The 2006–07 LEA Application for IDEA, Part B and by bigmekahlo

VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 12

									October 30, 2006                                         (X) Action Required
                                                         (X) Informational



BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LEARNING AND TEACHING


TO:          Educational Service District Superintendents
             School District Superintendents
             Assistant Superintendents for Business and/or Business Managers
             Educational Service District Special Education Offices
             School District Special Education Directors

FROM:        Dr. Terry Bergeson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction

RE:          Use of Funds: Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
             (IDEA 2004), Part B


PURPOSE

The purpose of this bulletin is to highlight several key changes as a result of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004), and reiterate
changes enacted by the Washington State biennial budget for the 2005–07 fiscal years.
Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) should be aware of the changes when planning
2006–07 expenditures.

BACKGROUND

The US Department of Education (ED), Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services (OSERS) published final federal regulations August 14, 2006. The regulations
went into effect October 13, 2006. You may download the regulations at:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/
pdf/06-6656.pdf. As of October 13, 2006, LEAs must implement the new regulations
that were published in the federal register, and existing Washington Administrative
Code (WAC) provisions that are not in conflict with those regulations. As part of their
2006–07 Part B of IDEA grant applications, LEAs must sign assurances. LEAs must
assure that they will make changes to existing policies and procedures, as necessary,
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 2
October 30, 2006


to bring those polices and procedures into compliance. LEAs must assure that they will
have policies, procedures, and programs consistent with 20 U.S.C. 1412, and state
policies and procedures, no later than December 31, 2007. As part of these
assurances, the LEAs must state that they will continue to comply with the federal and
state regulations that are applicable and currently in place.
Distribution of Federal Funds

IDEA funding formula for Section 611 of Part B, allocates base amounts to states that
are equal to the amounts the state received from federal fiscal year 1999. Then, 85
percent of the remaining funds are allocated on the basis of the relative populations of
children aged 3 through 21, who are the same age as children with disabilities for whom
the state ensures the availability of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and 15
percent of the remaining funds are allocated on the basis of the relative populations of
those children who are living in poverty.
The 2006–07 allocation tables for districts in Washington State are located at:
www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/pubdocs/data/SpEdAllocations0607.pdf. The tables reflect
final enrollment data from the P105A and P105B reports. Washington State school
districts are receiving 88% of federal IDEA funds in direct flow-through.

Use of Funds
The LEA assures that amounts provided to it under Part B of IDEA will be expended in
accordance with 20 U.S.C. 1412(a) and:
     (1) Shall be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and
         related services to children with disabilities;
     (2) Shall be used to supplement state, local, and other federal funds and not to
         supplant such funds; and
     (3) Shall not be used to reduce the level of expenditures for the education of
         children with disabilities made by the LEA from local funds below the level of
         those expenditures for the preceding fiscal year, except as explained in the
         Maintenance of Effort (MOE) section of this bulletin.

Excess costs are those costs for the education of an elementary school or secondary
school student with a disability that are in excess of the average annual per student
expenditure in an LEA during the preceding school year for an elementary or secondary
school student. An LEA must spend at least the average annual per student expenditure
on the education of an elementary school or secondary school child with a disability
before funds under Part B of the Act are used to pay the excess costs of providing
special education and related services.
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 3
October 30, 2006


Section 602(8) of the Act and 34 CFR § 300.16 require the LEA to compute the
minimum amount that must be spent for children with disabilities. Appendix A to Part
300 of the regulations provides an example of the calculation and it is attached to this
bulletin.

The 2006–07 LEA Application for IDEA, Part B and Section 619 funds is available at
http://eds.ospi.k12.wa.us/iGrants/Default.aspx. The application must be completed and
copies of the certification form and assurances must be submitted before the Office of
Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) will approve the LEA application and
provide the subsequent grant award. The completed LEA application is due to OSPI no
later than November 30, 2006. OSPI staff will review each application. Grant awards will
be made to LEAs after OSPI approves the application.

MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT

Per 34 CFR § 300.204, an LEA may reduce the level of its expenditures under Part B of
the Act below the level of those expenditures from the preceding fiscal year if the reduction
is attributable to the following:

   a. The voluntary departure, by retirement or otherwise, or departure for just cause, of
      special education or related services personnel.
   b. A decrease in the enrollment of children with disabilities.
   c. The termination of the obligation of the district, consistent with this part, to provide a
      program of special education to a particular child with a disability that is an
      exceptionally costly program, as determined by the OSPI, because the child:
         (1) Has left the jurisdiction of the district;
         (2) Has reached the age at which the obligation of the district to provide FAPE to
             the child has terminated; or
         (3) No longer needs the program of special education.
   d. The termination of costly expenditures for long-term purchases, such as the
      acquisition of equipment or the construction of school facilities.
   e. The assumption of cost by the high-cost fund operated by the SEA.

Exceptions to Maintenance of Effort

LEAs may use, as local funds, up to 50 percent of the increase in federal flow-through
funding from the prior year to meet the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements of
IDEA.

Additionally, IDEA 2004, 20 USC §1413(f) permits LEAs to use up to 15 percent of the
Part B funds received for early intervening services (EIS) for students who have not
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 4
October 30, 2006


been identified as students with disabilities under IDEA. An LEA that chooses to do this
must count the amount used for early intervening services towards any funds treated as
local funds in calculating MOE. ED provides two detailed examples for how the early
intervening services funds can count towards the maintenance of effort reduction
flexibility.

Example 1: The maximum amount that the LEA may use for early intervening services
is greater than the amount that may be used for local maintenance of effort reduction.

    Prior Year’s Allocation:                            $900,000
    Current Year’s Allocation:                          $1,000,000
    Increase:                                           $100,000
    Maximum Available for MOE Reduction (50%):          $50,000
    Maximum Available for EIS (15%):                    $150,000

         If the LEA chooses to set aside $150,000 for EIS, it may not reduce its MOE
          (MOE maximum $50,000 less $150,000 for EIS means $0 can be used for
          MOE reduction).
         If the LEA chooses to set aside $100,000 for EIS, it may not reduce its MOE
          (MOE maximum $50,000 less $100,000 for EIS means $0 can be used for
          MOE reduction).
         If the LEA chooses to set aside $50,000 for EIS, it may not reduce its MOE
          (MOE maximum $50,000 less $50,000 for EIS means $0 can be used for
          MOE reduction).
         If the LEA chooses to set aside $30,000 for EIS, it may reduce its MOE by
          $20,000 (MOE maximum $50,000 less $30,000 for EIS means $20,000 can
          be used for MOE reduction).
         If the LEA chooses to set aside $0 for EIS, it may reduce its MOE by $50,000
          (MOE maximum $50,000 less $0 for EIS means $50,000 can be used for
          MOE reduction).
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 5
October 30, 2006


Example 2: The maximum amount that the LEA may use for EIS is less than the amount
that may be used for MOE reduction.

    Prior Year’s Allocation:                          $1,000,000
    Current Year’s Allocation:                        $2,000,000
    Increase:                                         $1,000,000
    Maximum Available for MOE Reduction (50%):        $500,000
    Maximum Available for EIS (15%):                   $300,000


         If the LEA chooses to use no funds for MOE, it may set aside $300,000 for
          EIS (EIS maximum $300,000 less $0 means $300,000 for EIS).
         If the LEA chooses to use $100,000 for MOE, it may set aside $200,000 for
          EIS (EIS maximum $300,000 less $100,000 means $200,000 for EIS).
         If the LEA chooses to use $150,000 for MOE, it may set aside $150,000 for
          EIS (EIS maximum $300,000 less $150,000 means $150,000 for EIS).
         If the LEA chooses to use $300,000 for MOE, it may not set aside anything
          for EIS (EIS maximum $300,000 less $300,000 means $0 for EIS).
         If the LEA chooses to use $500,000 for MOE, it may not set aside anything
          for EIS (EIS maximum $300,000 less $500,000 means $0 for EIS).

Prohibition

If OSPI determines that an LEA is unable to meet the requirements of Part B, including
the targets of Washington State’s performance plan or OSPI has taken action against
an LEA under 20 USC § 1416, OSPI shall prohibit the LEA from reducing the level of
expenditures.

School-wide Programs under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA)

LEAs may use federal flow-through special education funds to assist in the
implementation of school-wide programs consistent with Title I, subject to the following
formula and conditions:

      Formula: Divide the amount the district receives for Part B by the number of
      eligible students in the district, and then multiply that number by the number of
      eligible students participating in the school-wide program consistent with Title I.
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 6
October 30, 2006


       Conditions: Funds must be used for ―excess costs‖ and must be used to
       supplement state, local, and other federal funds and not to supplant those funds.

PERMISSIVE USE OF FUNDS

Funds provided to the LEA under IDEA, Part B may be used for services and aids that
also benefit non-disabled children, early intervening services, high cost education and
related services, and administrative case management.

Services and Aids that also Benefit Non-disabled Children - 20 USC § 1413(a)(4)(i)

LEAs may use federal flow-through funds for the costs of special education and related
services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other
education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the individualized
education program of the child, even if one or more non-disabled children benefit from
such services.

Early Intervening Services - 20 USC § 1413(a)(4)(A)(ii)

20 USC §1413(f) (1) allows an LEA to use not more than 15 percent of the amount it
receives under IDEA, Part B for any fiscal year (less any amount reduced by the agency
for MOE in combination with other amounts which may include amounts from other
educational funds), to develop and implement coordinated, early intervening services.
Population served includes students in kindergarten through grade 12 with a particular
emphasis on students in kindergarten through grade three who have not been identified
as needing special education or related services but who need additional academic and
behavioral support to succeed in a general education environment. Allowable activities
include professional development for teachers and other school staff to enable the
delivery of scientifically-based academic and behavior interventions, including:

          Scientifically-based literacy instruction, and instruction on the use of adaptive
           and instructional software; and
          The provision of educational and behavioral evaluations, services, and
           supports, including scientifically-based literacy instruction.

LEAs must designate the amount to be spent on early intervening services in the 2006–
07 Special Education IDEA, Part B and Section 619 application, Section V. LEA
Provision of Early Intervening Services. The maximum amount available for early
intervening services is displayed on the application, however, LEAs should review the
MOE provisions contained in 20 USC § 1413(a)(2)(C)(iv) before budgeting amounts
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 7
October 30, 2006


for approved activities. In some cases, expenditures for early intervening services may
impact maintenance of effort calculations. Additionally, LEAs may combine funds to
carry out coordinated, early intervening services aligned with activities funded by ESEA,
if those funds are used to supplement and not supplant funds made available under
ESEA for the activities and services.

Each LEA that develops and maintains coordinated, early intervening services must
annually report to OSPI the number of students served by early intervening services;
and the number of students served by early intervening services who subsequently
receive special education and related services under IDEA during the preceding two-
year period.

High Cost Education and Related Services - 20 USC § 1413(a)(4)(A)(iii)

The federal statute provides an option for LEAs to support innovative and effective ways
of cost-sharing by the state, by an LEA, or among a consortium of LEAs, through a risk
pool. Funds may be used for a variety of activities associated with high cost special
education and related services. OSPI will continue to explore the development of this
program in coordination with representatives from LEAs. The state may reserve up to
five percent of the funds reserved for state-level activities to support this program.

Administrative Case Management - 20 USC § 1413(a)(4)(B)

An LEA may use IDEA, Part B funds to purchase appropriate technology for
recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and
related services personnel providing services described in the individualized education
program of children with disabilities.

MONITORING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT

OSPI has the responsibility of monitoring compliance with federal and state
requirements under the IDEA 2004. OSPI’s outcome-based monitoring system reflects
the federal intent to emphasize a data-driven, systemic approach to compliance and
improvement of results for children with disabilities. Beginning in 2005–06, OSPI
monitors have incorporated focused monitoring visits and targeted assistance visits with
routine compliance visits to ensure and maintain the integrity of the previous monitoring
system.
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 8
October 30, 2006


Disproportionality and Over-Representation

IDEA requires OSPI to collect and analyze data to determine if significant racial and
ethnic disproportionality is occurring at the state and the LEA level with regard to:

      (1) The identification of children as children with disabilities, including the
          identification of children with a particular impairment;
      (2) The placement of these children in a particular setting; and
      (3) The incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary actions, including
          suspensions and expulsions.

Should it be determined that an LEA is significantly disproportionate in identification of
children or placement in a particular educational setting, the school district must:

      (1) Require review and, if appropriate, revise policies, procedures, and practices
          used to identify and place students to ensure that policies, procedures, and
          practices comply with the requirements of IDEA;
      (2) Reserve the maximum amount of funds (15%) to provide comprehensive,
          coordinated early intervening services for children in those groups, but not
          exclusively for children in those groups, that were significantly over or under
          identified;
      (3) Publicly report on the revision of policies, practices, and procedures related to
          disproportionality.

WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Washington State Legislative provisions affecting the Safety Net process are explained
below.

Safety Net

Funding for special education safety net was increased by the 2005 Legislature. It
provided $18,940,000 in state funding and $28,698,000 in federal funding for the 2005–
07 biennium. The following changes were enacted by the 2005 Legislature and are
effective for the 2006–07 school year:
   Elimination of Line 25 (calculated local contribution) in the determination of
      demonstrated need on Worksheet A.
   Adoption of a uniform high need individual application threshold of $15,557 for
      reimbursement with state funds.
BULLETIN NO. 118-06 LT
Page 9
October 30, 2006


    Adoption of the federal definition of a high need student as a high-need child with a
     disability three times the average per pupil expenditure (as defined in section 9101
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965).
    Approved high-need student applications between $15,557 and $22,224 will be
     funded with state revenues (#4121).
    Approved high-need student applications in excess of $22,224 will be funded with
     federal revenues (#6124).

The Safety Net Application Bulletin is posted at:
www.k12.wa.us/BulletinsMemos/bulletins2006/102-06.doc

Should you have questions regarding this bulletin, please contact Mary Ellen Parrish,
Special Education Safety Net Supervisor, at maryellen.parrish@k12.wa.us or by calling
(360) 725-6075. The agency TTY is (360) 664-3631.

This information is also available at http://www.k12.wa.us/bulletinsmemos/ on the
agency website.

LEARNING AND TEACHING

Cathy Davidson, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent

Bob Harmon, Assistant Superintendent
for Special Programs

Douglas H. Gill, Ed.D, Director
Special Education Operations

TB:mep

Attachment 1: Appendix A to Part 300—Excess Cost Calculation
                          Attachment 1


Appendix A to Part 300--Excess Costs Calculation

    Except as otherwise provided, amounts provided to an LEA under
Part B of the Act may be used only to pay the excess costs of
providing special education and related services to children with
disabilities. Excess costs are those costs for the education of an
elementary school or secondary school student with a disability that
are in excess of the average annual per student expenditure in an
LEA during the preceding school year for an elementary school or
secondary school student, as may be appropriate. An LEA must spend
at least the average annual per student expenditure on the education
of an elementary school or secondary school child with a disability
before funds under Part B of the Act are used to pay the excess
costs of providing special education and related services.
    Section 602(8) of the Act and Sec.300.16 require the LEA to
compute the minimum average amount separately for children with
disabilities in its elementary schools and for children with
disabilities in its secondary schools. LEAs may not compute the
minimum average amount it must spend on the education of children
with disabilities based on a combination of the enrollments in its
elementary schools and secondary schools.
    The following example shows how to compute the minimum average
amount an LEA must spend for the education of each of its elementary
school children with disabilities under section 602(3) of the Act
before it may use funds under Part B of the Act.
    a. First the LEA must determine the total amount of its
expenditures for elementary school students from all sources--local,
State, and Federal(including Part B)--in the preceding school year.
Only capital outlay and debt services are excluded.

    Example: The following is an example of a computation for
children with disabilities enrolled in an LEA's elementary schools.
In this example, the LEA had an average elementary school enrollment
for the preceding school year of 800 (including 100 children with
disabilities). The LEA spent the following amounts last year for
elementary school students (including its elementary school children
with disabilities):




(1)....................   From State and local tax funds.      $6,500,000
(2)....................   From Federal funds............          600,000
                                                          ---------------
                           Total expenditures............       7,100,000


    Of this total, $60,000 was for capital outlay and debt service
relating to the education of elementary school students. This must
be subtracted from total expenditures.




Bulletin 118-06                                             October, 2006
(1)....................   Total Expenditures.............        $7,100,000
(2)....................   Less capital outlay and debt...           -60,000
                                                            ===============
                           Total expenditures for                $7,040,000
                           elementary school students
                           less capital outlay and debt.


    b. Next, the LEA must subtract from the total expenditures
amounts spent for:
    (1) IDEA, Part B allocation,
    (2) ESEA, Title I, Part A allocation,
    (3) ESEA, Title III, Parts A and B allocation,
    (4) State and local funds for children with disabilities, and
    (5) State or local funds for programs under ESEA, Title I, Part
A, and Title III, Parts A and B.
    These are funds that the LEA actually spent, not funds received
last year but carried over for the current school year.

    Example: The LEA spent the following amounts for elementary
school students last year:




(1)....................   From funds under IDEA, Part B          $ 200,000
                           allocation.
(2)....................   From funds under ESEA, Title I,          250,000
                           Part A allocation.
(3)....................   From funds under ESEA, Title              50,000
                           III, Parts A and B allocation.
(4)....................   From State funds and local               500,000
                           funds for children with
                           disabilities.
(5)....................   From State and local funds for           150,000
                           programs under ESEA, Title I,
                           Part A, and Title III, Parts A
                           and B.
                                                            ---------------
                           Total.........................         1,150,000
                                                            ---------------
(1)....................   Total expenditures less                 7,040,000
                           capital outlay and debt.
(2)....................   Other deductions...............      -1,150,000
                                                          ===============
                           Total.........................      $5,890,000


    c. Except as otherwise provided, the LEA next must determine the
average annual per student expenditure for its elementary schools dividing
the average number of students enrolled in the elementary schools of the
agency   during  the   preceding   year   (including  its   children   with
disabilities) into the amount computed under the above paragraph. The
amount obtained through this computation is the minimum amount the LEA
must spend (on the average) for the education of each of its elementary

Bulletin 118-06                                             October, 2006
school children with disabilities. Funds under Part B of the Act may
be used only for costs over and above this minimum.




(1)....................   Amount from Step b.............       $5,890,000
(2)....................   Average number of students                   800
                           enrolled.
(3)....................   $5,890,000/800 Average annual            $ 7,362
                           per student expenditure.


    d. Except as otherwise provided, to determine the total minimum
amount of funds the LEA must spend for the education of its
elementary school children with disabilities in the LEA (not
including capital outlay and debt service), the LEA must multiply
the number of elementary school children with disabilities in the
LEA times the average annual per student expenditure obtained in
paragraph c above. Funds under Part B of the Act can only be used
for excess costs over and above this minimum.




(1)....................   Number of children with                      100
                           disabilities in the LEA's
                           elementary schools.
(2)....................   Average annual per student               $ 7,362
                           expenditure.
(3)....................   $7,362 x 100...................
                           Total minimum amount of funds         $ 736,200
                           the LEA must spend for the
                           education of children with
                           disabilities enrolled in the
                           LEA's elementary schools
                           before using Part B funds.




Bulletin 118-06                                             October, 2006

								
To top