brustein & manasevit, pllc 1 school improvement grants: requirements and monitoring tiffany...
TRANSCRIPT
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
1
School Improvement School Improvement Grants: Requirements and Grants: Requirements and MonitoringMonitoring
Tiffany Winters, [email protected] Steven Spillan, [email protected] Brustein & Manasevit, PLLCFall Forum 2012
Topic ListSIG ResourcesBackground on the SIG ProgramMonitoring the SIG Program
◦ Application Process◦ Implementation◦ Fiscal◦ Technical Assistance◦ Monitoring◦ Data Collection
SIG, What’s Next? Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
2
School Improvement Grant 1003(g) (SIG) Resources
Latest updates: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/legislation.html#guidance “Final requirements for School Improvement Grants authorized
under section 1003(g) of Title I of the ESEA,” 75 Fed. Reg. 66363 (Oct. 28, 2010).
Guidance on fiscal year 2010 School Improvement Grants under 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education: March 1, 2012).
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
3
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
4
SIG FundingFY 2009 ARRA: $3 billion
FY 2010: $546 million
FY 2011: $535 million
FY 2012: $534 million
FY13: Level Funding vs. Sequestration Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
5
SIG Awards
Priority to the LEAs with the lowest-achieving schools that demonstrate —
(A) greatest need; and
(B) strongest commitment
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
6
Continuation Awards
Ongoing ActivitiesAn SEA may award SIG funds to an LEA for a Tier I or Tier II
school that has implemented, in whole or in part, one of the models within the last two years so that the LEA and school can continue or complete the intervention being implemented.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
7
SIG Updates?
SIG funds authorized for use in “priority schools” through ESEA Waiver Package
Guidance addendum in March 2012
Congressional Plans?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
8
SASA Monitoring of SIG
Areas Reviewed by SASAApplication ProcessImplementationFiscalTechnical AssistanceMonitoringData Collection
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
9
2012-2013 Monitoring Schedule
Current Published Schedule is Obsolete
No Monitoring Scheduled Past September
Behind Schedule
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
10
SASA On-Site General Schedule
Day 1: School #1 Site VisitSchool Leadership Team InterviewTeacher/Parent InterviewGuided Classroom Observations/Conversations with students
Day 2: LEA #1 Interview Day 3: School #2 Site Visit
Same as Day 1 Day 4: LEA #2 Interview Day 5: SEA Interview
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
11
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
12
ApplicationSEA’s application process compliant with both the State
application, requirements.
SEA RFP must ensure funds serve persistently lowest achieving schools
Serving schools identified in the Tier System.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
13
“Persistently lowest-achieving schools” (PLAS)Lowest-achieving 5% (or lowest 5 schools, which
ever is greater) of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring; or
High school that has had a graduation rate less than 60%; and
Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I funds that meets the same requirements as above. B
rust
ein
& M
an
ase
vit,
PL
LC
14
PLAS: Identification
To identify the PLAS, SEA must take into account both: (a) Academic achievement of the
“all students” group in a school in terms of proficiency on the State’s assessments in reading/language
arts and mathematics combined; and (b) The school’s “lack of progress” on those
assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
15
PLAS: Listing results
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
16
PLAS: Tier III - Catchall
Tier III would include every Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that is not a Tier I or Tier II school.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
17
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010Expands the group of schools that an SEA “may” identify as
Tier I, Tier II, or Tier III schools.Does not affect the schools an SEA must identify as Tier I, Tier
II, and Tier III schools.Raised the maximum amount from $500,000 to $2,000,000.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
18
PLAS: Newly Eligible Tier I Schools Elementary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds and:
Has not made AYP for at least 2 consecutive years; or Is in the State’s lowest quintile [20%] in reading/language arts
and mathematics combined; and
Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving Tier I school
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
19
Newly Eligible Tier II Schools Secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds and:
Has not made AYP for at least 2 consecutive years; or Is in the State’s lowest quintile [20%] in reading/language arts
and mathematics combined; and
Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving Tier I school; orA secondary school that has had a graduation rate less than 60%
over a number of years.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
20
Newly Eligible Tier III Schools A school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds:
Has not made AYP for at least two years; or Is in the State’s lowest quintile [20%] of performance in
reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and
Does not meet the requirements to be a Tier I or Tier II school.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
21
Annual Lists?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
22
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
23
ImplementationSASA monitoring will look at how each LEA is implementing its
SIG grant, focusing on each of the 4 turnaround models.
Focus is on LEAs, but SEAs will bear the burden of noncompliance.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
24
SIG 4 Models:
RestartClosureTransformationTurnaround
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
25
SIG Models: Restart
School converts or closes and reopens under a CMO or EMO
Considerable flexibilityMust enroll any former student who wishes to
attend the school May require agreements covering behavior,
attendance, or other commitments related to academic performance
May not require students to meet academic standards prior to enrolling
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
26
SIG Models: ClosureLEA closes a school and enrolls students
in “higher achieving” schools in the LEA.
Guidance: Critical to engage families and community early, selecting the appropriate improvement model to assure a smooth transition for students and their families at the receiving schools.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
27
Guidance – Unauthorized Closure
If an LEA closes a Tier I or II school after implementing any model other than Closure?SEA has the discretion to terminate and rescind. If SEA accepts new applications, LEA must meet all
Closure model requirements.ED allows for this circumstance, but notes that such an event
should be VERY rare.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
28
SIG Models: Transformation
IMPORTANT:An LEA with 9 or more Tier I and Tier II
schools may NOT implement the transformation model in more than 50% of those schools.
Guidance: If an LEA is already exceeding the cap, it may not implement the transformation model in any additional schools.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
29
SIG Models: Transformation
5 Required Activities1. Replace the principal2. Teacher/Principal evaluations3. Identify and reward school leaders, teachers, and other staff4. Professional Development5. Implement strategies to recruit, place, and retain staff
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
30
Guidance - Transformation Model
LEAs implementing a transformation model must:Provide sufficient operational flexibility. Ensure ongoing, intensive technical assistance and related
support.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
31
2011 Transformation Waiver: Teacher Evaluations
August 12, 2011 – ED letter to Chiefs Invites those LEAs implementing a transformation model “extra
time to develop and implement teacher evaluation systems.” Proposed waiver would allow LEAs to:
Develop the evaluation systems in the 2011-2012 school year, Pilot them next year (2012-2013), and Have them up and running by the 2013-2014 school year.
Asked for application by August 26th, but expecting later submissions. B
rust
ein
& M
an
ase
vit,
PL
LC
32
Transformation: Replace PrincipalsCEP Report:
15 out of 45 States using the transformation model saw removing the principals as a key element of the turnaround.
16 States said that the results varied from school to school. One State said it didn't make a difference, while three others
thought it was too soon to say.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
33
SIG Models: Turnaround9 required elements:
1. Replace the principal2. Use locally adopted competencies to measure the
turnaround staff effectiveness (50% rule)3. Implement strategies designed to recruit, place, and
retain the appropriate staff4. Provide ongoing, high-quality job-embedded
professional development5. Adopt new governance structure B
rust
ein
& M
an
ase
vit,
PL
LC
34
SIG Models: Turnaround
6. Use data to identify and implement an instructional program
7. Promote the continuous use of student data8. Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide
increased learning time9. Provide appropriate social-emotional and community-
oriented services and supports for students
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
35
Turnaround: Replace TeachersCEP Report
Highly unpopular with unions
8 of the 46 States implementing the turnaround model said the process helped pinpoint and enlist effective teachers.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
36
Increased Learning TimeReports show that LEAs are struggling with this requirement.
No uniformity among districts in implementing increased learning time.
What counts as increased learning time?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
37
Increased Learning TimeCEP Report:
Maryland schools were spending the extra time primarily on the students who are struggling the most academically.
Michigan schools were pushing to extend the school day for all students, with mixed results.
Idaho State and local officials did not see it as an essential piece of their school improvement formula.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
38
Increased Learning Time Definition: increasing the length of the school day, week, or
year to significantly increase the total number of school hours so as to include additional time for: Instruction in core academic subjects; Instruction in other subjects and provision of enrichment
activities; and Teachers to collaborate, plan, and engage in professional
development within and across grades and subjects.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
39
Increased Learning TimeMarch 2012 Guidance:
LEA must use a longer school day, week, or year to provide additional time for all three types of activities.
Focus should be on instruction of core academic subjects, and time for teacher collaboration & planning.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
40
Increased Learning Time Can include before- or after- school activities. Activities must be available to all students.
March 2012 Guidance:All students must have the opportunity to participate.School must have the capacity to serve any and all students.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
41
SIG Models: CriticismsModels do not address school climate and culture.
Ignores non-academic challenges, such as attendance and behavior.
Any focus on non-academic concerns often get in the way of SIG compliance.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
42
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
43
FiscalFinal Requirements
Guidance
OMB Circular A-87
EDGAR Section 76.710
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
44
SIG Fiscal SEAs:
Ensuring proper LEA use of funds?Only taking 5% for State admin?Ensuring adequate funds for three year grants?
LEAs:How are you spending funds?Ensuring funds are supporting SIG activities?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
45
SIG Cross Cutting Issues If not every Tier I school in a State was served with FY 2009
SIG funds in the 2010–2011 school year, an SEA must carry over 25% of those funds, combine them with FY 2010 SIG funds, and award those funds to LEAs in the same manner as FY 2009 SIG funds are awarded.
If a State does not serve every Tier I school, but needs more than 75% to fund all LEAs that it committed to serve – contact ED prior to issuing grants.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
46
SIG “District-wide” Activities An LEA may use SIG funds to pay for district-level activities:
Support implementation of one of the four school intervention models in each Tier I and Tier II school it commits to serve, and
Support other school improvement strategies in the Tier III schools it commits to serve.
An LEA may not use SIG funds to support district-level activities for schools that are not receiving SIG funds.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
47
SIG Guidance - SupplantingSIG funds must supplement, and not
supplant, non-Federal funds a school would otherwise receiveSNS applied to increased learning time Costs must:
Be directly attributable to the implementation of the model,
Be reasonable and necessary, and Exceed the cost the district would have
incurred in the absence of its implementation model.
This all requires documentation.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
48
SIG Guidance - ComparabilityLEA is obligated to ensure that all of its Title
I schools are comparable to its non-Title I schools.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
49
Guidance – Improvement Timeline
Receiving a SIG award restarts improvement timeline.
Regardless of where a school is in the improvement timeline, the clock restarts.
A 2012-2013 grantee could enter the first year of improvement (ESEA 1116(b)) --would be 2014-2015.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
50
Guidance – Pre-Implementation
LEA may use carryover/current funds prior to full implementation.
Enables an LEA to prepare for full implementation of a school intervention model at the start of the next school year.
May not use the funds to pay for needs assessment.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
51
SIG Guidance – Pre-ImplementationSEA Evaluation Criteria:
Directly related to the selected model?Reasonable and necessary?Designed to address a specific need?Represent meaningful change to improve student achievement?Research-based? Represent a significant reform that goes beyond the basic
educational program?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
52
Pre-Implementation Allowable Activities
Family and Community EngagementRigorous Review of External ProvidersStaffing Instructional ProgramsProfessional Development and SupportPreparation for Accountability Measures
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
53
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
54
Technical AssistanceSASA monitors will look at what types of TA the SEA is
providing, particularly with respect to: Conducting the needs-assessment Preparing and amending LEA applicationsPreparing and amending budgetsSelecting the intervention model for each school
Also how the SEA is determining what types of TA to provide and to whom?
How frequently is the SEA providing technical assistance?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
55
Technical Assistance at LEA Level
Has SEA been providing adequate TA?
How has the LEA supported, how does it currently support, and how does it plan to support schools in implementing the SIG program?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
56
LEA Monitoring An LEA must establish SEA approved annual goals for student
achievement on the State’s assessments in both reading/language arts and mathematics that it will use. to monitor each Tier I and Tier II school that receives SIG funds.
The determination of whether a school meets the student achievement goals established by the LEA is in addition to the determination of whether the school makes AYP as required by section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
57
LEA Monitoring• The following metrics constitute key indicators for the SIG
program, collected by SEA:
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
58
(1) Number of minutes within the school year;(2) Student participation rate on State assessments in reading/language arts and in mathematics, by student subgroup; (3) Dropout rate;(4) Student attendance rate;(5) Number and percentage of students completing advanced coursework (e.g., AP/IB), early-college high schools, or dual enrollment classes;
(6) Discipline incidents;(7) Truants;(8) Distribution of teachers by performance level on an LEA’s teacher evaluation system; and(9) Teacher attendance rate.
SEA Renewal If a Tier I or Tier II school does not meet the annual student
achievement goals established by the LEA, may an SEA renew the LEA’s SIG grant with respect to that school?
An SEA has discretion to examine factors, such asSchool’s progress on the leading indicators in section III of the
final requirements, or Fidelity with which it is implementing the modelSee section II.C(a)(ii) of the final requirements (I-16)
Renewal based on ALL factors
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
59
Guidance – Failure to Implement
LEA Unable to Implement ModelLEA must notify SEA IMMEDIATELY.
LEA must cease obligating SIG funds in that school.
If the LEA does NOT want to try a different model, SEA rescinds remaining funds and combines with carryover.
If the LEA does want to try another model, SEA has discretion to end the award, or ask LEA to reapply.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
60
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
61
Data CollectionWhat process is the SEA/LEA using to collect data on the
leading indicators? How is the SEA/LEA keeping track of or managing this data? Is the SEA/LEA collecting any additional data beyond that
required by the SIG program?Any plans for using data aside from reporting requirements?Have LEAs begun collecting any benchmark or interim data on
the leading indicators? If so, what does the data show thus far?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
62
Data CollectionSEA may add additional “leading indicators”
SEA may not deny LEA renewal request based on failure to make progress on SEA-added indicator, providing LEA has made progress federally-mandated indicators
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
63
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
64
SIG: What’s Next?FY 2013 Funding Fight
SIG remains top Administration priority House GOP wants to eliminate funding Skeptical of the turnaround models
Senate Democrats willing to keep funding, but offering more models
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
65
SIG: What’s Next ESEA Waiver Package
Flexibility to Support School Improvement: An SEA would have flexibility to allocate ESEA section 1003(a) funds to an LEA in order to serve any priority or focus school, if the SEA determines such schools are most in need of additional support.
Flexibility to Use SIG Funds to Support Priority Schools: An SEA would have flexibility to award SIG funds available under ESEA section 1003(g) to an LEA to implement one of the four SIG models in any priority school.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
66
SIG: What’s NextESEA Waiver Package: Priority School
Among the lowest 5% of Title I schools in the State; A Title I-participating or Title I-eligible high school with a
graduation rate less than 60% over a number of years; or A Tier I or Tier II school under the SIG program that is using SIG
funds to implement a school intervention model.
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
67
SIG: What’s Next Senate ESEA Reauthorization Two Additional Turnaround Models
Strategic Staffing Strategy – LEA must: (I) replace the principal if he/she has served more than 2 years; (II) allow the principal to staff the school with a turnaround team of
his/her choosing; (III) provide teacher and principal incentives.
Whole School Reform Strategy - must include a partnership with a strategy developer offering a school reform program Based on at least a moderate level of evidence that the program will have
a statistically significant effect on student outcomes
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
68
QUESTIONS?
Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
69
DisclaimerThis presentation is intended solely to
provide general information and does not constitute legal advice. Attendance at the
presentation or later review of these printed materials does not create an attorney-client
relationship with Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC. You should not take any action based
upon any information in this presentation without first consulting legal counsel familiar
with your particular circumstances. Bru
ste
in &
Ma
na
sevi
t, P
LL
C
70