a catalyst for program improvement federal monitoring: added value
TRANSCRIPT
Federal Monitoring:Added Value
Slide 2
Today’s Objectives
Summary of monitoring data 2003-09
Most frequent Findings and Recommendations
Value of monitoring process in conducting needs assessment and designing program evaluation for your state
Tips on preparing for next cycle
Slide 3
Monitoring Title X, Part C McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Act
of 2001
Slide 4
It’s the Law
“Each State educational agency shall ensure that each child of a homeless individual and each homeless youth have equal access to the same free, appropriate public education, including a public preschool education, as provided to other children and youth.”
(Title X, Part C, 721(1))
Slide 5
It’s the Law
McKinney-Vento addresses problems homeless students face in enrolling, attending and succeeding in school
McKinney-Vento ensures that homeless students have services needed to meet same state academic assessment and achievement standards
SEAs and LEAs are required to review/revise laws, regulations, practices or policies that may act as barriers
Slide 6
SASA Monitoring
Student Achievement and School Accountability (SASA) administers and monitors Title 1, Parts A & D; Title III; and the McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Program (EHCY)
Formalizes shared responsibility of SASA and SEAs to improve student achievement
Provides data to inform ED policy and national leadership activities
Slide 7
New for 2009-2010
Two-year cycle for ARRA and period pre-authorization; states with more findings in past cycles will receive onsite visits first
ARRA subgrantees are included in review
List of documents for advance review requested 2-3 months in advance of site visit
Slide 8
New for 2009-2010
Title 1 reservation now included in fiduciary indicators for Title 1 Part A review (Part A Fiduciary 3.3)
Reservation for state-level coordination activities is now included as an indicator (MV 3.2)
Slide 9
Summary of Findings and Recommendations
2003-2009
MV Indicator F R1.1 SEA collects and reports to ED assessment
data from LEAs on the educational needs of homeless children and youth
5 4
2.1 SEA implements procedures to address the identification, enrollment, and retention of homeless students
31 21
2.2 SEA provides, or provides for, technical assistance for LEAs to ensure appropriate implementation of the statute
8 14
Slide 10
Summary of Findings and Recommendations2003-2009, cont’d
MV Indicator F R
3.1 SEA ensures that LEA subgrant plans for services to eligible homeless students meet all requirements
16 6
3.2 SEA ensures LEA complies with providing comparable Title 1 Part A services to homeless students attending non-Title 1 schools
31 26
3.3 SEA has a system for ensuring the prompt resolution of disputes
12 10
3.4 SEA conducts monitoring of LEAs with and without subgrants sufficient to ensure compliance with MV program requirements
40 22
Slide 11
Indicator 1.1 SEA collects and reports assessment data from
LEAs Typical findings were for not reporting all
required data in CSPR in a timely manner, or for lacking complete data required
Some states report adequate data for sub-grantees but incomplete data for non-grantee LEAs
Other findings relative to headcount, i.e., under-reporting of homeless students (similar findings often in Indicator 1.2)
Slide 12
Indicator 2.1SEA implements procedures
to address identification, enrollment, and retention
Common Finding was charging unrelated SEA activities/staff time to MV
% FTE allocated for state coordinator (Recommendations)
Frequent disparity between LEAs with and without subgrants, especially in quality of outreach activities for purposes of identification (Recommendations)
Slide 13
Indicator 2.1SEA implements procedures
to address identification, enrollment, and retention
SEA and LEA policy updates, removal of barriers (immunization, enrollment, transportation)
Frequent Recommendations to strengthen collaborations between MV and other programs (especially Title 1)
Frequent Recommendations to strengthen outreach to underserved homeless sub-groups (unaccompanied youth, preschool)
Slide 14
Indicator 2.2SEA provides, or provides for, technical assistance to LEAs
to ensure compliance
Similar to Indicator 2.1 in nature and topic of Findings and Recommendations
Findings and Recommendations related to lack of systematic approach to TA and oversight to ensure that statutory requirements of MV and Title 1 are being met
Disparity between TA offered to LEAs with subgrants and non-grantee LEAs
Slide 15
Indicator 3.1SEA ensures that LEA subgrant
plans for services to eligible homeless students meet all
requirements Subgrant application process (required
elements missing, selection not competitive, length of cycle)
Carryover funds are allowed to make funds available throughout school year
Timeliness of announcement of awards and disbursement of funds
Allowable expenses; process for review of budget, expenditure reports
Slide 16
Indicator 3.2 SEA ensures LEA complies w/ providing comparable Title 1
services to homeless students in non-Title 1 schools
Common Findings/Recommendations related to the reservation of Title 1 Part A funds (set asides)
SEA provides guidance, LEA determines method of calculation
Liaisons often unaware of process Lack of TA Disparity between LEAs with subgrants
and non-grantee LEAs
Slide 17
Indicator 3.2 SEA ensures LEA complies w/
providing comparable Title 1 services to homeless students in non-Title 1
schools
Statutory requirements in both McKinney-Vento and Title 1 legislation
LEA Title 1/consolidated plan should include amount of reservation and description of how funds are used
It’s a shared responsibility!!
Slide 18
Frequent Findings and Recommendations related to lack of coordination between Title 1 and McKinney-Vento programs
Title 1 statutory requirement specific to coordination with McKinney-Vento
More detail on Indicator 3.2 – see handout
Indicator 3.2 SEA ensures LEA complies w/
providing comparable Title 1 services to homeless students in non-Title 1
schools
Slide 19
Indicator 3.3SEA has a system for ensuring
the prompt resolution of disputes
Lack of written policy specific to MV
Lack of documentation of liaison’s role
Lack of guidance from SEA
Lack of tracking system for disputes (record of interventions, communications, procedures that lead to resolution of complaints at local level before becoming dispute)
Slide 20
Indicator 3.4SEA conducts monitoring of
LEAs with and without subgrants to ensure compliance
Most Frequent Finding
Disparity between monitoring of LEAs with subgrants compared to non-grantee LEAs
Insufficient monitoring plan, schedule, reporting, corrective action, followup
Frequent Recommendation regarding program evaluation – different from monitoring
Slide 21
Findings and Recommendations for
States Monitored Twice
States Monitored Twice (48)
# of Findings
# of Recommendations
First Time Monitored
85 55
Second Time Monitored
50 43
Percent Decrease 41% 22%
Slide 22
So Now What?
What do we do with this information?
What does this mean for your program?
What lessons did you learn from your monitoring site visit? What did you learn from your preparation?
What changes have occurred in your program following monitoring?
Slide 23
Beyond Compliance
What impact does the monitoring event have on program implementation?
Needs Assessment
Program Evaluation
Beyond Compliance!! Use monitoring to address quality issues as well.
Slide 24
How Can NCHE Help?
What quality implementation issues are you struggling with?
What kinds of technical assistance would help you in addressing these issues?
What would you like to see on the March agenda (State Coordinators Meeting) relative to monitoring, and beyond?
Slide 25
Tips to Prepare for Next Cycle
Monitoring is one piece of large puzzle
Self-assessment is a valuable part of your preparation
Use self-assessment to identify program needs
Findings might give you leverage
Let monitoring help identify TA needs
Slide 26
Tips to Prepare for Next Cycle
Use protocol sent in advance to guide collection of basic documents
Organize documents according to indicators
Supplement list of documents required by ED with others that demonstrate program status (use questions from each indicator to guide choice of additional documentation)
Slide 27
Contact Information
Beth Garriss Hardy, Ph.D.Homeless Education ConsultantGarriss Hardy & [email protected]
Jan MooreProgram SpecialistNational Center for Homeless Education
(NCHE)Helpline [email protected]