1 Monitoring Review: What Every New Coordinator Should Know Victoria Rankin and Greta Colombi, NDTAC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Procedures for ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Effective July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2014 Monitoring For Results.
Advertisements

NCLB Consolidated Monitoring Integrated Approach to Title III Monitoring.
PACTS Online Tools Adriana Golumbeanu, Loretta Brown and Randall Richardson Office of Federal Programs.
1 Workshop Part I: Federal Monitoring Basics Victoria Rankin, Greta Colombi, and Alexandra Woods NDTAC.
Fiscal Monitoring Fiscal Monitoring. Agenda I. Fiscal Monitoring I. Fiscal Monitoring II. Follow-up II. Follow-up III. Correction Action Plan III. Correction.
ESEA Program Review Russ Sweet Preparing for ESEA Program Reviews of Titles I-A, II-A, VI-B (REAP), and X Summer 2014.
OVERVIEW OF ClASS METHODS and ACTIVITIES. Session Objectives By the end of the session, participants will be able to: Describe ClASS team composition.
1 Gold ND Community Call October 7, Agenda “That Time of Year”: Data Team Updates A Closer Look: Subgrantee Monitoring Review of Recent TA Requests.
Strategies for Developing Efficient and Effective Annual Count Processes Stephanie Lampron, DeAngela Milligan, and Marcia Calloway.
Workshop Part II: Subgrantee Monitoring Basics Victoria Rankin, Greta Colombi, and Alexandra Woods NDTAC.
Special Education Accountability Reviews Let’s put the pieces together March 25, 2015.
Introduction & Background Laurene Christensen National Center on Educational Outcomes National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)
Preparing for Title IIA Monitoring Review (FY14) February 24, 2015 Office of Educator Effectiveness Aviva Baff Isadora Choute Cynthia Mompoint Deborah.
Financial and Programmatic Monitoring ESEA/Act 807 ACSIP Arkansas Department of Education Division of Academic Accountability.
UNDERSTANDING, PLANNING AND PREPARING FOR THE SCHOOL-WIDE EVALUATION TOOL (SET)
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013 Monitoring and Program Effectiveness.
Introduction to Proposal Writing Proposal Development Team Office of Research & Sponsored Projects (ORSP) September 30, 2009.
Subrecipient Monitoring FY15 of Education Oklahoma State Department of Education Office of Federal Programs Federal Programs Office of Titles I, II, III,
Monitoring LEA McKinney-Vento Programs State Coordinators Meeting February 2009 Arlington, Virginia.
Erica Cummings Grant Coordinator 1.  The New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) is responsible for:  Monitoring.
Meeting the Educational Needs of Diverse Learners DeAngela Milligan and Sarah Bardack.
Innovative Approaches to Offsite Monitoring and TA Provision Greta Colombi, NDTAC.
OSEP National Early Childhood Conference December 2007.
1 Gold ND Community Call February 3, Agenda “That Time of Year”: CSPR Data Submission Peer-to-Peer Discussion: Questions from Community Members.
1 ND Topical Call Series: NDTAC Resources to Meet Technical Assistance Needs (Call 3) 22 September 2015 – Katie Deal.
Successful Program Implementation: Meeting Compliance Statutes Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration and Accountability Title.
ND Topical Call Subgrantee Monitoring Tools: Meeting the Civil Rights Obligations to Students (Call 1) January 14, 2015.
VIRTUAL monitoring What is Virtual Monitoring EXAMPLES:  STAR SYSTEM – Vehicles Cell Phones – I phones or Smart Phones used as a security system detector.
The Power of Monitoring: Building Strengths While Ensuring Compliance Greta Colombi and Simon Gonsoulin, NDTAC.
Making the Most of Your Data: Strategies for Evaluating Your Program Greta Colombi, NDTAC; and John McLaughlin, ED.
A Catalyst for Program Improvement Federal Monitoring: Added Value.
Learning Objectives Conducting an On-Site Monitoring Review FPO calls the Grantee: “As you know, we’re a little more than nine months into your 24 month.
1 NCLB Title Program Monitoring NCLB Title Program Monitoring Regional Training SPRING 2006.
Continuous Improvement and Focused Monitoring System US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Overview of the OSEP Continuous Improvement.
TITLE I, PART D STATE PLANS John McLaughlin Federal Coordinator for the Title I, Part D Program NDTAC Conference May
Overview of the Counting Process DeAngela Milligan.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
Coordinated Review Effort (CRE) School Year Karen Franklin, SNS Distance Learning October 1, 2015.
BPHC Infectious Disease Bureau, Education & Outreach Site Visit.
Procedures for ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Effective July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2014 Monitoring For Results Reviewed & Revised with COP April 2011.
1 Coordinated Program Review: School Staff Overview Sutton Public Schools Frequently Asked Questions: Faculty Information
Presented by: Jan Stanley, State Title I Director Office of Assessment and Accountability June 10, 2008 Monitoring For Results.
Data Report July Collect and analyze RtI data Determine effectiveness of RtI in South Dakota in Guide.
ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Office of Federal Programs December 10, 2013.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
1 ND Topical Call Series: NDTAC Resources to Meet Technical Assistance Needs (Call 2) 26 August 2015 – Katie Deal.
1 New Coordinator Orientation Lauren Amos, Katie Deal, and Liann Seiter.
1 ND Community Call Teal Community 27 October 2015.
1 Introductions Choose a photo from the table that appeals to you or represents you in some way. Write the answers to the following questions on a 3x5.
Title I, Part A Preparing for Federal Program Monitoring Lynn Sodat Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration and Accountability.
Subrecipient Monitoring FY14 Oklahoma State Department of Education Federal Programs Office of Titles I, II, III, VI and X.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction English Learner Program Categorical Program Monitoring Bilingual.
1 ND Community Call Gold Community 22 October 2015.
Federal Program Monitoring (FPM) Chris McLaughlin Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration and Accountability Virginia Association.
1 Restructuring Webinar Dr. Zollie Stevenson, Jr., Ph.D. Director Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs Office of Elementary and Secondary.
Subgrantee Compliance February 27, 2013 Preparing TPPS Subgrantees for Monitoring Shelby County Grants Office presents:
March 23, SPECIAL EDUCATION ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS.
1 Effectively Addressing Administrative Challenges of Implementing Title I, Part D Katie Deal, Rob Mayo, Liann Seiter, and Jake Sokolsky.
February 25, Today’s Agenda  Introductions  USDOE School Improvement Information  Timelines and Feedback on submitted plans  Implementing plans.
1 Welcome! Choose a photo from the table that appeals to you or represents you in some way. Write the answers to the following questions on a 3×5 notecard.
Preparing for Title IIA Monitoring Review (FY15) November 9, 2015 Deborah Walker Meagan Steiner David LeBlanc.
ESEA Consolidated Pre-Monitoring Meeting
Navigating the Charter Renewal Process: Start to Finish
ESEA Consolidated Monitoring
Infectious Disease Bureau,
Navigating the Charter Renewal Process: Start to Finish
Preparing for Title IIA Monitoring Review (FY15)
Preparing for Federal Program Monitoring Title I, Part D, Subpart 1
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013
Presentation transcript:

1 Monitoring Review: What Every New Coordinator Should Know Victoria Rankin and Greta Colombi, NDTAC

2 Overview Introduction to Monitoring Reviews –What is monitoring review? Which programs are monitored? Why is monitoring beneficial? Monitoring Review Processes –Federal, subgrantee, program/facility Conducting Monitoring Reviews –Onsite, off-site Challenges to Subgrantee Monitoring Reviews Resources

3 Introduction: What is Monitoring Review? Program monitoring involves the regular and systematic examination of program implementation and administration. Monitoring of Title I, Part D (Part D)-funded programs is conducted to ensure compliance with applicable State and Federal laws.

4 Introduction: Which Programs Are Monitored? Monitoring reviews occur at three levels: The U.S. Department of Education (ED) monitors State education agencies (SEAs) that receive funds (Federal monitoring). SEAs monitor their State agency (SA) and local educational agency (LEA) subgrantees (subgrantee monitoring). SA and LEA subgrantees monitor the facilities and programs to which they allocate funds (facility monitoring).

5 Introduction: Why Is Monitoring Beneficial? Allows administrators at all levels to ensure that students receive a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education. Provides a mechanism for collecting information about State and local needs to enable administrators to target assistance and other resources more effectively.

6 Monitoring Review Processes: Federal Monitoring Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs Office (SASA) within ED monitors SEA administration of the Title I, Part D, program. SASA examines the State’s Part D program against a set of consistent, program-specific criteria or "indicators."

7 Federal Indicator Areas Three areas of focus: –Standards, assessment, and accountability –Instructional support –Fiduciary Frequency of review –Typically, every 2 ˗ 3 years

8 What Is Involved? Each Federal monitoring review involves: A comprehensive desk review of documents the SEA/coordinator is asked to submit. Interviews with the SEA, all SA subgrantees, and a selection of LEA subgrantees. –Interviews occur remotely via video conference or in- person during an onsite review that occurs simultaneously with the Title I, Part A, onsite review.

9 Pre-SASA Contact Preparation Tips Things to do before you receive SASA’s call: Become familiar with each monitoring indicator. Check when your State was last reviewed (available at html). html Identify your program’s team at each level (SEA, SA, and LEA, if there is a Subpart 2 program). Locate the materials that SASA will request at least 2 months before your review.

10 Tips To Facilitate SASA’s Review Some factors to remember: Logistics—Who will be the contacts? Where and when will they meet? How and when will they communicate? Documentation—Organize by indicators and refer to SASA monitoring indicators for lists of documents by indicator that you will need to prepare. Interviews—Review the questions included in the SASA monitoring guide and prepare yourself and appropriate staff to answer all questions that are outlined.

11 Federal Monitoring Results Postreview, SASA prepares a report that includes one or more of the following three status assessments for each indicator: Met Requirements—State has fulfilled all requirements for this indicator, and no action is required. Recommendation—SASA recommends a certain action to improve programming, but not required. Finding—State is not fulfilling a requirement of the Title I, Part D, law and must take action to rectify the problem.

12 What Comes Next? States usually receive the SASA monitoring report a few months postreview. For findings, the State must: –Project a timeline for SASA regarding the completion of corrective actions. –Describe how corrective actions will be taken within 1 year.

13 Postreview Tips If, after 2 months, you have not received your report, follow up with your State Title I director. DO NOT contact the Federal program manager or Title I, Part D, monitor about the review before receiving your report unless he or she asks followup questions. Use information from your exit conference and monitoring report in your response to any findings and required actions.

14 Federal Monitoring: Your Responsibilities Review the indicators and documentation that Federal monitors typically require to assess SEA program compliance. Communicate with ED. Review past monitoring reports for your State. Prepare your SAs and LEAs for Federal monitoring reviews and involve them in planning.

15 Questions About Federal Monitoring? ?

16 Monitoring Review Processes: Subgrantee Monitoring Review Per the Federal statute and regulations, SEAs— represented by State coordinators are required to: –Monitor SA and LEA subgrantees’ implementation of Title I, Part D (Part D)-funded programs. –Implement a monitoring process that involves conducting reviews on a set schedule and developing related monitoring protocols and tools. In turn, SAs and LEAs are responsible for monitoring the facilities and programs to which they allocate funds.

17 Conducting Subgrantee Monitoring Reviews Often done through: –Offsite review  Review documents (e.g., desktop review)  Administer self-assessment –Onsite review  Review documents  Interview SAs, LEAs (if SEA administers Subpart 2), and facilities  Conduct onsite reviews at facilities (e.g., classroom observations)

18 Conducting Offsite Monitoring Two primary methods: –Desktop review  SEA requests information/data, subgrantees submit, and SEA determines compliance. –Self-assessment  Subgrantees complete and inform SEAs of compliance.

19 Steps Within the Offsite Monitoring Process 1.Set your offsite monitoring schedule. 2.Develop your tools/protocols. 3.Gather information/data. 4.Review information/data. 5.Respond to information/data provided.

20 1. Set Offsite Monitoring Schedule In light of the onsite monitoring schedule, determine how often you need to conduct offsite monitoring. Consider the method(s) you plan on using and when.

21 2. Develop Tools/Protocols Tools you will use: –Forms –Checklists Vehicles you will use: – –Online system –Web-based survey –State system –Video/phone conference –Other

22 Know the requirements you want to review. Consider what else you may want to know: –Do you have questions based on your review of their data and onsite monitoring results? –Are there broader issues that you want to investigate? 3. Gather Information/Data

23 4. Review Information/Data Check the information/data: – Confirm receipt – Confirm completeness – Confirm quality Analyze the information/data: –Identify problematic patterns –Identify good examples that can be shared

24 5. Respond to Submitted Information/Data Response to identified findings: −SEA writes official response/corrective action plan. −Subgrantee submits plan to address areas of noncompliance. Response to findings and other identified issues: −Develop a tiered technical assistance (TA) approach based on analyses of results:  Tier 1: TA for all  Tier 2: TA for some  Tier 3: TA for a few

25 Conducting Onsite Monitoring Primary activities: –Document review  SEA reviews subgrantee information/data and SEA determines compliance. –Interviews  SEAs meet with subgrantees and discuss compliance. –Site Visits  Visit subgrantee facility to confirm what the subgrantees have shared.

26 Onsite Monitoring– State Agencies Easier because usually have just a couple of SAs and they tend to be physically close to SEAs. Ideally coordinate with other SEA offices (e.g., special education)

27 Onsite Monitoring– LEAs SEAs tend to coordinate onsite reviews with other federal programs: “Consolidated Reviews”. Set monitoring cycle over a few years, where SEAs review a selection of LEAs and a couple of facilities among those selected LEAs. The frequency of onsite monitoring reviews depends on the size of the state, number of funded LEAs, and SEA resources.

28 Onsite monitoring reviews tend to be short and infrequent. Staff turnover tends to be high. Title I, Part D, requirements can be challenging to understand. Offsite monitoring is often necessary, but can be challenging without effective communication and tools that help to –Coordinate the receipt of appropriate materials –Coordinate between your team of reviewers –Address issues as they arise Subgrantee Monitoring Challenges

29 Subgrantee Monitoring: Your Responsibilities Create subgrantee monitoring protocols and guidelines. Establish consistent monitoring “cycles” or schedules. Require corrective actions for subgrantees not in compliance. Ensure that LEAs and SAs are monitoring every facility with which they have contracted for services.

30 Questions About Subgrantee Monitoring? ?

31 Resources Guide to Meeting Compliance Requirements for the Title I, Part D, Program, available on the NDTAC Web site. ND Communities’ Monitoring and Compliance topic page for examples of subgrantee monitoring forms and protocols from many States. Federal Monitoring Forms—available under “Monitoring Indicators” on the ED Web site ( oring/index.html). oring/index.html Your NDTAC State Liaison!