1 Title I Comparability Requirement Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Numbers Treasure Hunt Following each question, click on the answer. If correct, the next page will load with a graphic first – these can be used to check.
Advertisements

Presented by Leigh M. Manasevit, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Fall Forum 2012 Maintenance of Effort, Comparability.
1
© 2008 Pearson Addison Wesley. All rights reserved Chapter Seven Costs.
Copyright © 2003 Pearson Education, Inc. Slide 1 Computer Systems Organization & Architecture Chapters 8-12 John D. Carpinelli.
Chapter 1 The Study of Body Function Image PowerPoint
Copyright © 2011, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 6 Author: Julia Richards and R. Scott Hawley.
Author: Julia Richards and R. Scott Hawley
1 Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Appendix 01.
1 Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 3 CPUs.
NCLB Title I Comparability Paul Williams Principal Consultant ISBE September 2011.
Properties Use, share, or modify this drill on mathematic properties. There is too much material for a single class, so you’ll have to select for your.
UNITED NATIONS Shipment Details Report – January 2006.
RXQ Customer Enrollment Using a Registration Agent (RA) Process Flow Diagram (Move-In) Customer Supplier Customer authorizes Enrollment ( )
1 RA I Sub-Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Casablanca, Morocco, 20 – 22 December 2005 Status of observing programmes in RA I.
Title Subtitle.
Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds Key Issues for Decision-makers U.S. Department of Education 1.
Exit a Customer Chapter 8. Exit a Customer 8-2 Objectives Perform exit summary process consisting of the following steps: Review service records Close.
Create an Application Title 1Y - Youth Chapter 5.
Create an Application Title 1D - Dislocated Worker Chapter 9.
Create an Application Title 1A - Adult Chapter 3.
Process a Customer Chapter 2. Process a Customer 2-2 Objectives Understand what defines a Customer Learn how to check for an existing Customer Learn how.
Custom Statutory Programs Chapter 3. Customary Statutory Programs and Titles 3-2 Objectives Add Local Statutory Programs Create Customer Application For.
Custom Services and Training Provider Details Chapter 4.
New Title I/NCLB Directors Workshop NCLB Winter Conference January 16, 2007 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development Margaret MacKinnon, Title.
Targeted Assistance & Schoolwide Programs NCLB Technical Assistance Audio April 18, :30 PM April 19, :30 AM Alaska Department of Education.
FACTORING ax2 + bx + c Think “unfoil” Work down, Show all steps.
1 Click here to End Presentation Software: Installation and Updates Internet Download CD release NACIS Updates.
Webinar: June 6, :00am – 11:30am EDT The Community Eligibility Option.
REVIEW: Arthropod ID. 1. Name the subphylum. 2. Name the subphylum. 3. Name the order.
Turing Machines.
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
EU market situation for eggs and poultry Management Committee 20 October 2011.
Bright Futures Guidelines Priorities and Screening Tables
2 |SharePoint Saturday New York City
Exarte Bezoek aan de Mediacampus Bachelor in de grafische en digitale media April 2014.
VOORBLAD.
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
1 RA III - Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25 – 27 October 2006 Status of observing programmes in RA.
Factor P 16 8(8-5ab) 4(d² + 4) 3rs(2r – s) 15cd(1 + 2cd) 8(4a² + 3b²)
Basel-ICU-Journal Challenge18/20/ Basel-ICU-Journal Challenge8/20/2014.
1..
CONTROL VISION Set-up. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 5 Step 4.
© 2012 National Heart Foundation of Australia. Slide 2.
Adding Up In Chunks.
District Advisory Council (DAC) 1 October 22, 2012 Westlawn Elementary School.
LO: Count up to 100 objects by grouping them and counting in 5s 10s and 2s. Mrs Criddle: Westfield Middle School.
Understanding Generalist Practice, 5e, Kirst-Ashman/Hull
1 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt Synthetic.
Note to the teacher: Was 28. A. to B. you C. said D. on Note to the teacher: Make this slide correct answer be C and sound to be “said”. to said you on.
Model and Relationships 6 M 1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
25 seconds left…...
Subtraction: Adding UP
Analyzing Genes and Genomes
©Brooks/Cole, 2001 Chapter 12 Derived Types-- Enumerated, Structure and Union.
Essential Cell Biology
Intracellular Compartments and Transport
PSSA Preparation.
Essential Cell Biology
Immunobiology: The Immune System in Health & Disease Sixth Edition
Energy Generation in Mitochondria and Chlorplasts
Instructions for School Year 1  Please listen and follow directions closely. Errors in reporting could result in a school not receiving any.
Murach’s OS/390 and z/OS JCLChapter 16, Slide 1 © 2002, Mike Murach & Associates, Inc.
Annual Register Verification Training Presented By: OFFICE OF AUDITOR GENERAL New York City Department of Education.

Maintenance of Effort, Comparability, and Supplement/Supplant PAFPC April 2011.
Demonstrating Comparability School Year October 2014October 2014.
Presentation transcript:

1 Title I Comparability Requirement Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

2 An LEA may receive Title I, Part A funds only if it 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. If all schools in a grade span within the LEA are Title I schools, all schools must be “substantially comparable.” Definition ESEA Section 1120A(c)

3 LEAs must determine comparability annually.  DPI is only required to collect comparability data at least once every two years. Comparability is completed in the fall because LEAs need to review current-year resources and make adjustments for the current year as necessary. Timing

Required LEAs 4 Comparability is determined on a grade span-by-grade span basis. If an LEA has at least one non-Title I school and at least one Title I school within a grade span, the LEA must demonstrate comparability for that grade span. If an LEA has more than one Title I school at the same grade span (even without the presence of a non-Title I school), the LEA must demonstrate comparability for that grade span.

Grade Spans 5 Elementary  PK – 5  K – 8 Middle  6 – 8  6 – 9 High  9 – 12  9 – 10  11 – 12

Exemptions 6 LEAs are exempt if there is only one school per grade span (nothing to compare).  Example: Phelps School District has two schools, a 4K – 8 and 9 – 12. Phelps School District is exempt from completing the comparability report. Schools are exempt if the a school has fewer than 100 students.

Required LEAs Q and A 7 A district consists of One elementary school (Title I Schoolwide) One middle school (Title I Targeted Assistance) One high school (Non-Title I) Is this district required to complete the Comparability Report?

Required LEAs Q and A 8 No, this district is exempt because there is only one school per grade span.

Required LEAs Q and A 9 A district consists of One elementary school (Title I Schoolwide) One middle school (Title I Schoolwide) One high school (Title I Schoolwide) Is this district required to complete the Comparability Report?

Required LEAs Q and A 10 No, this district is exempt because there is only one school per grade span.

Required LEAs Q and A 11 A district has Three elementary schools (all Title I Schoolwide) One middle school (Title I Targeted Assistance) One high school (Non-Title I) Is this district required to complete the Comparability Report?

Required LEAs Q and A 12 Yes, the district is required to complete the comparability report to demonstrate comparability among the elementary schools only. The district is not required to complete the comparability report for the middle school because there is no other school in that grade span to compare it to.

Required LEAs Q and A 13 A district has four schools: Two elementary schools: PK – 2 and 3 – 5 One middle school: 6 – 8, and a One high school: 9 – 12. The two elementary schools receive Title I funds. Is this district required to complete the Comparability Report?

Required LEAs Q and A 14 No, because the grade spans do not overlap. BUT, if the district had two PK – 2 schools and two 3-5 schools that received Title I funds, then the district would be required to complete comparability for each grade span.

Required LEAs Q and A 15 A district has four schools: One elementary school: PK – 5 (TI Schoolwide) One middle school: 6 – 8 (TI Schoolwide) One high school: 9 – 12 (TI TAS) One alternative high school: 9 – 12 (Non-Title I) Is this district required to complete the Comparability Report for the high school?

Required LEAs Q and A 16 Only if the district entered an enrollment greater than 100 students for the alternative high school in the Title I application. This district would be exempt from the comparability report if the alternative high school has less than 100 students.

Web-based Comparability Report 17 Log in into the LEA’s ESEA Application.  Same user credentials as the application Submit the Title I application before completing the comparability report. If an LEA is exempt from comparability, the link will state “N/A Exempt.” No action is required. Click the comparability report’s “Enter Data” link on the ESEA Main Menu to complete the report.

Screenshot: Exempt LEA 18 Screenshots are hypothetical

Screenshot: Exempt LEA 19 Screenshots are hypothetical

Screenshot: Required LEA 20 Screenshots are hypothetical

Determining Comparability 21 LEAs should use current-year data. LEAs should not include federal resources in the calculations. LEAs may exclude state/local funds expended for:  Language instruction for LEP students;  Excess costs of providing services to students with disabilities;  Staff salary differentials for years of employment; and  Supplemental programs that meet the intent and purpose of Title I (for example, SAGE).

Determining Comparability 22 Screenshots are hypothetical LEAs need to be comparable in ONE option only.

Definition of Instructional Staff 23 Teachers and other personnel assigned to schools who provide direct instructional services.  Music, art, and physical education teachers; guidance counselors, speech therapists, and librarians Other personnel who provide services that support instruction.  School social workers and psychologists The LEA must be consistent with the categories of staff included for its schools. Section B- 5, US Department of Education, Non-Regulatory Guidance, Title I Fiscal Issues, February 2008

Instructional Staff Q and A 24 Should LEAs include teachers’ aides in the calculations for instructional staff salaries or instructional staff?

Instructional Staff Q and A 25 It depends on the function of the position. If the person is providing direct instructional support to students, then yes. This person is considered a paraprofessional and must be included in the calculation. If the person is providing other support services such as lunch/recess duty, taking attendance, making copies, and decorating bulletin boards, then no. This person shall not be used in the calculations for comparability.

Instructional Staff Q and A 26 How should LEAs count an instructional staff person that is shared between two or more schools, but not across all schools within the LEA?

Instructional Staff Q and A 27 LEAs should determine the FTE/salary for the staff person and include each school’s share in the comparability calculation.

Instructional Staff Q and A 28 How should LEAs count an instructional staff person that supports all the schools equally across the entire district (i.e. one art teacher for the entire district)?

Instructional Staff Q and A 29 LEAs could either divide the staff person’s time/salary equally for each school’s comparability calculation or the LEA could exclude the staff person from the comparability calculations for all of the schools. Either way the LEA must be consistent across all schools.

Definition of Instructional Materials 30 Instructional materials and supplies include:  General supplies for instruction;  Instructional media;  Textbooks and workbooks;  Computers, software and other technology; and  Library books and media center learning materials.

Determining Comparability 31 Screenshots are hypothetical

Determining Comparability 32 Screenshots are hypothetical

Determining Comparability 33

Determining Comparability Q and A 34 A district is required to demonstrate comparability between their three elementary schools (all of which are Title I receiving). The district tried all three comparability options in the application, but they did not meet comparability. What should the district do?

Determining Comparability Q and A 35 A district may recalculate their figures with the exclusion of state/local funds expended for: Language instruction for LEP students; Excess costs of providing services to students with disabilities; Staff salary differentials for years of employment; and Supplemental programs that meet the intent and purpose of Title I (for example, SAGE). If the district is still not comparable, the district will need to reallocate resources and adjust their general ledger to become comparable.

Determining Comparability 36 When in doubt contact your Title I Consultant 

Documentation 37 LEAs shall:  Develop procedures to be in compliance with the comparability requirement.  Maintain supporting documentation used for the web-based report. ESEA Section1120A(c)(3)

Audits 38 At the end of the fiscal year, auditors make sure that actual expenditures are comparable. If not, the consequence may result in returning funds to DPI/USDE.

39 Title I Comparability Requirements Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Questions???? Contact your Title I Consultant for assistance