Regional Planning Partnerships: Myths and Best Practices

Regional Planning PartnershipsBackground, Myths, and Best Practices

Agenda • Background • Purposes • Key requirements • Required membership • Duties and power limitations • Career Academies • Regional Centers • Mythbusters • Examples and best practices

Purposes • Primary task • Planning for the effective, efficient, and economical delivery of high-quality secondary CTE programming in a region • Enable participation: • Local districts and stakeholders in regional CTE delivery • Employers, the area education agencies, and representatives of sector partnerships and community stakeholders • Student access to work-based learning experiences • Increased and equitable access to high-quality career and technical education programs through the planning and development of a system of regional centers. • Promote • Career and college readiness • High-quality, integrated CTE programming, including career academy programs

Key Requirements • Roles • Structure can vary to enable effective work • Documents • By-laws (how partnership will function) • Multi-Year Plan (what partnership will do, how they’ll do it, and a budget)

RPP Required Membership

Sample RPP Structure to Enable Effective Execution

RPP Duties and Power Limitations • Create multi-year plan and update annually • Collect and review: • All relevant plans required under Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006 • Career and academic plans • Labor market, socio-economic, and demographic information • Share this and other state, regional, or national information necessary for completing the secondary program approval and review process with districts • Ensure compliance with standards adopted by the State Board of Education for the Partnership • Appropriately expend career and technical education funds assigned to the Partnership • Review and recommend to the Department secondary CTE programs for approval • Provide for the coordination and facilitation of advisory councils for CTE programs • As necessary, establish regional advisory councils to serve in the same capacity as local advisory councils. • Plan for regional centers with the purpose of achieving equitable access to high-quality CTE programming and concurrent enrollment opportunities for all students

Career Academies (CA) • Voluntary program structure • Pairs two years of sequential secondary CTE coursework with a postsecondary program through concurrent enrollment coursework • Instructors at the secondary district MAY be used to teach at a Career Academy

Regional Centers (RC) • A Regional CTE Planning Partnership is tasked with the following: • Determining if need exists for regional center(s), as they are not required • Planning for the development of such centers within its region, consistent with state standards and expectations • Physical location(s) where students may access numerous high-quality CTE programs • Must include at least four career academy programs • Must meet one of two requirements: • 1) two school districts, with a combined total of 120 participating students or • 2) a total of four school districts, with no minimum enrollment expectation.

Uses of RPP money • Guidance • The following link will provide allowable uses of RPP funds: • https://educateiowa.gov/documents/cte-redesign/2017/02/chapter-46-overview-and-guidance • 2018 legislative changes include the following: • Money can be claimed at the beginning of the year (not reimbursement basis) • RPP money can be used for supplies for CTE programs (CASE, etc.) • Uses: • RPP funds follow the same guidelines in many cases as Perkins funds • Guidelines/FAQ available at https://educateiowa.gov/documents/perkins/2017/12/perkins-faqs • Prohibited use: Fees for FFA Affiliation • Questions: Contact your RPP liaison

MYTHBUSTERS

Myth 1: Career Academies and Regional Centers are the same thing • Myth Basis: Miscommunication and misunderstanding of differences between career academy and regional center • Myth busted: They are different • Career Academy: series of courses offered by the community college • Could be at a high school (taught by HS teacher or CC instructor) • Could be remote • Could be at a center • Regional Center: for districts who cannot find instructors in certain areas or do not have the equipment or location to offer high quality CTE programs. This leads centralized delivery of Career Academy Content • Actual risk: • No risk—these things are different • Possible mitigation steps: • If people are talking about academies and centers interchangeably, teachers need to correct this information

Myth 2: Districts will do Regional Centers to save money • Myth Basis: Miscommunication on HF2392 • Myth busted: It is NOT a cost savings to the district • Iowa still requires four areas of CTE to be offered and taught • Secondary instructor should still be available for the first two years of instruction • Districts will need to make agreements with the community college in order to offer concurrent enrollment • Actual risk: • District COULD take the ‘at least the first two years’ requirement and apply an ‘at most the first two years’ approach • Possible mitigation steps: • Ensure program has advisory council with strong vision for program, drive community support, and engage local employers to understand what they value • Prepare annual report on program and ensure it reaches administration • Present annually in front of school board about program

Myth 3: Number of “program completors*” and high-achieving students will decrease • Myth Basis: if students (including academically talented students) cannot manage challenging schedules and required time to travel to regional center, they will not take four years • Myth could become reality • Actual Risk: Accepting school district or Center doesn’t offer any courses except CTE so student leaves OR student becomes part of program at Center • Possible mitigation steps or information • Coordination must be used if Center approach must be employed: • Regional Center offer rigorous academic courses, enabling these students to take multiple classes when they go to take their CTE course(s) • Ensure “home” FFA Chapter is still part of student experience • Employ technology in schools to enable distance learning with Regional Center • *‘Program completers’: Students completing three Carnegie units of a particular track of CTE

Myth 4: CTE Programs Lose Federal Perkins Funds due to creation of RPPs • Basis: People have confused the Federal Perkins Funds with the state allocation • Myth busted: • RPPs do NOT affect FEDERAL Perkins funds • Actual risk: None • Possible mitigation steps or information • Communication with the school board and local advisory committee to ensure they understand what RPPs are doing

Myth 5: This structure puts state ‘allocation’ funding for Ag Education at risk locally • Myth Basis: Some schools used the State Secondary Reimbursement to fund CTE (specifically ag education). This came from ‘allocation’ funds deposited into the district’s general fund based on state-approved programs. The State Secondary Reimbursement is now being allocated by the Regional Planning Partnership • Myth not busted: • Under the RPP structure, these State Secondary Reimbursement Funds are allocated to the RPP and can either go to districts or to the RC • Good news: • Money now HAS to go to CTE (versus a district general fund) • Schools CAN influence the decision-making process on the funds’ use • Funds can now be used for supplies (i.e. CASE items, fetal pigs, etc.) • Mitigation steps: • Make sure administration is involved heavily in the RPP decisions • Market your program to administration to ensure they know your needs

Myth 6: This structure puts extended contracts at risk • Myth Basis: RPP funds cannot be used for extended contracts • Myth not busted: this is true • Clarification: Because allocation funds can now be used for items like supplies, funding is freed up and can be spent on extended contracts • Mitigation steps: • Prove that the program is vital • Ensure that there is broad understanding of the three-circle model and the time that FFA and SAE takes outside of normal teaching (including in the summer) • Present annually to the school board, local advisory committee, and community to outline the investment in the students that is being made out of normal school hours

Myth 7: Ag ed programs in RPPs with low numbers of ag programs will be at funding disadvantage • Myth Basis: Teachers in RPPs with small number of ag programs feel their voice isn’t as strong as other, more common CTEs (like FCS) • Myth busted: Other programs such as FCS or Business do not have an advantage over Ag. • Mitigation Steps: • If the Ag instructors feels they are not getting the assistance they need, they should contact the Ag Consultant at the Department of Ed • All programs will have to do a needs assessment for Perkins V which will be the basis of funding for the district/consortium. • The DE will be reviewing those needs assessments and aligning them to their program approvals and ultimately RPP funds

Myth 8: Transitioning to an RPP could cause a loss of individuality of programming • Myth Basis: Teachers wonder if being part of the RPP will cause all programs in a geography to end up with similar offerings to align to the structure of the career academy and/or regional center • Myth busted: • The RPP has no authority to require a district to change their program; any change in programs should be based on local needs • If a career academy is put in place, it is optional for the district to participate or to send students • Mitigation steps: • The teacher/district should work closely with the local Ag Ed Advisory Committee to make sure the program is based on the needs of the school, community and employers in their area • Offer ag course as science credit, which could increase enrollment in ag education classes • Ensure “home” FFA Chapter is still part of student experience

Myth 9: The Program Approval is busy work and no one will evaluate the document • Myth Basis: Teachers are concerned that they’re putting in a lot of work but that the documents won’t be reviewed • Myth busted: All Program Approval Documents will be reviewed by both the RPP and by the Subject Area Consultant at the DE. This information will be used in the future for Perkins V requirements. Timeline: • December: program approval documents should be completed and submitted to RPP • December-early January: RPPs review documents and forward to DE • Through March: Pat Thieben reviews documents as they come in and asks questions of RPPs to help fill in information gaps • Mitigation Steps: • Utilize the NAAE or FFA NQPS tool to assist with the program approval document • Work with other Ag Teachers in the region to assist with the completion of the document

Myth 10: Teachers are afraid there will be increased workload for them • Myth Basis: Concerns from teachers in the field. • Myth not busted: The program review process must be completed every 5 years. The first time through the process may take longer • Mitigation Steps: • The Program review process should not be treated as a one-time event but as a continual improvement process • Leverage the NQPS Tool to complete the evaluation • Review yearly and monitor on a regular basis to mitigate the time when the 5-year evaluation is due again

Myth 11: Teachers are afraid there will be increased more paperwork needed for claims • Myth Basis: Concerns from teachers in the field • Myth busted: The RPP determines the paperwork needed for requesting funds, but Perkins requests could be used and duplicated • Mitigation Steps: • Keep track of what was purchased with Perkins Funds and copy those unfunded items into a new request for the RPPs

EXAMPLES AND BEST PRACTICES

Region 5 Partnership Membership Example

Sample RPP Structure to Enable Effective Execution

Example of RPP Arrangement • An example of an effective RPP can be found in the Grant Wood RPP. They utilize an Executive Team as one of their subcommittees. The team meets 1-2 times per month for 2 hours. • Other subcommittees include • Professional Development – this committee is meeting frequently to assist with PD days for their member districts • CTE Program Improvement Site Visit - Currently finishing up visits for the first year of program review • Other subcommittees are developed as necessary and as determined by the Executive Committee.

Regional Planning Partnerships: Myths and Best Practices