
FEDERAL PROGRAMS What a Parent Needs to Know Decatur County School System achieved accreditation by SACS during the school year.
Laws Governing ESL Programs in the US Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, color,
1 NCLB Title Program Monitoring NCLB Title Program Monitoring Regional Training SPRING 2006.
Federal Support for World-Class Schools Gwinnett County Public Schools 4/18/13.
Oct. 13, 2015 Flagstaff Oct. 14, 2015 Phoenix Oct. 15, 2015 Tucson Arizona Charter Schools Program: Getting Ready for the 2016 Grant Cycle 1.
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
Rowland Unified School District District Local Education Agency (LEA)Plan Update Principals Meeting November 16, 2015.
NCLB. Introduction Increased federal mandates and requirements on states Increased federal funding to states by almost 25% from the previous year Movement.
Oregon Department of Education Office of Curriculum, Instruction and Field Services Presenter:Bob Siewert, Associate Superintendent Presentation to the.
McKenzie Special School District No Child Left Behind Parent Advisory Committee Fall 2009.
Toll Middle School Title I Parent Meeting August 27, 2015.
The Every Student Succeeds Act Highlights of Key Changes for States, Districts, and Schools.
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): A Briefing for Alaska Lee Posey State-Federal Relations Division National Conference of State Legislatures.
ESSA Impact on Health & Physical Education. Inclusion in ESSA Well-rounded education definition – along with 17 other subjects…. – Title I – Title II.
The Day in the Life of OFPSI staff By: Dr. Shawnrell Blackwell Director of Federal Programs & School Improvement (OFPSI) Petersburg City Public Schools.
Agency Request Budget Biennium 1 State Board of Education December 11, 2014.
Title I Annual Meeting West Orange Elementary School Title I Program Overview for Schoolwide Program (SWP) Schools.
1 Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting Wilson Elementary School.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Federal Program Funding to Improve Student Outcomes
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
The Realities of School Reform
Consolidated Continuous Improvement Plan (CCIP)
Instructional Technology Plan Overview
Linden Elementary Title I Parent Night
KAESP 2012 Spring Retreat April 2, /15/2018.
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
ANNUAL TITLE Grants MEETING
Studio School Title I Annual Meeting Title I Program Overview for Schoolwide Program (SWP) Schools Federal and State Education Programs Branch.
Kindergarten – Middle School
NSTA Summer Congress July, 2002
The School Site Council
ANNUAL TITLE I MEETING NOBLE ACADEMY COLUMBUS.
LAUSD Consolidated Application Part II
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Consolidated Application Review
Federal Program Funding to Improve Student Outcomes
EDN Fall 2002.
Presentation transcript:

Consequences of Rejecting of Federal Funding October 25, 2006 Presented by: Dr. Paul Johnson Dr. Robert Howell Glenn Gustafson

D-11 Consolidated Grant  Mandated by CDE, submitted to the state electronically by the district upon Board review  Includes Title I, Title II, Title IID, Title III, Title IV, Title V and annually funds approximately $11 Million  Administered in D-11 by Office of Special Programs/Grants in the Division of Instruction (Dr. Paul Johnson)

D-11 Consolidated Grant  Title I – Disadvantaged Students-Reading and Math - $8.3 million  Title II – Class Size Reduction/teacher quality- $1.7Million  Title IID – Technology in Education - $85,200  Title III – English Language Learners - $148,000  Title III – English Language Set aside - $1,600  Title IV – Safe & Drug Free Schools - $152,000  Title V - Innovative Education Practices- $61,700

Consolidated Grant  Requirements from Federal and State: Single Assurance against discrimination Participation in CSAP and school improvement Nat’l Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Test Annual Financial Reports Single Audit Requirements Annual Program Evaluations

Consolidated Grant  Requirements we CANNOT Waive: Accreditation measures to close the achievement gap  Requires professional development, technical assistance and possible school closure School Accountability Report (SAR) CSAP Reporting (State Law) Individualized Learning Plans (ILP’s) for all students not proficient in Reading (CBLA)

Special Education - Title VIB  Developed for Local Education Agencies (LEA)  Administered in Special Education (Dr. Robert Howell)  FY Budget = $5.5 million

Special Education - VIB  Although a Board of Education may choose to refuse federal funds, it is doubtful that any significant requirements of the district to serve Special Education or 504 students could be legally eliminated.

Conclusions  District 11 is an increasingly urban school district that receives millions of dollars based on our student mix. (13,000 students on Free/Reduced Lunch)  Other districts rejecting federal funding are NOT!  Title I provides over $8.2 million to fund 115 FTE (Teachers & Support Staff) 150 FTE in Cons. Grant  These federal resources are essential in helping the district achieve its goals of increasing student achievement in accordance with the District’s Strategic Plan.

Conclusions  Title I is the major site-based funding source for one-third of our schools, including 3 charter schools (22 total school sites)  Rejection of Federal funding would NOT reduce reporting & compliance significantly.  Approx. 1/3 rd of the mandate would shift to the accreditation process, without additional funding.