Exhibits for Excess Costs of LEP/ELL Programs

(Limited English Proficiency Programs for Limited English Proficient Students)

Iowa Code section 257.31(5)”l”

This request in Code includes both the unusual need requirement and the unique need requirement:

·  If a district has unusual circumstances, creating an unusual need for additional funds, the committee may establish a modified allowable growth for the district (257.31(5)).

·  The district may request, and the SBRC may consider, modified allowable growth under paragraph “l” which is any unique problem of the school district (257.31(5)”l”).

Therefore, these exhibits should be specific to your district and your district/student needs as an individual district separate from all other districts in Iowa. If your need is not actually unusual or unique to your district, so state below.

Background Information for Districts

There are three sources of funding for LEP/ELL Programs within Iowa Code.

1.  Supplementary Weighting for the students in their first 4 years of the instructional ELL program

2.  SBRC Modified Allowable Growth for students beyond their first 4 years of the instructional ELL program but still served in the instructional program.

3.  SBRC Modified Allowable Growth for excess costs of providing the instructional ELL program

These sources are requested in the order given above and each request is reduced by the previous requests; i.e. the request for excess costs (item 3 above) will be reduced by both the modified allowable growth granted for weighting beyond the 4 years (item 2 above) and the supplementary weighting requested by counting the students on the certified enrollment (item 1 above).

The request for LEP program excess costs shall only include costs of instruction of LEP students above the costs of instruction in a regular curriculum. Costs included in the request shall not supplant general program or general purposes expenditures. Districts shall not include expenditures here for which federal funding has been provided to cover those costs. Districts shall not include transitional students. Modified allowable growth, if approved, for expenditures in LEP programs is categorical. Appropriate expenditures and inappropriate expenditures are:

·  Appropriate uses of funding for the LEP program are those that are direct costs of providing instruction which supplement, but do not supplant, the costs of the regular curriculum. These expenditures include, but are not limited to, salaries and benefits of teachers and paraeducators; instructional supplies, textbooks, and technology; classroom interpreters; support services to students served in LEP programs above the services provided to pupils in regular programs; support services to instructional staff such as targeted professional development, curriculum development or academic student assessment; and support services provided to parents of LEP students and community services specific to limited English proficiency (IAC 281—98.16(1)).

·  Inappropriate uses of funding for the LEP program include, but are not limited to, indirect costs, operational or maintenance costs, capital expenditures other than equipment, student transportation, administrative costs, or any other expenditures not directly related to providing the LEP instructional program beyond the scope of the regular classroom (IAC 281—98.16(1)).

Descriptive Program Information

These exhibits are public documents. Due to confidentially considerations, do not identify students by name.

Describe the program and program delivery method.

What languages are represented in the LEP population?

What is the staffing for the program?

Describe your request in terms of your district having unusual circumstances and an unusual need.

Describe your program needs in terms of being a unique problem to your school district that sets you apart from all other school districts in Iowa.

The SBRC is required to consider both your unexpended fund balance and your unspent balance in any decision they make on this request. Describe your program needs in relationship to your district’s balances at the end of the previous fiscal year.

1.  For example, explain why your district is making a request for modified allowable growth if your district had an unspent balance remaining at the end of the prior fiscal year that is larger than the amount you are requesting.

2.  For example, explain why your district is making a request for modified allowable growth for expenditures that must be expended within the remainder of this current school year if your district did not have sufficient fund balance at the end of the prior fiscal year to cover these costs as well as last summer’s cash flow requirements.


History

Complete the following table that includes four years of history and your anticipated current year data. Do not include transitional students.

TABLE 1

LEP History
2008-09 / 2009-10 / 2010-11 / 2011-12 / 2012-13
1. Actual LEP instructional expenditures from CAR-COA
2. LEP resident students served in the ELL program (FTE if part year) from SRI
3. LEP nonresident students served in the ELL program (FTE if part year) from SRI
4. Per-pupil share of actual LEP instructional expenditures (1 / (2 + 3))
5. Number of pupils in the prior year’s LEP count on certified enrollment
6. District Cost Per Pupil
7. Weighting factor for LEP / .22 / .22 / .22 / .22 / .22
8. Total LEP Funding Generated (5 * 6 * 7)
9. Other resources received to cover these LEP costs reported in the first row (such as Title III and other grants, donations, tuition on OE, EQ/PD, prior year LEP carryover on row 12, etc.)
10. Amount of modified allowable growth funding requested and approved by the SBRC for LEP (on the application form and separate request)*
11. Excess of Expenditures over Weighted Funding & Other Available resources (1 – 8 – 9 - 10) THIS IS YOUR MAXIMUM REQUEST FOR 2012-13
12. Amount of end of year (EOY) LEP carryover (8 + 9 + 10 - 1) If not the same as the CAR-COA, explain.
13. Teacher FTE
14. Paraprofessional FTE
15. Pupils per Teacher ((2 + 3) / 13)
16. Pupils per paraprofessional ((2 + 3) / 14)

·  FY13 will have application form MAG only on row 10 but not MAG for this request.


2012-13 LEP Excess Instructional Costs Request to the SBRC

Complete the following table of 2012-13 LEP Instructional Expenditures Permitted by IAC in Excess of LEP Weighted Funding Generated in 2012-13, LEP MAG on the 2012-13 Application Form, and any Other Resources Available to the District for these Instructional Costs. The bottom row of this table should equal row 11 for 2012-13 on the previous table.

·  Expenditures must have been incurred during the 2012-2013 school year in the general fund.

·  Do not include subsequent or previous fiscal year expenditures.

·  Expenditures must be documented actual, known, and unduplicated costs, that do not supplant general fund expenditures, and that are allowed by Iowa Administrative Code (IAC).

·  Expenditures in blue boxes are questioned costs and must have additional detailed explanation of the costs.

·  These costs should be estimated in such a way that no FY13 LEP carryover is planned or anticipated.

TABLE 2

Object by Function / Salaries 100-199 / Benefits 200-299 / Purchased Professional 300-399 / Equip rental/repair
430-449 / Other (tuition)
500-599 / Supplies
600-699 / Equip
730-739
Instruction 1XXX
Student Support Services 21XX
Staff Support Services 22XX
Exec Admin 23XX
Bldg Admin
24XX
Business Admin
25XX
O & M 26XX
Transportation 27XX
Community Services 33XX
Column total
A. Grand total
B. Weighted funding (from row 8 of the previous table)
C. Other resources (from row 9 of the previous table)
D. MAG on Application form (from row 10 of the previous table)
Maximum allowable request (A-B-C-D)

TABLE 3

Subsequent Year LEP Funding from Weighting these Current Year Students

1. LEP weighted FTE from the October 2012 counts for certified enrollment
2. Estimated 2013-2014 DCPP
3. Weighting Factor / .22
Estimated Grand Total (1 * 2 * 3)

TABLE 4

Request to the SBRC for Modified Allowable Growth for Excess LEP Instructional Costs

Maximum from Table 2 or a lesser amount

Was the decision of the board to request modified allowable growth unanimous?

When the minutes were published showing action on the decision to request modified allowable growth, were there any public comments received? If so, please summarize. Also attach a copy of the board minutes authorizing this request to the SBRC.

In submitting this request for modified allowable growth, the district is affirming to the School Budget Review Committee that it has followed the instructions, Iowa Code (IC), and Iowa Administrative Code (IAC).

1