1 / 63

USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY

USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY . OSPI August 17, 2012 Title I, Part A Office. Why did Washington State apply?.

fredricka
Download Presentation

USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY OSPI August 17, 2012 Title I, Part A Office

  2. Why did Washington State apply? This is the right decision for Washington State. Over 1176schools and 113 districts across our state were identified as “in improvement” based on 2010-11 state assessments. And, by 2014, nearly every school and district would be identified as in improvement. So we know our current AYP system doesn’t work. We need a new way to measure progress and provide resources to support our work. This request gives us the opportunity to set new annual learning targets and frees up to $58 million across our state to address the needs of struggling students and schools. It provides the flexibility Washington needs to ensure ALL students graduate with college- and career-ready skills. Randy Dorn, Superintendent of Public Instruction

  3. What does ESEA FLEXIBILITY require from states? • Ensure college- and career-ready expectations for all students (Common Core State Standards [CCSS] and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium [SBAC] in Washington). • Implement state-developed system of differentiated recognition, accountability, and support. • Support effective instruction and leadership (Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project [TPEP] in Washington). • Reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on school districts by the State.

  4. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 1. The requirements in ESEA section 1111(b)(2)(E)-(H) that prescribe how an SEA must establish annual measurable objectives (AMOs) for determining adequate yearly progress (AYP) to ensure that all students meet or exceed the State’s proficient level of academic achievement on the State’s assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics no later than the end of the 2013–2014 school year. The SEA requested this waiver to develop new ambitious but achievable AMOs in reading/language arts and mathematics in order to provide meaningful goals that are used to guide support and improvement efforts for the State, Districts, schools, and student subgroups.

  5. Accountability System Based on ESEA REQUEST Up to 2011-12 2012-13 and 2013-14 2014-15 and beyond • AMO Calculations • Annual targets intended to close proficiency gaps by half by 2017; uses 2011 as baseline and adds equal annual increments (1/6 of proficiency gap) to get to 2017 target; each subgroup, school, district, and state have unique annual targets. • Calculations reported on Report Card • No AYP sanctions based on identification of schools and districts “in improvement” • Requires districts to set-aside up to 20% for Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools • AYP Determinations • Sanctions for schools and districts “in improvement” • Set-asides required for Public School Choice and Supplemental Education Services • School Improvement • Uses AYP calculations to identify schools and districts in a step of improvement (Title I) • Uses PLA Methodology based on AYP calculations to generate list of Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools (PLASs) Washington State’s New Accountability System Used to identify Reward, Priority, Focus, and Emerging schools for Title I and non-Title I schools ESEA Request Accountability System Used to identify Reward, Priority, Focus, and Emerging schools  SBE/OSPI Achievement Index Used to identify Award Schools 5

  6. STATE Uniform Bar GOALS Under Old NCLB Requirements

  7. Set ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)NEW Annual Measurable Objectives (Targets): Cut Proficiency Gap by Half by 2017Sample High School - 10th Grade Reading NEW for 2012-13 Proficiency Gap

  8. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 2. The requirements in ESEA section 1116(b) for an LEA to identify for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, as appropriate, a Title I school that fails, for two consecutive years or more, to make AYP, and for a school so identified and its LEA to take certain improvement actions. The SEA requested this waiver so that an LEA and its Title I schools need not comply with these requirements.

  9. Flexibility • Schools are no longer identified as in improvement. • Only Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools are identified. • All schools must write school improvement plans. [Chapter 180-16-220(2)(b)WAC] • Only Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools must send their Student and Success Action Plan (school improvement plan) to OSPI for review. • Elimination of AYP determinations and associated sanctions for schools in improvement, including 20% set-aside of Title I, Part A funds for Public School Choice and Supplemental Education Services and 10% set-aside for professional development for schools. [See B-9 through B-10a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  10. REWARD SCHOOLS * The school cannot have significant gaps among subgroups, which means the school is not on the list of Focus Schools or the list of Emerging Schools.

  11. PRIORITY, FOCUS, & EMERGING SCHOOLS

  12. Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools Priority: Based on “All Students” Performance Focus: Based on “Subgroup” Performance Emerging: Next 5% of Priority and 10% of Focus Total N = 138 Next 10% (N=92) Next 5% (N=46) Next 10% (N=92) Next 5% (N=46) Lowest 10% (N = 92) Lowest 5% (N=46)

  13. SAMPLE Notification -- Letter for Priority–Focus–Emerging Schools • Dear Parent/Guardian: • We hope this letter finds you enjoying the last few days of summer and preparing for another year of learning as your son/daughter returns to ______________ School. • The purpose of this letter is to reaffirm our commitment to the success of ALL students and to inform you that we are still working to improve. During the summer, your school, _________________________________was identified as a (Priority, Focus, or Emerging) school based on an analysis of student achievement in relationship to how we compare with other schools in our state. This analysis, specifically identified that our________________ (sub group or all students) has/have not met our goals or expectations over the past three years (on state assessments in Reading and Mathematics OR with respect to graduation rates). • To increase learning outcomes for all of our students, we are taking the following action steps over the course of the school year: • Participate in a Needs Assessment to identify strengths and challenges in our school; the assessment will also include recommendations for improvement. • Identify next steps we will take to improve learning outcomes for our students, by completing our “Student and School Success Action Plan”; the plan must be submitted to the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction for review and approval. • Implement our plan and examine a variety of data to ensure we are making progress. • Engage parents/guardians and our school community in our improvement efforts. • Attached is a brief description of the basis for the school’s identification as a (Priority, Focus, or Emerging) school. • More details about the movement of our state, district, and school in pursuit of ongoing improvement for all our students can be found at http://www.k12.wa.us/ESEA/PublicNotice.aspx). • We are committed to continued growth as we work together to support our most valuable resource, our children. • Sincerely, A letter must be sent by September 14, 2012

  14. Requirement for Priority, Focus, and Emerging schools 14

  15. PRIORITY, FOCUS, AND EMERGING SCHOOLS *Use findings from external Needs Assessment (NA) **Use findings from internal Needs Assessment (NA) ***If Emerging School is identified from Priority Schools list 15

  16. Implement Turnaround Principles • Provide strong leadership. • Ensure that teachers are effective and able to improve instruction. • Redesign the day or school year to provide additional time for student learning and teacher collaboration. • Ensure instructional program is research-based, rigorous, and aligned with standards in order to meet the academic needs of all students. • Use data to inform instruction and for continuous improvement and provide time for collaboration on the use of data. • Improve school safety and discipline and other non-academic factors, such as students’ social, emotional, and health needs. • Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement.

  17. SUPPORTS AND SERVICES 17

  18. PRIORITY, FOCUS, AND EMERGING SCHOOLS *Generated with support of Student & School Support Coach and external partners before Needs Assessment **Generated with support of Student & School Support Coach as part of Needs Assessment process 18

  19. 20% Set-aside – Title I, Part A Application iGrants Form Package 201 Page 4-Program Plan (Q. 10) If applicable, describe the actions the school district will take to assist any schools which have not met Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) regardless of whether they receive Title I, Part A funds. [Sec. 1112 (b)(1)(L)] (Q. 11) Are any schools in the district identified as Priority, Focus or Emerging?   If yes, Districts complete the following: ---Identify number of schools identified as Priority, Focus or Emerging ---Amount of up to 20% reservation set-aside (Page 5, Cell B) Briefly describe: • Why the amount set-aside is adequate to support schools identified as Priority, Focus or Emerging in their efforts to implement turnaround criteria, • How the funds will be used to support these schools, and • How the district will evaluate the effectiveness of the use of these funds on student academic achievements. ---------Date notification of schools identified as Priority, Focus, and/or Emerging was sent to the community. Page 5-Required Expenditures - Buildings in Improvement (Q.B) The district must reserve up to 20% of its Title I, Part A allocation to ensure their Priority, Focus and Emerging schools receive sufficient resources and support to implement meaningful interventions aligned with the school’s needs as articulated in the school’s improvement plan. [See B-10. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  20. Office of Student and School Success iGrants’ Applications Coming soon for schools identified as Priority and Focus Schools. • Form Package 636 • Form Package 637 More details soon • Form Package 638 Notification will come from OSSS to District contacts.

  21. Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions Question: In an ESEA flexibility State, if a student has transferred under the public school choice provisions of section 1116 of ESEA, may she stay at the school she attends until completion of the highest grade for the school? Answer: Yes. The student must be allowed to stay at the school as the ESEA flexibility waiver pertaining to public school choice did not waive this requirement. [See ESEA 11169b)(13), 34CFR 200.44(g), B-8 Public School Choice Non-Regulatory Guidance]

  22. Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions Question: May an LEA continue to use Title I, Part A funds to pay for the Public School Choice transportation of a student that had transferred in the previous years? Answer: Yes, as long as the LEA takes into consideration the other needs of its Title I program. [See ESEA 11169b)(13), 34CFR 200.44(g), B-8 Public School Choice Non-Regulatory Guidance]

  23. Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions May Title I, Part A funds be used to provide Supplemental Educational Services? • A District may continue to provide SES as long as it is an activity identified in the Priority, Focus and Emerging school’s school improvement plan. • OSPI is no longer required to select or monitor SES providers. • Districts may contract directly with tutoring providers.

  24. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 3. The requirements in ESEA section 1116(c) for an SEA to identify for improvement or corrective action, as appropriate, an LEA that, for two consecutive years or more, fails to make AYP, and for an LEA so identified and its SEA to take certain improvement actions. The SEA requested this waiver so that it need not comply with these requirements with respect to its Districts.

  25. Flexibility Districts are no longer identified as in improvement. • Eliminates the requirement to write a district improvement plan. • Eliminates the 10% set-aside for professional development for districts.

  26. Using Title I, Part A Funds for Professional Development Background ESEA requires a District identified for improvement to spend not less than 10% of its Title I allocation to “address the professional development needs of the instructional staff.” Change Districts may not use Title I professional development funds to support non-Title I staff. [See B-12a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  27. ESEA Flexibility – Requested and Approved 4. The requirements in ESEA sections 6213(b) and 6224(e) that limit participation in, and use of funds under the Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) and Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) programs based on whether an LEA has made AYP and is complying with the requirements in ESEA section 1116. The SEA requested this waiver so that an LEA that receives SRSA or RLIS funds may use those funds for any authorized purpose regardless of whether the LEA makes AYP.

  28. Flexibility What does the flexibility include with respect to rural districts? • Permits districts that receive Small, Rural School Achievement Program or Rural and Low-Income School Program funds to use those funds for any purpose authorized under the applicable program regardless of AYP status. • Removes the requirement that rural districts that had not made AYP be required to only use the funds for activities under 1116. [See B-14. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  29. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 5. The requirement in ESEA section 1114(a)(1) that a school have a poverty percentage of 40 percent or more in order to operate a schoolwide program. The SEA requests this waiver so that an LEA may implement interventions consistent with the turnaround principles or interventions that are based on the needs of the students in the school and designed to enhance the entire educational program in a school in any of its Priority and Focus schools that meet the definitions of “Priority schools” and “Focus schools,” respectively, set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility, as appropriate, even if those schools do not have a poverty percentage of 40 percent or more.

  30. Flexibility A Priority and a Focus school may implement a schoolwide program with less than 40% poverty . • Title I, Part A funds may then be used to implement interventions aligned with the turnaround principles, which would affect the entire educational program of the school in which they are implemented. [See C-28. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  31. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 6. The requirement in ESEA section 1003(a) for an SEA to distribute funds reserved under that section only to Districts with schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring. The SEA requests this waiver so that it may allocate section 1003(a) funds to its Districts in order to serve any of the State’s Priority and Focus schools that meet the definitions of “Priority schools” and “Focus schools,” respectively, set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.

  32. ESEA 1003(a) School Improvement Funds Based on approval of iGrant applications: • Priority Schools receive up to $50,000 • Focus Schools receive up to $20,000

  33. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 7. The provision in ESEA section 1117(c)(2)(A) that authorizes an SEA to reserve Title I, Part A funds to reward a Title I school that (1) significantly closed the achievement gap between subgroups in the school; or (2) has exceeded AYP for two or more consecutive years. The SEA requested this waiver so that it may use funds reserved under ESEA section 1117(c)(2)(A) for any of the State’s Title I reward schools that meet the definition of “reward schools” set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.

  34. Title I, Part A Awards Due October 1, 2012 • 2012-13 Title I Distinguished Schools • Memorandum No. 044-12M. • Exceptional student performance for 2 or more consecutive years. • Significantly closed the Achievement Gap between student groups. • 2012-13 Academic Achievement Award Program • Memorandum No. 044-12M. • Met AMOs in all cells for the last year (2012) and AYP in all cells in 2009-10 and 2010-11.

  35. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 8. The requirements in ESEA section 2141(a), (b), and (c) for an LEA and SEA to comply with certain requirements for improvement plans regarding highly qualified teachers. The SEA requested this waiver to allow the SEA and its Districts to focus on developing and implementing more meaningful evaluation and support systems.

  36. Upcoming TPEP Webinars August 23 and August 30 from 1:30 to 3:30 Register on-line at http://tpep-wa.org/2012/08/14/tpep-webinar-update/ Resources at http://tpep-wa.org/

  37. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 9. The limitations in ESEA section 6123 that limit the amount of funds an SEA or LEA may transfer from certain ESEA programs to other ESEA programs. The SEA requested this waiver so that it and its Districts may transfer up to 100 percent of the funds it receives under the authorized programs among those programs and into Title I, Part A.

  38. Flexibility - Transferability Districts may transfer program funds from Improving Teacher Quality State Grants (ESEA section 2121- Title II, Part A) to Title I, Part A. This authority would apply to all Districts notwithstanding the limitations on such transfers and the restrictions on the use of the transferred funds in ESEA section 6123(b)(1). • Must meet private school equitable share requirement under Title II, Part A. [See B-19 through B-22a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

  39. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 10. The requirements in ESEA section 1003(g)(4) and the definition of a Tier I school in Section I.A.3 of the School Improvement Grants (SIG) final requirements. The SEA requested this waiver so that it may award SIG funds to an LEA to implement one of the four SIG models in any of the State’s Priority schools that meet the definition of “Priority schools” set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.

  40. Waiver Number 11 OSPI did not request 21st Century Community Learning Centers

  41. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 12. The requirements in ESEA sections 1116(a)(1)(A)-(B) and 1116(c)(1)(A) that require Districts and SEAs to make determinations of adequate yearly progress (AYP) for schools and Districts, respectively. The SEA requested this waiver because continuing to determine whether an LEA and its schools make AYP is inconsistent with the SEA’s State-developed differentiated recognition, accountability, and support system included in its ESEA flexibility request. The SEA and its Districts must report on their report cards performance against the AMOs for all subgroups identified in ESEA section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v), and use performance against the AMOs to support continuous improvement in Title I schools that are not Reward schools, Priority schools, or Focus schools.

  42. Report Card – Prior to 2012-13

  43. DRAFT for 2012-13 Report Card

  44. ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED 13. The requirements in ESEA section 1113(a)(3)-(4) and (c)(1) that require an LEA to serve eligible schools under Title I in rank order of poverty and to allocate Title I, Part A funds based on that rank ordering. The SEA requested this waiver in order to permit its Districts to serve a Title I-eligible high school with a graduation rate below 60 percent that the SEA has identified as a Priority school even if that school does not rank sufficiently high to be served.

  45. Title I Eligible High School Section 1113 waiver allows a District to serve “out of rank order” a Title I eligible high school with graduation rate below 60 percent that has been identified as a Priority school. If a Priority school becomes a Title I school • then Title I requirements apply to the school and • an “equitable share” for private schools must be provided.

  46. Waiver Impact on Ranking and Allocation

  47. Waiver Impact on Ranking and Allocation

  48. Waiver Impact on Ranking and Allocation Example: Now that Schools 1, 2, and 5 are Title I schools, the equitable service requirements apply. • As indicated in the first table, in the attendance areas of Schools 1, 2, and 5, there are 10, 15, and 10 students from low-income families, respectively, who attend private schools. • Amounts for equitable services generated by School 1’s, School 2’s, and School 5’s private school students are: • $6,000 (10 students multiplied by $600/student); • $7,125 (15 students multiplied by $475/student); and • $5,000 (10 students multiplied by $500/student), respectively.

  49. Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers Supplement not Supplant Requirements: Apply to Title I, Part A funds used to implement ESEA flexibility ED may not waive the supplement not supplant requirements.

  50. Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers Schoolwide Program: Must receive all of the non-Federal funds it would otherwise receive if it were not a Title I school.

More Related