Date post: | 15-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | athena-northcraft |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Exercising Greater Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant FundsNora Hancock, EdDAssociate CommissionerGrants and Federal Fiscal Compl iance
Association for Compensatory
Educators of Texas October 10, 2014
Flexibility
Closing the Student Achievement Gap
Demographic Landscape (who we are)
Over 5 million Texas students in 2012–2013 school year
64% African American and Hispanic
30% white
60% economically disadvantaged
National Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP) Results: Rankings and
Gaps
Fourth-Grade Reading Ranking
• White: 12th• African American: 14th• Hispanic: 35th
Fourth-Grade Reading Gaps
• Between white and African American: 24 points
• Between white and Hispanic: 27 points
NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps
Eighth-Grade Reading Ranking
• White: 9th• African American: 14th• Hispanic: 29th
Eighth-GradeReading Gaps
• Between white and African American: 26 points
• Between white and Hispanic: 24 points
NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps
Fourth-GradeMath Ranking
• White: 6th• African American: 5th• Hispanic: 14th
Fourth-GradeMath Gaps
• Between white and African American: 24 points
• Between white and Hispanic: 20 points
NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps
Eighth-GradeMath Ranking
• White: 5th• African American: 4th• Hispanic: 4th
Eighth-GradeMath Gaps
• Between white and African American: 27 points
• Between white and Hispanic: 19 points
Writing Performance
STAAR Writing English I: 30% gap English II: 28% gapbetween economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged students
Writing Performance
STAAR Writing English I - 27% Gap English II - 30% Gapbetween White students and African American students
2013 Graduation Rates
Texas high school graduation rate: 88%Gaps:• African American student graduation rate is 8.9%
lower than the white student rate• Hispanic student graduation rate is 8.7% lower
than Asian student rate
Implementing Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant Funds and Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs
Guiding Principles• Allowing local discretion • Providing clear guidance• Removing barriers• Improving performance• Ensuring grant funds spent appropriately • Strengthening accountability
Federal Flexibility Initiative Focus
1. TEA policy changes2. Title I, Part A schoolwide programs3. Uniform Guidance
TEA Policy Changes1. Grant administration2. Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs3. Uniform Guidance
1. Grant Administration Policy Changes• Grant application• Grant application negotiation• Grant accounting process• Federal fiscal subrecipient monitoring
Grant Application Streamlined
• Applicants no longer required to submit certain information and documentation• TEA staff do not automatically deny late or
retroactive amendments
Grant Application Negotiation
• TEA staff will no longer negotiate applications and amendments with a “one size fits all” approach
Grant Accounting Process• Detailed documentation only required upon
request• TEA staff will no longer assume that large
reimbursement requests made at the very end of the grant period are not allowable
Substitute Time and Effort Deadlines
• TEA now has three submission periods for management certification form (which allows an LEA to use the substitute system)
• Deadlines for 2014–2015 school year:o September 4, 2014 for fall, spring, and summer semesterso December 15, 2014 for spring and summer semesterso May 15, 2015 for summer semester
Federal Fiscal Subrecipient Monitoring
• TEA monitors only conduct reviews of current-year grants that have not closed• TEA provides for settlement conferences to
resolve federal fiscal monitoring findings that could result in enforcement actions
2. Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs• Encouraging schoolwide programs• Schoolwide background data• TEA support for schoolwide programs• Title I, Part A consolidation options
Encouraging Title I, Part ASchoolwide Programs
• Flexibility offered by schoolwide program modelo Easing of some programmatic requirementso Allowing campuses to consolidate funds into a single
budget “pool”
• Clear guidance given on web pageso Continuously updated information
Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs
(2014–2015)
1,200 Number of LEAs eligible for Title I, Part A funds(out of 1,216 LEAs)
6,613 Number of campuses eligible to operate a Title I, Part A schoolwide program (out of 8,177 campuses)
5,854 Number of Title I, Part A schoolwide campuses5,037 consolidate Title, Part A funds234 consolidate federal funds583 consolidate all federal, state, and local
134 Number of Title I, Part A targeted assistance campuses
TEA Support for Title I, Part A
Schoolwide Programs
• Clear guidance• Models and examples• Technical assistance
Title I, Part A Schoolwide Options
• Full consolidation• Federal funds consolidation• Title I, Part A funds only
Key Issues for Schoolwide Programs
•Specific programmatic and fiscal requirements•Account code structure and PEIMS reporting•Consolidating funds vs. coordinating funds•Carryover•Monitoring and documentation
Federal Subrecipient Monitoring
•Monitoring process•Documentation required of LEAs with
campuses that operate schoolwide programs
High-Risk Grantee Designation
•High-risk grantee designation and special conditions apply to LEA•Affects reimbursement requests to campuses
operating a schoolwide program•Required documentation•Uniform Guidance
3. Uniform Guidance• Reasons for change• Final regulations: December 26, 2014
Uniform Guidance Goals• Streamline guidance for federal awards to ease
administrative burden• Strengthen oversight of federal funds to reduce risks
of waste, fraud, and abuse
Most Significant Changes• Time and effort requirements• “Specific conditions” option• Subrecipient monitoring requirements• Monitoring findings and resolution requirements
Uniform Guidance:Time and Effort Requirements
• Certifications• Substitute system
Uniform Guidance:Specific Conditions
• “High-risk” grantee designation• Review of each subrecipient’s risk level
Uniform Guidance:Subrecipient Monitoring
Requirements• Scope of monitoring determined by each
subrecipient’s risk• Possible monitoring activities
Uniform Guidance: Audit Findings and Resolution
Requirements• Raising thresholds for:o Required single audito Questioned costs
Next Steps• Responding to questions• Tools to assist LEAs
Questions and Feedback
Contact Information Title I, Part A schoolwide programs:
Anita VillarrealDivision of Federal and State Education [email protected]
Federal flexibility initiative:Terry ReyesOffice for Grants and Federal Fiscal [email protected]