Exercising Greater Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant Funds

1. Exercising Greater Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant Funds Nora Hancock, EdD Associate Commissioner Grants and Federal Fiscal Compliance Association for Compensatory Educators of Texas October 10, 2014

2. Flexibility Closing the Student Achievement Gap

3. Demographic Landscape (who we are)

4. National Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP) Results: Rankings and Gaps • Fourth-Grade Reading Gaps • Fourth-Grade Reading Ranking • Between white and African American: 24 points • Between white and Hispanic: 27 points • White: 12th • African American: 14th • Hispanic: 35th

5. NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps • Eighth-GradeReading Gaps • Eighth-Grade Reading Ranking • White: 9th • African American: 14th • Hispanic: 29th • Between white and African American: 26 points • Between white and Hispanic: 24 points

6. NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps • Fourth-GradeMath Ranking • Fourth-GradeMath Gaps • White: 6th • African American: 5th • Hispanic: 14th • Between white and African American: 24 points • Between white and Hispanic: 20 points

7. NAEP Results: Rankings and Gaps • Eighth-GradeMath Ranking • Eighth-GradeMath Gaps • White: 5th • African American: 4th • Hispanic: 4th • Between white and African American: 27 points • Between white and Hispanic: 19 points

8. Writing Performance

9. Writing Performance

10. 2013 Graduation Rates

11. Implementing Flexibility in Administering Federal Grant Funds and Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs

12. Guiding Principles • Allowing local discretion • Providing clear guidance • Removing barriers • Improving performance • Ensuring grant funds spent appropriately • Strengthening accountability

13. Federal Flexibility Initiative Focus • TEA policy changes • Title I, Part A schoolwide programs • Uniform Guidance

14. TEA Policy Changes • Grant administration • Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs • Uniform Guidance

15. 1. Grant Administration Policy Changes • Grant application • Grant application negotiation • Grant accounting process • Federal fiscal subrecipient monitoring

16. Grant Application Streamlined • Applicants no longer required to submit certain information and documentation • TEA staff do not automatically deny late or retroactive amendments

17. Grant Application Negotiation • TEA staff will no longer negotiate applications and amendments with a “one size fits all” approach

18. 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

19. 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: • September 4, 2014 for fall, spring, and summer semesters • December 15, 2014 for spring and summer semesters • May 15, 2015 for summer semester

20. 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

21. 2. Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs • Encouraging schoolwide programs • Schoolwide background data • TEA support for schoolwide programs • Title I, Part A consolidation options

22. Encouraging Title I, Part ASchoolwide Programs • Flexibility offered by schoolwide program model • Easing of some programmatic requirements • Allowing campuses to consolidate funds into a single budget “pool” • Clear guidance given on web pages • Continuously updated information

23. Title I, Part A Schoolwide Programs(2014–2015)

24. TEA Support for Title I, Part ASchoolwide Programs • Clear guidance • Models and examples • Technical assistance

25. Title I, Part A Schoolwide Options • Full consolidation • Federal funds consolidation • Title I, Part A funds only

26. 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

27. Federal Subrecipient Monitoring • Monitoring process • Documentation required of LEAs with campuses that operate schoolwide programs

28. 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

29. 3. Uniform Guidance • Reasons for change • Final regulations: December 26, 2014

30. 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

31. Most Significant Changes • Time and effort requirements • “Specific conditions” option • Subrecipient monitoring requirements • Monitoring findings and resolution requirements

32. Uniform Guidance:Time and Effort Requirements • Certifications • Substitute system

33. Uniform Guidance:Specific Conditions • “High-risk” grantee designation • Review of each subrecipient’s risk level

34. Uniform Guidance:Subrecipient Monitoring Requirements • Scope of monitoring determined by each subrecipient’s risk • Possible monitoring activities

35. Uniform Guidance: Audit Findings and Resolution Requirements • Raising thresholds for: • Required single audit • Questioned costs

36. Next Steps • Responding to questions • Tools to assist LEAs

37. Questions and Feedback

38. Contact Information Title I, Part A schoolwide programs: Anita Villarreal Division of Federal and State Education Policy nclb@tea.state.tx.us Federal flexibility initiative: Terry Reyes Office for Grants and Federal Fiscal Compliance terry.reyes@tea.state.tx.us

39. More Contact Information FASRG account code structure: financialaccountability@tea.state.tx.us PEIMS reporting: peimscustomersupport@tea.state.tx.us