Florida Education: The Next Generation DRAFT

1. Florida Education: The Next GenerationDRAFT March 13, 2008 Version 1.0 NCLB: 2009 Fiscal Update Presented by: Martha K. Asbury, Director Administrative Services April 28, 2009 Florida Department of Education Dr. Eric J. Smith, Commissioner

2. Biggest Change - ARRA • The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act adds many opportunities and challenges • Targeted vs. Stabilization Funds • Implications for all NCLB programs • Significant reporting and accountability requirements

3. Second Biggest Change No Consolidated Application (for this year only)

4. Goals • Ensure no disruption to programs for students • Maintain compliance with federal and state requirements • Issue awards QUICKLY to maximize availability of funds

5. Solutions • District Staff: prepare applications that can be approved with no or minimal revisions • District Staff: Submit applications early (use most recent data available) – SEEK TA • DOE Staff: establish processes that expedite approval without sacrificing quality • DOE: Issue conditional approvals

6. Process • All applications will receive conditional approval upon receipt of application in substantially approvable form. • Conditional Awards will be in effect through September 30, 2008. • If it appears that revisions cannot be completed by that time, Superintendent and Finance Officer will be contacted. • Amount of funding will be limited to the percentage received by DOE for July 1 – September 30. Note: Most NCLB programs release only a percentage of the allocated funds on July 1 with the remainder on October 1. For example, Title I will receive 25% of the award on July 1 and the remainder on October 1

7. Budget: DOE 101-R (New Form) • Narrative! • Provide Detail • Check Red Book for Function and Object • Get Early Review from Finance Officer (especially important this year) • Double Check Relationship to Program Narrative • Watch Set-Asides (see column provided for that purpose)

8. Elements – For ARRA Only • Special Revenue Code (Pre-Populated) • ARRA • Assurances • Principles • Strategies • FTE Positions • Job Codes • Saved • Created • Continued

9. Elements – For All (or at least most!) • School or District-Based Expenditure • Activity • Function • Object • Account Title and Description • FTE Positions (Total) • Amount

10. Budget: DOE 101-R • Reasonable • Allowable • Allocable • Necessary

11. Plan A Essentially the same as last year Must exclude all but $25,000 of the cost of a subagreement Continues to exclude capital outlay The $25,000 applies for the duration of the agreement Subagreements generally include cooperative projects and pass-through grants in which LEAs have both administrative and direct financial involvement Subagreements generally exclude pass-through grants in which LEAs have administrative involvement only Plan B All expenditures in Object 310 (Professional/Technical Services) in Functions 5000 (Instruction) and 7800 (Pupil Transportation) are treated as excluded costs Exception is expenditures by charter schools Indirect Cost

12. Indirect Costs vs. Administrative Costs • Indirect Costs are a sub-set of Administrative Costs • If there is a cap on Administrative Costs, the cap will include Indirect Costs • Administrative Costs can be both Direct and Indirect

13. Maintenance of Effort Maintenance of effort refers to the need of each LEA, as a condition of receiving funds under any "covered program" (identified in ESEA section 9101(13)), to have maintained in the previous fiscal year at least 90 percent of the level of State and local expenditures for K-12 education, in the aggregate or on a per-pupil basis, that the district expended in the second preceding fiscal year. If an LEA fails to maintain effort, ESEA section 9521(b) requires the state agency to reduce ESEA funding to that LEA under covered programs.

14. Supplement – Not Supplant Three Presumptions of Supplanting – Use of Federal Funds to Provide Services: • required under other federal, state, or local law • provided with non-federal funds in the prior year • for participating children that are provided with non-federal funds for non-participating children

15. Rebuttal to Presumption of Supplanting What would you do in the absence of federal funds?

16. Documentation • LEAs will need to maintain fiscal and programmatic records to confirm that, in the absence of federal funds they would have eliminated staff or other services in question. • The LEA must ensure that its records confirm: • The reduced amount or lack of State and local funds available to pay for the position or service (budget documents, revenue estimates, etc.) and • The LEA's decision to eliminate the position or service in the absence of Federal funding, along with the reason(s) for that decision (board minutes, allocation schedules, etc.) Source: March 6, 2004 Letter to Oklahoma Superintendent of Education from Gene Hickok, Deputy Secretary, USED

17. USED Position on Audits “Finally, it is possible that your auditors or others may question the propriety of an LEA's use of any ESEA program funds for personnel or other services previously paid with State or local funds. For reasons explained above, an LEA's records should reasonably confirm that (1) if it had received no ESEA funding the LEA would not have paid for the personnel salaries or other services at issue with State or local funds, and (2) the use of these ESEA funds is otherwise authorized. Where an LEA retains these records and there are no other facts that indicate that supplanting occurred, I fully expect that this Department would support decisions made by both that LEA and your own agency. “

18. Exclusion to Supplement Not Supplant – Title I • Districts may exclude certain state and local funds from the supplanting analysis when funds are used to carry out a program that meets the intents and purposes of Title I, Part A. • Implemented in a school with at least 40% free and reduced price lunch • Promotes schoolwide reform and upgrades the entire educational operation of the school • Designed to meet the educational needs of all students in the school. State and local funds used to support the program must be supplemental in nature (Example SAI)

19. Miscellaneous • ARRA Funds • Apply for a two-year period • For targeted funds, all of the programmatic and fiscal requirements pertain to ARRA programs unless specifically waived (DOE will be seeking appropriate waivers) • Reporting will be quarterly with reports due by the 5th day after the end of the quarter (First is July 5) • Comparability and Maintenance of Effort requirements apply to this funding • Possible that Stabilization funds can be used to meet Maintenance of Effort Requirements (waiver needed) • Set-Asides • Based on the total of ARRA and non-ARRA funds • The expenditures may be charged to ARRA or non-ARRA federal funds or both

20. Resources • ARRA: http://www.fldoe.org/ARRA/ • Grants Website: http://www.fldoe.org/grants/gm/ • Required Forms • GMS • Green Book • Red Book • Reference Guide for State Expenditures: http://www.fldfs.com/aadir/reference%5Fguide/ • Comptroller’s Office: http://www.fldoe.org/comptroller/Default.asp

21. For Assistance • Grants Management • 850/245-0496 • Sue Wilkinson • Kay Caster • Chief’s Office • 850/245-0735 • Ed Clayton • Administrative Services • 850/245-0420 • Martha K. Asbury

22. Florida Education: The Next GenerationDRAFT March 13, 2008 Version 1.0 Questions?