TEA/ESC NCLB Coordinated Meeting

TITLE III, PART A

PROGRAM MEETING

TEA/ESC NCLB Coordinated Meeting

March 22, 2010

Division of NCLB Program Coordination

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Meeting Overview...... 2

Title III Updates...... 3

Statewide Professional Development...... 3

Program Review Checklists...... 3

Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs)...... 4

Immigrant Funding Formula...... 5

USDE Title III Monitoring Report Update...... 6

Issues to Target through Training and Technical Assistance

Equitable Participation of ELLs in Private Schools...... 10

Third-Party Contracts...... 12

Administrative Costs...... 13

Recordkeeping for Split-Funded Staff...... 14

Teacher Fluency and Title III, Part A-LEP...... 16

2009-2010 ESC Title III Grant Documentation...... 17

2010-2011 Consolidated Application Update for Title III...... 18

The materials are copyrighted © and trademarked ™ as the property of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of TEA, except under the following conditions:

1)Texas public school districts, charter schools, and Education Service Centers may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for the districts’ and schools’ educational use without obtaining permission from TEA.

2)Residents of the state of Texas may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for individual personal use only without obtaining written permission of TEA.

3)Any portion reproduced must be reproduced in its entirety and remain unedited, unaltered and unchanged in any way.

4)No monetary charge can be made for the reproduced materials or any document containing them; however, a reasonable charge to cover only the cost of reproduction and distribution may be charged.

Private entities or persons located in Texas that are not Texas public school districts, Texas Education Service Centers, or Texas charter schools or any entity, whether public or private, educational or non-educational, located outside the state of TexasMUST obtain written approval from TEA and will be required to enter into a license agreement that may involve the payment of a licensing fee or a royalty.

For information contact: Office of Intellectual Property, Texas Education Agency, 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX 78701-1494; phone 512-463-9270 or 512-463-9713; email: .

MEETING OVERVIEW

AGENDA

8:00 a.m. / Networking (optional)
8:30 a.m. / Welcome
8:45 a.m. / Bilingual/ESL Updates / Susie Coultress
10:00 a.m. / Morning Break
10:30 a.m. / Title III Updates

Statewide Professional Development
AMAOs
Program Review Checklists
Immigrant Funding Formula
USDE Title III Monitoring Report Update

Issues to Target through Title III Technical Assistance

Equitable Participation of ELLs in Private Schools
Third Party Contractors

/ Elizabeth Minjárez
11:30 a.m. / Lunch Break
1:00 p.m. / ELL Assessment Updates / Laura Ayala
1:45 p.m. / Issues to Target through Technical Assistance (cont.)

Administrative Costs
Recordkeeping for Split-Funded Staff
Teacher Fluency

/ Elizabeth Minjárez
2:30 p.m. / Afternoon Break
3:00 p.m. / 2009-2011 ESC Title III Grant Documentation / Heather Mauze
3:30 p.m. / 2010-2011 Consolidated Application Update for Title III / Annie Molina
4:15 p.m. / Closing Announcements and Evaluations / Elizabeth Minjárez
4:30 p.m. / Adjourn

TRAINING RESPONSIBILITIES AND RESOURCES

Unless otherwise noted, the TEA will rely on you, the ESC Title III contact(s) for your region to share the training and technical assistance addressed in this meeting with all Title III-funded LEAs in the region. The materials provided for you today will be sent to you in electronic format by or before Friday, March 26, 2010.

Thank you for all you do!

TITLE III UPDATES

STATEWIDE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

PROGRAM REVIEW CHECKLISTS

General Reminders:

There are two separate checklists – one for Title III, Part A-LEP subrantees and one for Title III, Part A-Immigrant subgrantees.
LEAs must only submit the checklist(s) associated with the program(s) for which they are funded for 2009-2010.
Friday, March 26, 2010, is the deadline for submission to TEA.
A “FAQs” document was sent to each regional ESC on Monday, March 8, 2010, with instructions to share with each project LEA in the region.

ANNUAL MEASURABLE ACHIEVEMENT OBJECTIVES (AMAOS) FOR 2009-2010

On January 15, 2010, the TEA submitted amendment to USDE to implement a new 2010 Title III accountability system that is consistent with the requirements addressed in the Title III Notice of Interpretations, released October 17, 2008, and a letter of clarification released to Chief State School Officers in December 2009.

State Definition of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs)

AMAO 1 (Progress in Learning English) – in order for a student to be considered as having made progress under AMAO 1, the student will progress at least one overall proficiency level on the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) from spring 2009 to spring 2010.
AMAO 2 (Attainment of English) – in order for a student to be considered as having attained English proficiency, the student will reach an overall proficiency level of Advanced High on the spring 2010 Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS).
AMAO 3 – Adequate Yearly Progress for LEP

Definition of AMAO Targets for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011

The TEA’s new AMAO targets for progress in learning English (AMAO 1) and attainment of English proficiency (AMAO 2) will take into account the amount of time that LEP students have had access to language instruction education programs.

In an effort to establish the most appropriate targets for AMAO 1 and AMAO 2, the TEA is in the process of working with English Language Proficiency (ELP) assessment data modeled according to the amount of time LEP students have been identified as LEP, as well as the amount of time LEP students have been enrolled in a language instruction education program.

State Calculation of AMAO 3 – Adequate Yearly Progress

For the purposes of AMAO 3 determinations, the TEA will use the results that are calculated for AYP for Title I, Part A.

Minimum Group Size

A minimum group size will be used in the calculation of AMAO determinations. This minimum group size has not been determined yet, but will not exceed the minimum group size approved under Title I for Adequate Yearly Progress and will only apply to the LEP subgroup as a whole, rather than to any separate cohorts.

AMAO Determinations for LEAs Belonging to Consortia

The TEA will calculate both individual LEA-level and consortium-level determinations. In cases where determinations can be made at the LEA level, that will be the result for the individual LEA. In cases where the determination cannot be made due to a group size that does not meet the minimum level required, the consortium-level determination will be the result for the individual LEA. This will ensure that every Title III-funded LEA receives an AMAO result and is subject to Title III accountability requirements. It also will ensure that LEAs in the consortium that do meet the AMAOs are not subject to Title III accountability requirements due to an overall result of the consortium.

IMMIGRANT FUNDING FORMULA

ForTitle III, Part A—Immigrant Subgrants

PROPOSED FUNDING FORMULA FOR FY2011

Percentage of Title III, Part A State Allocation Set Aside for Immigrant Grants: 6%

Method 1 – Significant Increase in Number of Immigrant Students

1.Total Number of students identified in PEIMS as immigrant in fall 2009, fall 2008 and fall 2007*.

2.An average number is obtained from fall 2008 and fall 2007 immigrant data. This average is subtracted from the number of immigrant students reported for fall 2009 and the difference must be a significant increase.

3.A ‘significant increase’ of immigrant students for an LEA to qualify for immigrant funds is defined as at least 100 or more immigrant students.

Method 2 – Significant Increase in Percentage of Immigrant Students

1.Total Number of students identified in PEIMS as immigrant in fall 2009, fall 2008 and fall 2007*.

2.An average number is obtained from fall 2008 and fall 2007 immigrant data. This average is subtracted from the number of immigrant students reported for fall 2009 to determine a difference and the difference must be a significant increase relative to the average (the difference divided by the average).

3.A ‘significant increase’ of immigrant students for an LEA to qualify for immigrant funds is defined as at least a 50% increase.

4.If a significant increase of 50% or greater does occur, the LEA will need to have a total of at least 30 immigrant students enrolled in fall 2009 in order to qualify for funding under this method.

Calculation of FY 2011 Allocation:

Total No. Immigrant Students in LEA reported to PEIMS fall 2009 x $__ (Per Student Amount) = Total LEA Allocation

*Includes charter schools based on enrollment data submitted on eGrants form SC5010—NCLB Data Request Form for Federal Funding.

USDE TITLE III, PART A MONITORING REPORT UPDATE

Texas Monitoring Visit Conducted August 2009

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

FIDUCIARY
Element 2.1: Within-State Allocations, Reallocations and Carryover. / 3 Findings
State Activities, ESEA Section 3111(b) / Met
Administrative Expenses Related to State Activities, ESEA Section 3111(b)(3) / (Finding-pending)
Allocations for LEP Subgrants, ESEA Section 3114(a)-(b) / (Finding)
Reallocations for LEP Subgrants, ESEA Section 3114(c) / Met
Allocations for Immigrant Subgrants, ESEA Section 3114(d) / Met
Subgrants, ESEA Section 3111 / (Finding-pending)
Finding 1: The TEA has not ensured that it meets requirements regarding the maximum amount of its Title III grant that can be used for state-level administration.
Status: Pending
Finding 2: Not including ELLs from PNP schools in count used to allocate funds to LEAs and not providing for equitable participation of ELL children attending private schools. -Section 3114(a)
TEA Corrective Actions:

Revise data collection instrument to ensure that subgrantee awards are based on ELL student counts that include ELLs in participating private schools.
Include discussion of PNP equitable services requirement at March 2010 ESC meeting and June 2010 NCLB Management Institute to ensure that LEAs utilize the proper amount of Title III funds to provide for equitable participation of ELLs attending private schools
Add an indicator to Initial Compliance Review (ICR) concerning the provision of equitable services to private schools, to be implemented fall 2010; indicator will be subject to random validation process to annually ensure correct implementation of this requirement.

Finding 3: Awarding subgrants to ineligible entities (by awarding subgrants to the ESCs to carry out state activities).
Status: Pending
Element 2.2 Within-District Allocations The SEA ensures that its LEAs comply with the provisions related to LEA use of funds under section 3115 of ESEA. / 4 Findings
Finding 1: Not ensuring that LEAs meet requirement regarding 2% cap on administrative costs.
TEA Corrective Actions

Modify its 2010-2011 Consolidated Application for Federal Funding to accommodate the 2% limitation on administrative costs.
Use a Program Review Checklist, which includes the 2% administrative cap, to ensure compliance for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation process.

Finding 2: TEA has not ensured that LEAs have included all appropriate costs when calculating administrative costs. (LEAs must include salaries and, if using third-party contractor to provide services, must require contractor to break out administrative costs and include those costs when calculating the total subject to 2 percent cap.)
TEA Corrective Actions:

Modify its expenditure reporting system to accommodate reporting of expenditures related to specific reservations of funds, including administrative costs; projected to begin with 2010-2011 school year.
Use a Program Review Checklist, which includes third-party contracts, to ensure compliance for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation process.

Finding 3: TEA has not ensured that LEAs meet requirements related to allowable costs for staff paid by Title III and other funds. (LEAs must have and use written procedures for maintaining time and effort records for split-funded employees; procedures must include description of how and when LEA will review records and how and when it will make adjustments in the percentage of salary charged to Title III.)
TEA Corrective Actions:

Use a Program Review Checklist, which includes split-funded personnel, to ensure compliance for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation process.
Address documentation required for split-funded personnel through 1) letter to LEAs; 2) application instructions; and 3) discussion at March 2010 ESC meeting and June 2010 NCLB Management Institute.

Finding 4: TEA has not ensured that LEAs maintain control of program funds being used to provide equitable participation for private school ELL students and their teachers. (LEAs that provide services to private school students using third-party contractors must have signed contracts or agreements that provide technical descriptions of services with detail sufficient to enable LEAs to determine that the Title III statutory requirements will be met.)
TEA Corrective Actions:

Use a Program Review Checklist, which includes equitable services, to ensure compliance for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation process.
Address the requirement of ensuring that third-party contractors’ services to private school students meet Title III requirements through 1) letter to LEAs; 2) application instructions; and 3) discussion at March 2010 ESC meeting and June 2010 NCLB Management Institute.

Element 2.3 Maintenance of Effort.The SEA ensures that LEAs comply with procedures for ensuring maintenance of effort (MOE) as outlined in § 9021 of ESEA. / Met
Element 2.4 Supplement, Not Supplant – General. The SEA ensures that the LEA complies with the provision related to supplement, not supplant under section 3115(g) of the ESEA. / Met
Element 2.4A Supplement, Not Supplant – Assessment. The SEA has met requirements related to supplement, not supplant and use of Title III funds to develop and administer State ELP assessments under sections 1111(b)(7) and 3113(b)(2) of the ESEA. / Recommendation
ELPS STANDARDS, ASSESSMENTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Element 3.1 English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards:
The State provided evidence of a process that complies with section 3113. / Met
Element 3.2 ELP Assessments: The State provided evidence of a process that complies with section 3113 and evidence that an ELP assessment has been administered to all K-12 limited English proficient (LEP) students in the State. / Finding
Finding: The TEA did not provide documentation that explains the process it uses to determine that the TELPAS is aligned with State ELP standards.
Status: Pending
3.3 New English Language Proficiency Assessment: The State provided evidence of a process that complies with Title III, section 3113. The process addresses thetransition to a new ELP assessment or revision of the current State ELP assessment aligned to the State-developed ELP standards. / Met
3.4 Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs): AMAOs have been developed and AMAO determinations have been made for Title III subgrantees. / Findings
Recommendation
Finding 1: The TEA did not provide evidence that it made AMAO calculations consistent with Title III requirements.
TEA Steps Thus Far: The Agency began process in May 2009 for changes needed for 2009-2010 AMAO targets (as per Notice of Final Interpretations issued October 17, 2008).
TEA Planned Next Steps:

Submit Consolidated State Plan amendment by January 15, 2010, to reflect changes to accountability system.

AMAOs 1 and 2 – Targets will take into account: 1) amount of time LEP students have had access to language instruction education programs; 2) minimum group size to be determined; no other factors to be considered.
AMAO 3 – Use the results calculated for AYP for Title I, Part A.
AMAO Determinations for LEAs in Consortia (SSA) – TEA will calculate LEA-level and consortium-level; results used are a) LEA-level results if LEA has min. group size; and b) consortium-level if LEA does not have min. group size.

Continue process of developing new targets.

Internal data modeling and draft targets;
Stakeholders meeting to gather input.

Submit to USDE the targets and minimum group size number to be used for 2010 AMAOs (and subsequent statewide letter announcing targets to LEAs).

Finding 2: The TEA did not provide evidence that it is holding subgrantees that have not met AMAOs for four consecutive years accountable using the specific sanctions required in section 3122(b)( 4) of the ESEA.
TEA Response: Pending (Provided description of actions taken thus far and Agency’s plan for remaining steps to be taken.)
3.5 Data Collection:The State has established and implemented clear criteria for the administration, scoring, analysis, and reporting components of its ELP assessments, and has a system for monitoring and improving the ongoing quality of its assessment systems. A data system is in place to meet all Title III data requirements, including capacity to follow Title III-served students for two years after exiting, and State approach to following ELP progress and attainment over time. / Met
STATE-LEVEL ACTIVITIES; LEA AUTHORIZED AND REQUIRED ACTIVITIES, IMMIGRANT CHILDREN AND YOUTH
4.1 State-Level Activities: Using funds retained at the state-level, the State carries out one or more activities that may include:

Providing professional development
Planning, evaluation, administration and interagency coordination
Promoting parental and community participation
Providing recognition to subgrantees that have exceeded AMAO requirements.

/ Met
4.2 Required Subgrantee Activities:The subgrantee must provide high-quality language instruction educational programs and sustained professional development activities to all classroom teachers of LEP students (including teachers in classroom settings that are not defined as language instruction educational programs). Training activities must also include principals, administrators, and other school or community-based organization personnel. / Met
4.3 Authorized Subgrantee Activities: The LEA may use the funds by undertaking one or more authorized activities. / Met
4.4 Activities by Agencies Experiencing Substantial Increases in Immigrant Children and Youth:The subgrantee receiving funds under section 3114(d)(1) shall use the funds to pay for activities that provide enhanced instructional opportunities for immigrant children and youth. / Findings
Finding 1: TEA did not have a process for ensuring that immigrant funds are used for intended purpose.
Status: Pending
Finding 2: TEA does not ensure appropriate students are included inimmigrant children and youth counts.
TEA Corrective Action: Requested definition change of Element ID: E0797-Immigrant Indicator Code in the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) to reflect the Title III definition of State (by including students born to military personnel outside the U.S.).
STATE REVIEW OF LOCAL PLANS
5.1 Application: The SEA ensures that its LEAs comply with the provision for submitting an application to the SEA (section 3116(a)). / Finding
Refer to Element 4.4
Finding: TEA did not ensure that LEAs use Title III LEP funds to support allowable activities (LEA plans address how funds would be spent…).
Action Required: The TEA must provide ED with evidence that it has revised its LEA consolidated application so it requires submission of an LEP plan. The TEA must require LEAs to submit plans that are specifically targeted for the Title III program.
Status: Pending
5.2 Private School Participation: LEAs comply with ESEA requirements regarding participation of LEP students and teachers in private schools. / Met
Refer to Element 2.1
5.3 Teacher English Fluency: Certification of teacher fluency requirement in English and any other language used for instruction (section 3116). / Finding
Finding: The TEA did not ensure that LEAs complied with requirement that teachers in Title III-funded programs be fluent in English and any other language of instruction.
TEA Corrective Actions:

Use a Program Review Checklist, which includes teacher fluency, to ensure compliance for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation processduring which selected LEAs will be required to submit applicable documentation to the Agency for review.
Address the requirement of ensuring teacher fluencythrough 1) letter to LEAs; 2) application instructions; and 3) discussion at March 2010 ESC meeting and June 2010 NCLB Management Institute.

STATE MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
6.1 Monitoring: The SEA conducts monitoring of its subgrantees sufficient to ensure compliance with Title III program requirements. / Finding
Finding: The TEA did not ensure that procedures for monitoring LEAs for compliance with Title III were sufficient to ensure that all areas of noncompliance were identified and corrected in a timely manner.
TEA Corrective Actions:

Use a Program Review Checklistto ensure compliance with Title III for 2009-2010 school year; checklist responses will be subject to random validation processduring which selected LEAs will be required to submit applicable documentation to the Agency for review.
To ensure compliance beginning with the 2010-2011 grant year, the Agency will make adjustments to:

The Title III program description schedule (PS3106) in the Consolidated Application for Funding; and
The Title III section (PR3002) of the Consolidated Compliance Report to facilitate a more comprehensive desk monitoring process through the Initial Compliance Review.

PARENTAL NOTIFICATION
7.1 Parental Notification: Parental notification in an understandable format as required under section 3302 for identification and placement and for not meeting the State AMAOs. / Met

EQUITABLE PARTICIPATION OF ELLs IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS