Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) Accountability and Alignment

1. Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) Accountability and Alignment North/South Accountability MeetingsSacramento – September 16Ontario – September 23Presented by:Fred Balcom, Ph.D., DirectorAccountability and Improvement DivisionCalifornia Department of Education

2. California Accountability Improvement System

3. Basis for Categorical Program Monitoring Responsibilities Program Instruments Ongoing Program Self-Evaluation Tools Site Selection Onsite Monitoring Visit Resources Alignment Presentation Content Slide 3

4. Basis for Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) Federal law Grantees must monitor grant and subgrant supported activities to assure compliance with applicable Federal requirements. Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, section 80.40(a). Slide 4

5. Basis for CPM: State Law California Department of Education (CDE) is required to monitor categorical programs operated by local educational agencies (LEAs). Onsite school and district compliance reviews of categorical programs shall continue. Slide 5

6. Basis for CPM: State Law (Cont.) School plans shall be required and reviewed as part of these onsite visits and compliance reviews. The Superintendent shall establish the process and frequency for conducting CPM reviews. Education Code (EC) Section 64001(b) Slide 6

7. Basis for CPM: Purpose Used to ensure that an LEA is meeting the legal requirements of a specific categorical program Instruments contain the legal requirements of a specific categorical program Slide 7

8. Basis for CPM: Purpose (Cont.) CPM findings will pertain directly to a legal requirement of a categorical program, and be based on factual evidence derived from data, documents, interviews, and observations. Slide 8

9. Basis for CPM: Purpose (Cont.) If an LEA is not meeting the legal requirements of a specific categorical program, the CDE helps an LEA by stating what an LEA must do to meet the legal requirements of a specific categorical program. Slide 9

10. Responsibilities: CDE Establishing the process for conducting CPM reviews Developing monitoring instruments that show the current legal requirements for specific categorical programs Slide 10

11. Responsibilities: LEA Meet the legal requirements of each categorical program it operates, as stated in that program’s monitoring instrument Develop its own ongoing process for monitoring compliance with legal requirements of each categorical program for which it receives funds Slide 11

12. Responsibilities: LEA (Cont.) Develop a Local Educational Agency Plan (districtwide plan). For guidance, go to the Local Educational Agency Plan Guidelines Web page at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/le/guide temp.asp Slide 12

13. Responsibilities: LEA (Cont.) The LEA Plan (districtwide plan) should provide broad leadership initiatives for categorical programs operated by the LEA. Slide 13

14. Responsibilities: School Develop a Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). SPSA should describe how a specific school in the LEA will use categorical funds to improve student academic achievement. Slide 14

15. Responsibilities: School (Cont.) The LEA Plan and SPSA describe the LEA’s coordinated leadership efforts to use categorical funds to improve student academic achievement. Information pertaining to SPSA development is available online at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/le/ singleplan.asp Slide 15

16. Program Instruments: Use The CPM review team uses program instruments to objectively determine whether an LEA meets statutory requirements pertaining to a specific categorical program. Slide 16

17. Program Instruments: Use (Cont.) The CDE has developed a program instrument for each categorical program monitored by a CPM review team. In addition, a Cross-Program instrument includes statutory requirements pertaining to multiple categorical programs. Slide 17

18. Program Instruments: Dimensions CPM program instruments are organized around the following seven dimensions: Involvement Governance and Administration Funding Slide 18

19. Program Instruments: Dimensions (Cont.) Standards, Assessment, and Accountability Staffing and Professional Development Opportunity for Equal Educational Access Teaching and Learning Slide 19

20. Program Instruments: List Instruments for the 2008-09 CPM review cycle are available on the CDE Web site at:http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/cc/08instruments.asp Cross-Program Adult Education California School-Aged Families Education Slide 20

21. Program Instruments: List (Cont.) 2008-09 CPM Program Instruments: Career Technical Education Child Development Educational Equity English Learners Gifted and Talented Education HIV/AIDS Prevention Slide 21

22. Program Instruments: (Cont.) NCLB, Title I, Part A: Basic and State Compensatory Education NCLB, Title I, Part A: Program Improvement NCLB, Title I, Part C: Education of Migratory Children and California Migrant Education Slide 22

23. Program Instruments: (Cont.) NCLB, Title I, Part D: Neglected or Delinquent NCLB, Title II, Part A: Improving Teacher Quality NCLB, Title IV, Part A: Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities and Tobacco Use Prevention Education Slide 23

24. Program Instruments: (Cont.) NCLB, Title IV, Part B: Before and After School Programs NCLB, Title X, Part C: Homeless Uniform Complaints Procedures Physical Education Slide 24

25. Ongoing Program Self-Evaluation Tools (OPSETS) The OPSETs are organized around the same seven dimensions as the program instruments. They help to answer the question: “What must a local educational agency do to meet statutory requirements.” OPSETS for the 2008-09 CPM review cycle are available on the CDE Web site at:http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/cc/08opsets.asp. Slide 25

26. Site Selection Objective Selection criteria grounded in law CPM primary site selection criteria: Academic Performance Index, and Evidence of district compliance with state and federal law [EC 64001(b)] CPM site selection criteria details online at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/cc/selectioncriteria.asp Slide 26

27. Onsite Monitoring: Prior Team prepares by reviewing existing CDE data and documents. CPM Regional Team Leader is primary contact-person for LEA. CDE staff contact a school district’s Categorical Director with feedback regarding preliminary data and document review. Slide 27

28. Onsite Monitoring: During During onsite, CPM review team reviews additional factual evidence including data, documents, interviews, and observations Team focuses on requirements in CPM program instrument Program quality review not within the scope of a CPM onsite monitoring visit Slide 28

29. Onsite Monitoring: During (Cont.) Scope of CPM limited to a determination of whether an LEA is meeting statutory requirements in a CPM program instrument Team focuses on legal requirements and informs district representatives of monitoring issues Slide 29

30. Onsite Monitoring: During (Cont.) CPM review team conducts interviews and observes categorical program activities Notification of Findings of Noncompliance prepared, presented, and discussed prior to team’s exit from district CPM review team and LEA representative sign Notification of Findings of Noncompliance prior to review team’s exit from school district Slide 30

31. Onsite Monitoring Visit: Follow-up Following CPM visit, LEA sends CDE a Proposed Resolution of Noncompliance. CDE staff reviews and approves or denies proposed resolution. CDE staff work with LEA representatives to help LEA resolve all findings and meet legal requirements. Slide 31

32. Alignment of Title I, Title II and Title III Accountability Requirements • Currently: • Disparate timelines • Planning templates • Reporting expectations • Contribute to: • A fragmented approach

33. Alignment 2008-09 Transitional Year Program staff working to align: • Correspondence • Due Dates • Planning Requirements • Technical assistance • District Capacity Study

34. Correspondence September 2008 letters: • Outline Title I and Title III requirements • Advance email to district superintendents Letters accommodate combinations of Title I and Title III requirements

35. Correspondence: Title II Policy requirements for Title II are the subject of a November 2008 State Board of Education (SBE) item and will be disseminated after the November SBE meeting.

36. Correspondence: Notice • Common Notice letters posted on the Web at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/programimprov.asp • Letters will also be posted on a Title III Web site

37. Due Date: Entering PI Year 1 • January 9, 2009, for any LEA entering Program Improvement (PI) Year 1 • January 9, 2009, for any LEA entering PI Year 1 and any other combination of Title III, Years 1, 2, 3, or 4

38. Due Date: Entering PI Year 3 • March 9, 2009, for any LEA entering PI Year 3 • March 9, 2009, for any LEA entering PI Year 3 and any other combination of Title III, Years 1, 2, 3, or 4

39. Due Date: Remaining in PI Year 1 or PI Year 3 • No new plans due in 2008-09 • PI Year 3 Corrective Action and/or Title III Year 4 should implement their current approved plan • Potential assistance of a District Assistance and Intervention Team and/or a Title III County Office Lead

40. Planning Requirements: PI Year 1 • Prepare and implement LEA Plan Addendum with the assistance of an outside entity • Notify parents • Contract with external entity to revise the LEA Plan addendum after consulting with the county superintendent of schools • Set aside 10 percent of Title I funds for professional development

41. Planning Requirements: PI Year 2 • Implement approved PI LEA addendum • Continue to set aside 10 percent of Title I apportionment for professional development

42. Planning Requirements: PI Year 3 • LEAs will be subject of Priority Assistance Index, defined at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/yr08/documents/mar08item21a2.xls • Priority Assistance Index is a combination of AYP and API variables • Corrective actions • Technical assistance

43. Planning Requirements: PI Year 3 • State will review possible corrective actions at November 2008 meeting of SBE • LEAs will be assigned corrective action and level of technical assistance

44. Technical Assistance Technical assistance differentiated based on Priority Assistance Index • Extensive • Moderate • Minor • Other

45. Technical Assistance (Cont.) • SBE may assign LEA to work with a specific district assistance and intervention team (DAIT) • SBE may require LEA to contract with a DAIT for support and a capacity study

46. Title I Technical Assistance • Title I interface with Title III will be discussed at Title III forums and seminars • Online webinars will be conducted as needed • Updates will be provided at CAASFEP

47. District Capacity Study • DAIT to analyze and report on the LEA’s capacity to support schools’ efforts to improve student achievement • SBE expressly requested CDE to have LEA Plans publicly posted

48. District Capacity: Defined Current and potential ability of a district to implement a coherent, standards-based instructional program to improve student achievement.

49. District Capacity: Parameters of Study Assess LEA capacities in governance, academic support, and fiscal and human resources, especially in serving English learners and students with disabilities.

50. District Capacity: Governance • Stability of district leadership • Policies governing staff recruitment • Policies governing high priority students, including placement in, assignment to, and exit from interventions for English learners (ELs) and students with disabilities (SWDs)