Bilingual Coordinators Network November 19-20, 2009 Sacramento, CA

1. Bilingual Coordinators Network November 19-20, 2009Sacramento, CA

2. Language Policy and Leadership Office Update 

3. Title III UpdateCarlos Rivera Education Administrator ILanguage Policy and Leadership Office

4. Apportionments for Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 The request for the last apportionment for fiscal year (FY) 2007-08 went to the State Controller at the end of October The third apportionment for FY 2008-09 went to the School Fiscal Services Division in early November

5. 2009-10 Applications Applications for 2009-10 Limited English Proficient (LEP) (known as English learners in California) and for Immigrant Education Programs have been completed by local educational agencies (LEAs)

6. Award Letters Award letters for the 2009-10 school year are anticipated to go out by the end of the calendar year The letters confer spending authority for the LEP Education Programs and Immigrant Education Programs LEAs do not need to wait to receive their apportionment from their county offices in order to spend

7. End of Year Expenditure Reports End of Year (EOY) Expenditure reports are available online this year for the first time and are due on November 30, 2009 Only direct funded and leads of consortia report If an LEA was consortia lead in either one of those two years they should have received a letter with a pin/password so that the LEA can complete the EOY Expenditure Form (only for the year in which the LEA was the lead)

8. End of Year Expenditure Reports Please visit the CDE Title III Web pages for online access to the expenditure reports: LEP: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/t3eoyimm.asp Immigrant: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/t3eoylep.asp

9. Annual Survey Annual Survey for FY 2008-09 has been online and has a deadline of November 20, 2009 Please visit the following CDE Title III Web page to access the survey required of all Title III funded LEAs: http://www2.cde.ca.gov/title3survey/logon.aspx If your LEA was the lead of a consortium in 2008-09 please report for all members of the consortium

10. The California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System The California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) allows LEAs to provide information of the English Learners (ELs) (known as LEP in Federal law) and Immigrant students as of October 2009 The R-30 Language Census will therefore no longer be required in March of every year

11. The California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System The Student National Origin Report (SNOR) will be submitted online but will only used by private schools The SNOR letter to private schools will be mailed by early February and the count (taken either on October 7, 2009 or March 1, 2010) submitted by March 31, 2010

12. Immigrant Student Definition As of July 1, 2009, the definition of Immigrant Students has been updated Sections 3301(1) and (6) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) define immigrant children and youth as individuals who: 1) Are aged 3 through 21 2) Were not born in any state 3) Have not been attending one or more schools in any one or more states for more than 3 full academic years Section 3301(14) of the ESEA defines State as each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

13. The Consolidated Application II The Consolidated Application (ConApp) II is due on January 31, 2010 LEAs will report their expenditures for FY 2008-09 and 2009-10

14. Supplement, Not Supplant Carlos Rivera Education Administrator I

15. Supplement not Supplant in Brief�General Principle In general, the Title III supplement not supplant requirement is intended to ensure that services provided with Title III funds are in addition to, and do not replace or supplant, services that students would otherwise receive

16. Title III Supplement not Supplant Requirement Title III funds must be used to supplement the level of federal, state, and local funds that, in the absence of Title III funds, would have been expended for programs for LEP children and immigrant children and youth [Section 3115(g) of ESEA]

17. The First Test of Supplanting: �Required by Law� LEAs use Title III funds to provide services that they are required to make available under state, local or federal laws

18. The Second Test of Supplanting: �Prior Year� An LEA uses Title III funds to provide services that it provided in the prior year with state, local, or other federal funds (This assumption may be rebutted)

19. Supplement not Supplant Considerations at the Local Educational Agency and School Level Any determination about supplanting is very fact specific, and it is difficult to provide general guidelines without examining the details of a situation

20. How Can Title III Funds be Used Without Violating the Supplement not Supplant Requirement? Questions to Ask:  1) What is the instructional program/service provided to all students? What does the LEA do to meet Lau requirements? What services is the LEA required by other federal, state, and local laws or regulations to provide?

21. Questions to Ask: (continued)  4) Was the program/service previously provided with state, local, and other federal funds? Based on the answers to the above questions, would the proposed funds be used to provide an instructional program/service that is in addition to or supplemental to an instructional program/service that would otherwise be provided to LEP students in the absence of a Title III grant?

22. Resources http://www.ed.gov/programs/sfgp/legislation.html http://www.ed.gov/programs/sfgp/supplefinalattach2.pdf

23. For more information: Carlos Rivera Education Administrator I Language Policy and Leadership Office 916-319-0247crivera@cde.ca.gov

24. Title III Accountability UpdateLilia G. S�nchez  Education Programs Consultant

25. Title III Accountability System Requirements LEAs and Consortia Must Meet All three Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) AMAO 1 � California English Language Development Test Achieve Annual Progress in Learning English AMAO 2 � California English Language Development Test Attain English Proficiency AMAO 3 � California Standards Test, California Alternate Performance Assessment, California High School Exit Examination Meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for the EL subgroup at the LEA level There was some confusion about this requirement. These requirements were originally approved at the March, 2008 SBE meeting. In essence, there were no changes to this section of the CBET regulations at the May, 2008 SBE meeting.There was some confusion about this requirement. These requirements were originally approved at the March, 2008 SBE meeting. In essence, there were no changes to this section of the CBET regulations at the May, 2008 SBE meeting.

26. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives 100 Year 1 LEAs/Consortia 135 Year 2 LEAs/Consortia 59 Year 3 LEAs/Consortia 9 Year 4 LEAs (newly identified) 129 Year 4 LEAs (continuing) Source: October 1, 2009 update These are the numbers of LEAs and consortia that did not meet AMAOs based on the Sept. 4 release. (These numbers may change slightly in the future based on updates to AYP) There were a total of 627 Title III subgrantees (LEAs or consortium leads) 189 (30%) Year 1 83 (13%) Year 2 11 (2%) Year 3 58 (9%) New Year 4 92 (15%) Continuing Year 4. Did not meet AMAOs for 5 consecutive years. 194 (31%) met all AMAOs in 06-07 These are the numbers of LEAs and consortia that did not meet AMAOs based on the Sept. 4 release. (These numbers may change slightly in the future based on updates to AYP) There were a total of 627 Title III subgrantees (LEAs or consortium leads) 189 (30%) Year 1 83 (13%) Year 2 11 (2%) Year 3 58 (9%) New Year 4 92 (15%) Continuing Year 4. Did not meet AMAOs for 5 consecutive years. 194 (31%) met all AMAOs in 06-07

27. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives 202 LEAs/Consortia met all three AMAOs 432 LEAs/Consortia did not meet all three AMAOs 634 Total LEAs and Consortia Source: October 1, 2009 update

28. 2008-09Percent of Subgrantees Meeting AMAOs AMAO 1 - 82 percent of LEAs/consortia AMAO 2 - 81 percent of LEAs/consortia AMAO 3 - 37 percent of LEAs/consortia Met all three AMAOs - 32 percent of LEAs/consortia Source: October 1, 2009 update Shows the percent of Title III subgrantees that met each of the AMAOs in 2007-08. There was in increase in the percent that are meeting AMAO 1 and 2 from 2006-07. In 06-07, 73% met AMAO 1 and 74% met AMAO 2. So you can see there are substantial increases particularly for AMAO 1. As you know the AYP targets have increased dramatically for AMAO 3 and the percent of Title III subgrantees meeting AMAO 3 has decreased from 69% in 2006-07 to 38% in 2007-08. The targets for AYP will continue to increase. I�ll talk more about the AYP targets later. Shows the percent of Title III subgrantees that met each of the AMAOs in 2007-08. There was in increase in the percent that are meeting AMAO 1 and 2 from 2006-07. In 06-07, 73% met AMAO 1 and 74% met AMAO 2. So you can see there are substantial increases particularly for AMAO 1. As you know the AYP targets have increased dramatically for AMAO 3 and the percent of Title III subgrantees meeting AMAO 3 has decreased from 69% in 2006-07 to 38% in 2007-08. The targets for AYP will continue to increase. I�ll talk more about the AYP targets later.

29. Title III Improvement Status LEAs and Consortia identified as: Title III Year 2 135 Title III Year 4 9 Total 144 Out of this total, 9 are Consortia Source: October 1, 2009 update

30. Improvement Plan AddendumTIII Year 2 ESEA Title III Section 3122 (b) Improvement Plan �the agency shall require the entity to develop an improvement plan that will ensure that the entity meets such objectives The improvement plan shall specifically address the factors that prevented the entity from achieving such objectives It was felt that since the SBE already has authority to request a CBET evaluation, specific language to this effect was unnecessary. Some school district misunderstood that all data collection requirements were omitted. It was felt that since the SBE already has authority to request a CBET evaluation, specific language to this effect was unnecessary. Some school district misunderstood that all data collection requirements were omitted.

31. Action Plan TIII Year 4 ESEA Title III Section 3122(b)(4) Online Action Plan Requires LEAs that did not meet their AMAOs for four consecutive years to modify their curriculum, program and method of instruction provided to ELs

32. Year 2 and Year 4 Technical Assistance Series of Webinars focused on Inquiry process Guided data analysis Selection of appropriate strategies Implementation drivers Use of research to identify best practices Again, it is important that the data collection requirement be met by all participating school districts, since an evaluation may be requested by the SBE. In addition, school districts must review and revise their CBET plan at least once every 3 years, and consider the data collected on the previous slide. Again, it is important that the data collection requirement be met by all participating school districts, since an evaluation may be requested by the SBE. In addition, school districts must review and revise their CBET plan at least once every 3 years, and consider the data collected on the previous slide.

33. Year 2 Improvement PlanYear 4 Action Plan Develop in consultation with the County Office of Education lead

34. Adequate Yearly Progress Update It is expected that there will be an update to AYP on December 4, 2009 When AYP is updated, the TIII Accountability team will check to see if it affects AMAO 3�

35. Adequate Yearly Progress Update If it does, the Title III accountability reports, and AMAO Year status files will be updated and the appropriate LEAs and consortia will be notified Last year the changes were minor and it is expected that to be true for this year as well

36. For more information: CDE Title III Accountability Technical Assistance Web page http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/acct.asp TitleIIIY2@cde.ca.gov TitleIIIY4@cde.ca.gov Lilia G. S�nchez Education Programs Consultant lsanchez@cde.ca.gov

37. Community-Based English Tutoring Program Pam LucasAssociate Governmental Program Analyst

38. Community Based English Tutoring Program Pursuant to Senate Bill x3 4 (SB x3 4), Community Based English Tutoring (CBET) program funding for the period of 2008-09 through 2012-13 may be used for any educational purpose All program requirements are suspended during this flexibility period CBET funding for 2009-10 through 2012-13 will be based on 2008-09 allocations, rather than on EL counts

39. Community Based English Tutoring Program The CDE sent a payment request to the State Controller�s Office on November 11, 2009 This payment will be for 100 percent of the allocation for 2009-10 and is expected to be deposited with the county treasurers by the end of November Funding results for 2009-10 have been posted on the CDE Categorical Programs Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/ca/cbet.asp In addition to flexibility for 2008-09 through 2012-13 funding, SBx3 4 provides that CBET balances as of June 30, 2010 may be used for other purposes. The time period to do so ends June 30, 2010

40. English Language Acquisition Program  Pam Lucas Associate Governmental Program Analyst

41. English Language Acquisition Program Apportionment notices for 2009-10 were mailed in early September To obtain a copy of an apportionment notice, please send an e-mail to Pamela Lucas Funding results will be posted on the CDE Categorical Programs Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/ca/englishlang.asp

42. English Language Acquisition Program Funds are expected to be deposited with the county treasurers by mid-December English Language Acquisition program (ELAP) funding for 2008-09 through 2012-13 is NOT granted flexibility This funding must still be used to provide supplemental services to ELs in grades four through eight

43. English Language Acquisition Program However, SBx3 4 provides that ELAP balances as of June 30, 2008 may be used for other purposes The time period ends June 30, 2010

44. English Language Acquisition Program For further questions on CBET or ELAP, please contact: Pamela Lucas Associate Governmental Program Analyst Language Policy and Leadership Office 916-319-0610 plucas@cde.ca.gov

45. Accountability Leadership InstituteNancy ZarendaEducation Programs Consultant

46. Accountability Leadership Institute For English Learner, Immigrant, & Migrant Students December 7-8, 2009 Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport in Burlingame

47. Coordinating Improvement Efforts �Building Synergies� Focus Areas: Policy and Legislation Promising Practices, Connections, and Opportunities Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability Curriculum and Instruction

48. Keynote Speakers Dr. Sharroky Hollie, Center of Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning Simon Silva, Artist Dr. Chuck Weis, Santa Clara County Office of Education Dr. Emir Jose Macari, Sacramento State University

49. Returning Workshop Topics Title III Fiscal & Program Guidance Title III Accountability Update on Categorical Program Monitoring Research and Effective Instruction ELs with Disabilities Two Way Immersion Primary and Secondary English Language Development California Legislative Update California English Language Development Test and more

50. New Workshops Migrant Policies and Programs Aligned Implementation of Title I, II and III Accountability Requirements Our Youngest Learners � Pre-Kindergarten International/Bi-national Schools Culturally Responsive Teaching & Learning Effective Parent Involvement Seal of Biliteracy Heritage Language Instruction The Changing Face of Giftedness and more

51. Register Now! The brochure is available on the CDE Title III and Migrant Web pages (respectively) at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3 http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/me/mt Questions? E-mail: ALI2009@cde.ca.gov or nzarenda@cde.ca.gov