Message: Charter Schools Summit-webinar

Charter Schools Summit-webinar
Charter Schools Summit-webinar

From | Morse, Stacy | Date Monday, October 2, 2017 3:07 PM

To | Wieberg, Jackie
Cc |
Subject | Charter Schools Summit-webinar

Food and Nutrition Services Updates.pptx (1903 Kb ) Budgeting, Calendaring Reuirements and Coding changes.pptx (299 Kb ) A Brief Overview of Federal Programs.pptx (359 Kb ) Data Collection.pptx (1316 Kb ) Improvement and Innovation.pptx (212 Kb ) The Office of Educator Quality.pptx (6526 Kb ) Federal Programs - Pat Kaiser.pptx (153 Kb ) Missouri Assessment Program.pptx (637 Kb ) Special Education.pptx (976 Kb ) Charter summit.pdf (75 Kb )

Jackie-

Here is a first draft of email to presenters. Please let me know what to add or it can come from you and Chris. Whatever is easiest and will get the best reception. Thank you for all your help!

Stacy

Presenters-

Thank you for your time and efforts in making the charter summit a success. Please review the survey feedback to see the compliments as well as questions that were not covered in presentations.

By October 31, we are asking that presenters record a webinar (either in your office or the webinar room) that will then create a link to be sent to attendees and posted on the DESE charter school web page.

Jackie Wieberg can assist with scheduling a webinar room, and if you need assistance when you are ready to record Jackie can assist you (uploading your presentation, audio set up, etc.) at that time as well.

Thank you for Julie Boeckmann for formatting presentations for consistency. Please use the attached version of your presentation and make any updates needed based on the survey feedback.

Stacy E. Morse

Director of Educational Support Services

Phone: 573.522.3651

Email: Stacy.Morse@dese.mo.gov

Food and Nutrition Services Updates
Karen Wooton, Coordinator

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)

Food and Nutrition Services (FNS)

1

Current Programs

- National School Lunch Program

- After School Snack Program
- Seamless Summer Option

- School Breakfast Program
- Special Milk Program
- Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program
- Donated Foods Program

2

1/1/97

2

Administrative Reviews (ARs)

- On-site compliance monitoring
- 3 year cycle

- First cycle: 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16
- Second cycle: 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19

- List on website of ARs for 2017-18

3

Administrative Reviews

- Public Access Report on web site

- Finding
- Description of the finding
- Required corrective action

4

Administrative Reviews

- Meal access and reimbursement

- Certification and benefit issuance
- Verification
- Meal counting and claiming

- Meal pattern and nutritional quality
- Resource management

- Maintenance of non-profit status
- Paid Lunch Equity
- Revenue from nonprogram foods
- Indirect costs

5

1/1/97

3

Administrative Reviews

- General program compliance

- Civil rights
- Local wellness policy
- Smart Snacks
- Professional standards
- Water
- Food safety
- Reporting and recordkeeping
- Breakfast and summer feeding outreach

6

1/1/97

4

Administrative Reviews

- Other Federal Programs

- Afterschool snacks
- Seamless Summer Option
- Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program
- Special Milk Program

7

1/1/97

5

Procurement Reviews

- New for 2016-17
- Reviews in conjunction with ARs

- Code of conduct
- Procurement procedures
- Vendor paid list
- UDSA procurement tool

8

Direct Certification (DC)

- File available weekly

- MOSIS file
- ZIP code file

- Free meal eligible from DC list

- SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program)
- TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families)
- Foster

9

Direct Certification

- Mandatory 3 times yearly

- July/August, October and January

- Mandatory 1 time yearly for Community Eligibility Provision (CEP)

- April

10

Verification

- Sample size selected as of October 1
- Must complete the Verification process by November 15
- Verification Report due by December 15

11

CEP – Eligibility Criteria

- LEA or school must have an identified student percentage of at least 40% as of April 1st of the school year prior
- Identified students: certified for free meals without an application

12

Definition: Identified Student

- Directly certified through SNAP, TANF or Foster
- Extended SNAP and TANF eligible
- Status as homeless, migrant, runaway
- Participation in Head Start

KEEP SOURCE DOCUMENTATION

13

CEP Documentation

- Must submit Identified Student Percentage (ISP) Calculation Worksheet
- Must upload Identified student data into Tiered Monitoring

14

Paid Lunch Equity (PLE)

- If charged less than $2.86 for paid lunches in SY 2016-17 must raise price or add non-federal funds

- Federal reimbursement for free ($3.16) minus paid ($0.30) meals = $2.86
- Never required to raise more than 10 cents
- Exemption if exceed a 3 month operating cost

15

Revenue - Nonprogram Foods

- Must demonstrate that the percent of nonprogram food costs is less than the percent of nonprogram revenues

- Nonprogram revenue tool

- Separate nonprogram food costs from program costs for a period of 5 consecutive days

16

Civil Rights Training and Tracking

- Training must be provided to all frontline staff and supervisors who deal with School Nutrition Program applicants and participants
- PowerPoint presentation on website
- Upload previous year attendee sheet under Checklist Summary on Web Application

17

Local Wellness Policy

- Must have a local wellness policy in place and updated with the new requirements of final rule.
- Final rule requirements on FNS website

18

Unpaid Meal Charge Policy

- Required to have a local meal charge policy in place

- Must be communicated in writing to all households
- Include, if applicable, the availability of alternate meals
- Must include policies regarding collection of delinquent meal charge debt
- Must provide copy of the policy during the AR

19

Charge Policies

- Local Decision

20

Delinquent Debt vs Bad Debt

- Delinquent – considered collectable and efforts made to collect (allowable use of food service funds)
- Bad – when determined efforts to collect delinquent debt is useless or too costly (losses must be restored using non-federal funds)

21

Smart Snacks

- Nutrition standards shall apply to all foods and beverages sold to students:

- Outside of school meal programs
- On the school campus
- At any time during the school day (the period from the midnight before, to 30 minutes after the end of the official school day)

22

Fundraiser Exemptions in Missouri

- A maximum of 5 fundraisers, per school building, per school year will be allowed
- A single exempt fundraiser will have a duration of one day
- Locally may implement more restrictive standards

23

Professional Standards

- Hiring standards for new school nutrition program directors
- Training standards for all school nutrition program employees
- Must maintain documentation

24

Donated Foods Program

- July/August - Entitlement Letters
- January - USDA Foods Packet available
- February - Expo Food Shows & USDA Foods Packet is due
- August/September - Value of USDA Foods Distributed Letter
- August to April – Monthly deliveries

25

Questions or anything else you would like to talk about?

26

6

Food and Nutrition Services

27

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; email civilrights@dese.mo.gov.

Email: foodandnutritionservices@dese.mo.gov

Phone: 573-751-3526

Web address: http://dese.mo.gov/financial-admin-services/food-nutrition-services

Type comments here.

7

1/6/2011

title:Food and Nutrition Services Updates Karen Wooton, Coordinator
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T19:08:52Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T19:11:28Z
document template:powerpoint template 2011
edit minutes:2
word count:962
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:194
slides:28
slide notes:7
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Charter School
Budgeting, Calendar Requirements, and Upcoming Coding Changes

Missouri Department
of Elementary and Secondary Education

September 2017

Presented by:

Tammy Lehmen~ Director, School Finance

and

Debra Clink ~ Manager, School Transportation

Type comments here.

1

1/6/2011

Topics

- State Adequacy Target and Threshold Percentages
- Estimated ADA
- Basic Formula
- Classroom Trust Fund
- Proposition C
- Prior Year Correction
- Calendar Requirements
- Inclement Weather
- Upcoming Coding Changes

2

State Adequacy Target

3

SAT and Threshold Recalculations

- The SAT and related Thresholds have been recalculated for the school year 2017-18 as follows:

- SAT* $6,241
- Free & Reduced Lunch Threshold 36.12%
- Special Education (IEP) Threshold 12.16%
- Limited English Proficiency Threshold 1.94%

*The SAT will remain at an adjusted level through the calculation process until such time that there is funding available to increase the SAT to the calculated level provided above.

4

SAT and Threshold Recalculations

- The SAT and related Thresholds for school years 2018-19 & 2019-20 have been recalculated.

- State Adequacy Target 2018-19 $6,308
- State Adequacy Target 2019-20 $6,375
- Free & Reduced Lunch Threshold 31.42%
- Special Education (IEP) Threshold 12.06%
- Limited English Proficiency Threshold 2.50%

*The SAT will remain at an adjusted level through the calculation process until such time that there is funding available to increase the SAT to the calculated level provided above.

5

SAT and Threshold Recalculations

The SAT was calculated at $6,375 but per 163.011 RSMo, “should a recalculation result in an increase in the state adequacy target amount, fifty percent of that increase shall be included in the state adequacy target amount in the year of recalculation, and fifty percent of that increase shall be included in the state adequacy target amount in the subsequent year.”

6

Estimating ADA

7

Estimated Regular Term ADA

- Charter schools are paid on the current year estimated regular term ADA. This estimate should NOT include Summer School ADA.
- Review the estimated ADA often throughout the school year.
- Estimated ADA can be modified at any time during the year and the calculation must be e-mailed to the charter school’s finance consultant to enter on the School Finance Estimated ADA screen.
- Final date to provide an update is May 15.

8

2

Estimating ADA Reminders

- Take into consideration the attendance percentage for the school when estimating
- Be careful not to overestimate

9

Name | Title
Tammy Lehmen Tammy.Lehmen@dese.mo.gov | Director, School Finance Contact for districts in counties 048, 055-079, 347-347 & Kansas City Charter Schools
Debra Clink Debra.Clink@dese.mo.gov | Student Transportation Manager Contact for districts in counties 080-115 & St. Louis Charter Schools

3

Basic Formula Payment

10

Total ADA

- Regular Term ADA - Charter Schools are paid based on an estimated regular term ADA
- Summer School ADA

- Summer school attendance hours are divided by 1,044
- Each charter school provides the summer school attendance hours to DESE via the Missouri Student Information System (MOSIS)

- Total ADA

- Regular Term ADA plus Summer School ADA

11

Weighted ADA

12

| Regular Term ADA
+ | Summer School ADA
= | Total ADA
+ | Free and Reduced Lunch Weighting
+ | IEP Weighting
+ | LEP Weighting
= | Total WADA

2017-18 WADA Calculation

13

1. Estimated ADA | 947
2. Summer School ADA | 43.3535
3. Total ADA (Line 1 + 2) | 990.3535
4. FRL weighting | 3.47
5. IEP weighting | 0
6. LEP weighting | 0
7. Total WADA (Line 3 + 4 + 5+ 6) | 993.8235

Example – FRL Weighting

The example provided is specifically for FRL, this same calculation can be followed for IEP and LEP weighting by using the threshold percentage and weighting components that apply to IEP and LEP.

14

Total ADA (1+2) | 100
Free & Reduced Lunch (FRL) count | 50
Threshold Percentage | 36.12%
Threshold Amount (Total ADA times Threshold Percentage) | 36.12
Count to be weighted (FRL count minus Threshold Amount) | 13.88
FRL Weighting (Count to be Weighted times .25) | 3.47

Basic Formula Payment

15

| Estimated WADA
x | Amount per WADA
- | Charter school sponsor withholding
= | Net to Charter
x | Total amount due at current time in the year
| (Ex: September payment is 3/12th of annual amount
- | Amount paid during the previous months
= | Payment amount due for month

Monthly Formula Payment

- To determine the September payment amount, take approximately 3/12ths (.25) of the Basic Formula - State Monies (Line 17B) less the amount the charter school received through August for Basic Formula – State Monies. These items can be located on the payment transmittal.
- The above method can be used to determine the payment amount in any month during the school year.
- If a prior year correction was processed during the month the amount of the positive or negative prior year correction will need to be added to or subtracted from the monthly amount calculated through the above method.

16

Classroom Trust Fund

17

Classroom Trust Fund (CTF)

- Gaming monies
- Part of revenue available to fund formula
- State funds to districts/charter schools will show dollars from CTF and dollars from state General Revenue
- Paid on first preceding year ADA

18

Classroom Trust Fund

- Shall be spent at discretion of the charter school

- For the 2010-11 school year and for each subsequent year, all proceeds a charter school receives from the classroom trust fund in excess of the amount the charter school received from the classroom trust fund in the 2009-10 school year shall be placed to the credit of the charter's teachers' and incidental funds.

- May be used for:

- Teacher recruitment, retention, salaries
- School construction, renovation, leasing
- Technology, textbooks, instructional materials
- School safety
- Supplying additional funding for required programs

19

Classroom Trust Fund

2015-16

June 2015-16 CTF was $389.1363 per 2014-15 ADA

2016-17

June 2016-17 CTF was $404.9466 per 2015-16 ADA

Budgeting for 2017-18

Appropriation $351,663,349

Estimate of the 2016-17 ADA is 850,000

Estimate of $413 per 2016-17 ADA

The state will only distribute funds that are actually collected into the Classroom Trust Fund

20

Prop C

21

Proposition C

A $.01 state-wide general sales tax for education with a corresponding property tax reduction for school districts/charter schools. Prop C sales tax revenue is collected locally, transmitted to the state and then passed on to school districts/charter schools based on an amount per prior year Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) amount.

22

Proposition C

2015-16

June 2015-16 Proposition C - $947.63 per 2015-16 WADA

2016-17

June 2016-17 Proposition C - $979.04 per 2015-16 WADA

Budgeting for 2017-18

Appropriation is $901,600,000

Estimate of the 2016-17 WADA is 912,000

Estimate of $988 per 2016-17 WADA

The state can only distribute what is appropriated for Proposition C.

23

Prior Year Correction

24

Prior Year Correction

- The 2016-17 Basic Formula Apportionment will be recalculated at least twice during the 2017-18 school year
- November or December will most likely be the first time the recalculation is completed and will reflect the largest correction
- A second prior year correction will likely be done in May

25

Prior Year Correction

- Why is a prior year correction done?

- Charter Schools are paid on an estimate of the current year ADA.

- A calculation must now be completed based upon actual data.

- June MOSIS Enrollment and Attendance Information
- Screen 10 Actual Calendar Information

26

Prior Year Correction

- To calculate the prior year correction, start with the June Basic Formula Calculation page

- Change the WADA to the 2016-17 actual WADA
- Multiply by the recalculated payment amount per WADA

- Calculation sheets are not currently available for the prior year corrections

27

Prior Year Correction

- 2017-18 Basic Formula, Line 17B

- June 2017 Calculation $1,036,437
- 2017 Recalculation $1,068,273
- Difference/Correction $ 31,836

- Note: A school may receive a negative correction even though the charter school’s data did not change

28

Monthly Formula Payment

September FY 2018 Basic Formula Apportionment | = | $ 3,730,470
.25 of the September Apportionment | = | $ 932,617
Amount paid to school July through August (taken from August transmittal sheet) |  | ($613,015)
September FY 2018 Payment | = | $ 319,602
FY 2017 Prior Year Correction (if applicable) +/- |  | $31,836
September Payment | = | $ 287,766

29

School Calendar Options

30

School Calendar Options

- A traditional calendar may be adopted which requires the school board to provide a minimum term of at least 174 days and 1,044 hours of instruction, 171.031.1, RSMo.

- Minimum required hours in a school day of 3 hours of instruction per Section 160.041.1, RSMo.
- Maximum possible hours in a school day of 7 hours of instruction per Section 171.031.7, RSMo.

31

School Calendar Options

- A calendar of less than 174 days may be adopted by the school board that provides a minimum of at least 1,044 hours of instruction, 171.029.1 RSMo.

- Minimum required hours in a school day of 4 hours of instruction per Section 160.041.1, RSMo.
- Maximum possible hours in a school day of 8 hours of instruction per Section 171.031.7, RSMo.

32

School Calendar Options

- A calendar of 142 days (four days per week) may be adopted by the school board that provides a minimum of at least 1,044 hours of instruction, 171.031.1, RSMo.

- Minimum required hours in a school day of 4 hours of instruction per Section 160.041.1, RSMo.
- Maximum possible hours in a school day of 8 hours of instruction per Section 171.031.7, RSMo.

33

Standard Day Length

- Total number of hours between the starting time of the first class and the dismissal time of the last class, minus the time allowed for lunch and one passing time caused by lunch, and minus Channel One time.
- Passing time and recess time supervised by certificated staff are included.
- The standard day length is reported to four decimal places.

34

Standard Day Length

- If the charter school makes sure the minutes in the standard day length are divisible by three there will be no rounding problems that impact the standard day length.
- If the calendar for a grade level or building varies from other grade levels or buildings in the school a separate calendar must be shown in Core Data Screen 10.

35

Weather Make-Up Requirements

- Per 171.033.4, RSMo:

- “In the 2009-2010 school year and subsequent years, a school district may be exempt from the requirement to make up days of school lost or canceled due to inclement weather in the school district when the school district has made up the six days required under subsection 2 of this section and half of the number of additional lost or canceled days up to eight days, resulting in no more than ten total make-up days required by this section.”

36

Weather Make-Up Requirements

- Inclement weather shall be defined as:

- Ice
- Snow
- Extreme cold
- Flooding
- Tornado

- Such term shall not include excessive heat.

37

Weather Make-Up Requirements

- Charter schools must plan 6 make-up days.
- This rule applies to charter schools that plan to attend 174 days or more as well as to those schools that plan to attend less than 174 days (per Section 171.029, RSMo).

38

Weather Make-Up Requirements

- Schools must make up the first 6 weather days and every other day there after to a maximum of 10.
- Which means the school makes up the first 7, then day 8 is forgiven, etc.
- Weather Make-Up days may be done during the school year or tacked onto the end of the school year.

39

Weather Make-Up Requirements

- Schools must be careful to attend the minimum day length required by their calendar when releasing early for weather.
- If a school does not attend the minimum day length on a partial day then the hours do not count in the calendar and the day does not count as a day.
- Hours should not be reported in MOSIS either.

40

Calendar FAQ’s

- Can inclement weather days be made up by adding minutes/hours to the end of some or all of the remaining school days?

- No, there is not a provision in the law to make up inclement weather days by adding minutes/hours to the end of the school day.

- Does the inclement weather forgiveness apply to schools that are attending less than 174 days?

- Yes, the inclement weather forgiveness applies to all schools regardless of the planned days of school for the year. All schools are required to follow the guidelines for missed school days described previously.

- What happens if a school doesn’t make up the appropriate days and hours?

- Schools that don’t make up the appropriate days and hours will be required to use days at the beginning of the following school year to satisfy the requirements of statute pertaining to inclement weather. If this occurs the school will be required to meet all minimum day and hour requirements for the following year as well.

41

Calendar FAQ’s

- What are considered to be inclement weather days that can be forgiven?

- Per 177.033, RSMo, “Inclement weather” shall be defined as ice, snow, extreme cold, flooding, or a tornado, but such term shall not include excessive heat. Other circumstances, such as, water main breaks and power outages are not considered inclement weather and should be made up independently.

- Can a school make up an inclement weather day with a partial day of school instead of a full day of school?

- A school is able to make up an inclement weather day with a partial day of school instead of a full day of school. When doing so the school will need to follow the criteria for minimum hours required in a school day provided above. The school will also need to be conscientious of the minimum hours required in a school year and if making up a full day with a partial day would cause the school to fall below the 1,044 hour requirement it would not be an option for the school and a full make up day of school would be required.

42

Calendar FAQ’s

- How is funding affected if a school is forgiven a day due to inclement weather?

- As mentioned above, days that are forgiven due to inclement weather will not have an adverse impact on the average daily attendance (ADA) calculation. This will create a situation which will have an effect on both components (both the total attendance hours and the hours in session) of the ADA calculation and, therefore, will not have a negative impact on the ADA. Since the ADA is not affected there also isn’t a decrease in funding associated with the forgiven inclement weather days.

- How should the days forgiven be reported on the calendar entered on Core Data Screen 10?

- All weather days, those required to be made up as well as those forgiven should be reported as a weather day on the actual calendar on Core Data Screen 10. The School Finance staff will review the actual calendar provided on Core Data Screen 10 to verify that the school has made up the appropriate days and hours based on the days and hours provided on the planned calendar and the weather days and weather make up days provided on the actual calendar.

43

Calendar FAQ’s

- How should it be reported if the school has scheduled to make up an inclement weather day and the make-up day cannot be attended due to inclement weather?

- If a school is unable to attend a make-up day the day is reported as a not in session day. The day is not reported as a weather day since the district/charter school was using the day to make up an actual weather day. Note, since the district/charter school was unable to be in session on this day the district/charter school will still need to make up the original inclement weather day.

44

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

45

Why is standardized account-code structure important?

5

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

- New Code Structure Starting FY 2019

- Order of items in the district/charter schools account entry will vary by vendor.
- Fund has always been stated to be 3 digits.

- Not all vendors had this set up as three digits.
- DESE will only be collecting 1 digit for the Fund in the ASBR.

46

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Fund Code – 3 Digits – Only 1 Digit Collected on the ASBR

- The Fund Code represents the Fund the revenue or expenditure is occurring in.

- General Fund - 1

- There could be sub funds to the General Fund, they need to be reported as Fund 1.

- Teachers Fund - 2
- Debt Service Fund - 3
- Capital Projects Fund - 4

47

The last digit(s) may be used to indicate fiscal year. Federal obligation takes place in 2017-18 school year but paid in 2018-19 school year requires separate tracking.

6

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Function Code – 4 Digits – 4 Collected on the ASBR

- The Function Code describes the action, purpose, or program for which activities are performed.

Object Code – 4 Digits - 4 Collected on the ASBR

- The Object Code describes the service or commodity obtained as a result of a specific expenditure.
- Depending on your vendor your Revenue Code will fall under on of these two categories if not a separate field in your accounting string.

48

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Location Code – 4 Digits - 4 Collected on the ASBR

- The Location Code refers to individual campuses within a district/charter school and individual components within the administration, school service, and maintenance and operation divisions. The district/charter school must use DESE’s core data building codes to distinguish separate campuses where student data is reported. The district/charter school may assign other codes that it wishes for its other operational or “cost” units.
- The Location Code should tie to each of the district’s/charter school’s buildings. Example:

- 4020 – ABC Elementary
- 4030 – GHI Elementary
- 3020 – MNO Middle School
- 1050 – PQR High School

49

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

A list of Revenue, Function, and Object Codes Required to have expenditures reported at a building level can be found at:

https://dese.mo.gov/financial-admin-services/school-finance/fy-2019-accounting-changes

50

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Source of Funds – 1 Digit - 1 Collected on the ASBR

- The Source of Funds Code is used to identify a subset of revenue used to fund a specific expenditure. Districts/charter schools must assign a Source of Funds Code to expenditures funded by each type of revenue as noted below:
- “1” for expenditures funded with Local Revenue (Includes Non-Current Sources of Revenue)
- “2” for expenditures funded with County Revenue
- “3” for expenditures funded with State Revenue
- “4” for expenditures funded with Federal Revenue

51

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Project Code – 5 Digits -5 Collected on the ASBR

- The Project Code is used to identify an expenditure paid for with a specific source of revenue or part of a specific grant. The Project Code may also be used to aggregate costs across subfunds, such as teachers’ salaries and supplies, to construct the reports necessary for various granting agencies. The district/charter schools must use DESE’s assigned Project Codes if one is assigned for a specific Revenue Source.

52

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

Project Code – 5 Digits -5 Collected on the ASBR

53

Range of Codes Reserved for DESE Assignment | Range of Codes Open for District/Charter School Use for Other Purposes
| 00001-09999
| 10000-19999*
| 20000-29999*
30000-39999 |
40000-49999 |
| 50000-59999
| 60000-69999*
| 70000-79999
| 80000-89999*
| 90000-99999

*If a district chooses to use a project code in this range it is encouraged to follow the structure shown in the Missouri Financial Accounting Manual to eliminate major changes if DESE must assign a Project Code in this range at a future date.

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

List of Project Codes can be found at:

https://dese.mo.gov/financial-admin-services/school-finance/fy-2019-accounting-changes

54

Upcoming Accounting Structure Changes

For more information on these upcoming changes please see the School Finance Website.

- Accounting Manual Page.
- Annual Secretary of the Board Report (ASBR) Page (website, not web applications).

- This contains a preliminary layout for the ASBR file upload.
- Excel Spreadsheets showing the FY 2017 and the preliminary FY 2018 ASBR changes.

55

Importance of Proper Coding

- Must code revenue and expenditures according to the Missouri Financial Accounting Manual.
- Do not use a code that is not in the manual.
- Do not use a code that states it is not for posting transactions.

56

Importance of Proper Coding

- Why does this matter?

- Incorrect reporting occurs.
- Incorrectly calculates various percentages and numbers which impact the district/charter school.
- Hard to compare districts’/charter schools’ data when everyone is not reporting the same.

- Creates more work trying to complete annual reporting of:

- ASBR
- FERs
- MOEs

57

Upcoming Timeline

- Upcoming Training

- September 12 – webinar with MOASBO on Salary Coding Guidance and Technology Coding Guidance.
- October 24-26 - webinars with districts/charter schools and their vendor regarding the changes the vendor has made due to ESSA.
- November 1 - webinar regarding coding basics.
- November 14 - MOASBO Support Staff Conference
- Spring Webinar regarding ASBR changes due to ESSA.

58

Contact Information

School Finance 573-751-0357

59

Name | Title
David Tramel David.Tramel @dese.mo.gov | Coordinator, Financial and Administrative Services
Tammy Lehmen Tammy.Lehmen@dese.mo.gov | Director, School Finance Contact for districts in counties 048 & Kansas City Charters, 055-079 & 347-347
Debra Clink Debra.Clink@dese.mo.gov | Student Transportation Manager Contact for districts in counties 080-115 & St Louis Charters
Taylor Richter Taylor.Richter@dese.mo.gov | School Finance Consultant Contact for districts in counties 001-047 & 049-054

title:Charter School Budgeting, Calendar Requirements, and Upcoming Coding Changes
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T19:04:56Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T19:07:26Z
edit minutes:2
word count:3523
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:476
slides:59
slide notes:6
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

A Brief Overview of Federal Programs

Missouri Department
of Elementary and Secondary Education

September 28, 2017

Type comments here.

1

1/6/2011

Overview of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)/ Federal Programs
Gain an understanding of Federal Programs to make local decisions

2

Take-Away for Today

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act was signed into law in 1965 it has been reauthorized under several different names with the most recent reauthorization happening on December 10th 2015 when President Obama signed into act the Every Student Succeeds Act replacing the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

- goal for the day – provide a brief overview of ESEA in particular ESSA and the Federal Programs in your district

- As Superintendents, we want you to understand how the requirements and policies impact academic achievement in local districts and

- Gain understanding to make appropriate, reasonable, necessary decisions based on student’s academic needs

2

Purpose of ESEA

3

- Support efforts for student academic achievement and assistance for struggling students to meet state standards.
- Make funding available to all qualifying LEAs.

- One misconception of ESEA is that it is for poor kids, but it is not just for poor students or F & R kids the amount of money you receive at the district level and how you disperse Title I funds to your buildings is based on economic deprivation but students that receive services is based on academic deprivation. ESEA is to help students reach proficiency on state academic assessments based on our Missouri Learning standards.

- Focus on

- low achieving students,
- closing achievement gap,
- high standards & expectations for all students,
- high quality PD,
- coordination of services,
- expanded Parent and family engagement,
- extended learning time,
- early intervention

3

What’s Involved?

- Title I. A – Improving Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged
- Title I.C – Education of Migratory Children
- Title I.D – Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk
- Title II. A – Preparing, Training and Recruiting High-Quality Teachers, Principals, and other School Leaders
- Title III – Language Instruction for English Learners and Immigrant Students
- Title IV.A – Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants
- Title V.B – Flexibility and Accountability
- Title V.IIB – McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act

4

These are the programs that are funded through ESSA under our Federal Programs Section. Our Extended Learning Section has 21st Century School Funding under Title IV, it is a separate competitive grant that is funded outside of our consolidated application.

1/6/2011

4

Requirements

5

Supplement, Not Supplant

Federal funds are supplemental funds for LEAs to use to provide additional support for students and teachers.

- All Federal funds must be supplemental – they are to provide additional support for students and teachers

- This is a requirement that has changed from NCLB to ESSA for Title I funds. LEAs will document that Title I funds are supplemental by showing that the school/building is receiving the same level of state and local funds as they did in the prior year. This is a change in our application process for the 17-18 school year. LEAs will have to enter the state and local funds each of their buildings received in the 16-17 school years as well as what they will receive in the 17-18 school year. After this initial year the prior year funding should roll forward so next year the 17-18 state and local allocations will roll forward and you will only have to enter 18-19 state and local funding.

- For all other ESSA consolidated funding sources the LEA;

- must maintain services that are required by MSIP / state requirements

- Appropriate staffing
- Textbooks / classroom curriculum

- We can presume supplanting occurred if federal funds were used to provide services that,

- Were required to be made available under other federal, state or local laws regular classroom teacher, sped teacher
- Were provided with nonfederal funds in prior year you had a reading coach that you paid with state or local funds last year but are using federal funds this year
- Were provided to participating children, if those same services were provided with nonfederal funds to nonparticipating children, buying desk in Title I classroom

First 2 can be rebutted if the LEA can demonstrate it would not have provided the services with nonfederal funds if the federal funds were not available the LEA can not rebut the 3rd bullet.

A good question to ask yourself is;

What would happen in the absence of these federal funds, would I still have this program? How has program/staff been funded before? If yes to either of these you probably want to stay away from funding it with federal funds.

5

Title I.A Funding

6

- Extra monies for extra services
- Reasonable and Necessary
  expenditures?
- District support for programs?
- July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018 budget year

Title I funds can only support Title I identified students or teachers serving Title I identified students. IF you have targeted buildings in your district meaning the building does not have a schoolwide plan it is very important to remember Title I funds may only be used for Title I students. If your building or buildings have schoolwide plans ALL students would be Title I eligible students therefor able to participate in programs and activities funded with Title I funds.

LEAs could provide–

- Tutoring before or after school
- Preschool services (blended funding)
- small group instruction
- Instructionally based programs
- focused materials
- instructional support materials / technology

Reasonable and necessary expenditures –

- not buying “stuff”,
- not spending funds just to stockpile, Materials and supplies, even capital outlay should be purchased, inventoried and used within the same fiscal year.
- We often ask use the language is it reasonable and necessary to teach the children

****Fiscal year runs July 1 – June 30 – Typically our ESEA Consolidated budget applications opens in early to mid May. Because of the changes from NCLB to ESSA our budget Application has been very delayed. – Before you can begin obligating funds from any of the federal funds you have to have substantial approval date- you may want to go back to your district and make sure that your budget has been submitted so that you are not obligating funds if you don’t have a substantial approval date.

Obligations for staff occur the first day they begin working, so if you have 12 month employees it is important to have a July 1 substantial approval date.

6

Service to Students

7

- Building based
- All grade levels possible
- Push-in or pull-out classes
- Service and personnel based on
  student needs

- Once funding is at the district level the district will allocate funds to eligible/served buildings through the Breakdown of Allocation which is found in the consolidated budget application. Title I funds can be used K-12 if the building is eligible based on economic deprivation.

- If the building is eligible you can serve any or all grade(s) in that building – if you choose a particular grade level(s) to serve you do not have to do that forever, grade level can change from year to year

- The law requires LEAs to Plan for these federal funds. The law requires LEAs to develop a needs assessment which will drive the planning process- who you are serving and how you are serving them should be a result of your needs assessment

During this transition year from NCLB to ESSA the US Department of Education has allowed states to use an assurance from LEAs in lieu of plans. As an agency we have decided to use this flexibility and only collect an assurance that LEAs will follow the law and requirements of each funding source. This provision all states that once the SEA has an approved consolidated state plan we must offer LEAs a consolidated LEA plan. So while you did not have the requirement of submitting all the separate plans for 2017-2018 we will have 1 consolidated plan for the 18-19 school year.

7

Program Possibilities

8

- Preschool
- Tutoring
- Parent and Family Engagement
- Professional Development

- Focus still on struggling students

- Could include components of

- Preschool (must serve K-12 can’t just serve Pre-K)
- Tutoring
- Parent and Family engagement
- Professional Development

8

Targeted Assistance Program

9

- Building Based
- Identified students only
- Multiple Criteria @ grade level
- Limited use of resources

In Title I you can have 2 types of programs either Targeted or Schoolwide let’s talk about targeted first.

Have to remember with Title I you are looking at each building in your district for eligibility so in your district you could have targeted schools as well as schoolwide schools. In a targeted school you must identify students as being most in need. To do this you have to use a multiple criteria,

Criteria must be

- objective,
- educationally based,
- multiple items, at least 3, 1 of the criteria cannot qualify a student for services as well as 1 criteria cannot disqualify a student for services.
- appropriate for grade level,
- include MAP in grade levels where administered

- Districts determine what criteria they use and they determine the weight for each criteria and the cutoff score for being eligible to receive services.

- Resources including staff / materials / technology only allowed for service to identified students

9

Schoolwide Program

10

- Building based –
- 40% economic deprivation or
- Approved waiver from DESE
- All grades eligible – based on needs
  assessment
- All students eligible – focus on struggling
  students
- Grades served - may change year to year

Building must

- meet 40% economic deprivation based on formula including F & R percentage, or if the building is not at 40% but the LEA feels they have buildings that would benefit from being schoolwide you could request a waiver from DESE of the 40% requirement.
- Complete SW planning process and actual SW plan
- Address process for changing / upgrading entire academic structure of building
- Address how to use funds to best meet needs of students

10

Academically Challenged

11

- Removing barriers to academic
  success and serving children with
  greatest educational need
- Homeless definition and identification
- Registered Nonpublic – equitable
  services

Homeless defined –

(2) The term `homeless children and youths’—

1. means individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence (within the meaning of section 103(a)(1)); and

(B) includes—

1. children and youths who are sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar reason; are living in motels, hotels, trailer parks, or camping grounds due to the lack of alternative adequate accommodations; are living in emergency or transitional shelters; are abandoned in hospitals; or are awaiting foster care placement;

(ii) children and youths who have a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (within the meaning of section 103(a)(2)(C));

(iii) children and youths who are living in cars, parks, public spaces, abandoned buildings, substandard housing, bus or train stations, or similar settings; and

(iv) migratory children (as such term is defined in section 1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965) who qualify as homeless for the purposes of this subtitle because the children are living in circumstances described in clauses (i) through (iii).

Donna Cash is our Homeless Coordinator her contact information is donna.cash@dese.mo.gov or 573/522-8763

LEA’s are required to provide equitable services to the nonpublic students in their district. Under Title I.A, services follow the student, so if you have resident student who attends a nonpublic school, even outside of your district boundaries, because the student resides within the district boundaries you are required to offer equitable services. Under Title I.C, Title II.A, Title III, and Title IV you are required to provide services to the Nonpublic school building that sits within your district boundaries. If you have nonpublic schools or children who attend nonpublic schools I would encourage you to contact Lisa Burks in our office about the registration process of the nonpublic schools and your Federal Programs Supervisor about consultation with the nonpublic school.

As you go into your new districts on the 1st I would encourage you to check with your Federal Programs Coordinator in your district to make sure consultation with nonpublic has occurred and that the public private design has been filled out and the consultation forms have been signed. If those things haven’t happened you will want to make sure that happens sooner rather than later. The ESSA law requires that timely and meaningful consultation with the nonpublic school officials occurs BEFORE decisions are made about how the federal funds are spent.

ESSA also required State Agencies to have an Ombudsman to ensure equitable services are taking place. The ombudsman was put in place for nonpublic schools and public school as a resource and guidance on equitable services. Our Missouri Ombudsman is Theresa Villmer her contact information is theresa.villmer@dese.mo.gov and 573-526-4365

11

Dates to Remember

12

- July 1st – ESEA Application are due in ePeGS
- October 15th - October Cycle of the Self Assessment due (based on cohort year)
- October 15th – All federally-paid positions, full and part time have been verified and entered in to the October Cycle of MOSIS/Core Data.
- December 15th - December Cycle of the Self Assessment due (based on cohort year)
- February 15th – February Cycle of the Self Assessment due(based on cohort year)
- March 31st - Recommended last day to order materials and supplies
- April 15th – April Cycle of the Self Assessment due (based on cohort year)
- April 30th – Deadline for NCLB Consolidated Federal Programs’ Budget Application Revisions.
- http://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/qs-fedcomp-fed-prog-calendar-2013-2014.pdf

The link to the full calendar is at the bottom of the slide

12

http://dese.mo.gov/quality-schools/area-supervisors-instruction

13

State Supervisors

573-751-4104

- Area supervisors

13

Federal Programs
573-751-3468

14

Supervisor | Regions | Telephone
Christina Wales | Region A | 573-751-9124
Becci Taylor | Region B | 573-522-6182
Janet McLelland | Region C | 573-751-6762
Cheryl Pickett | Region D | 573-751-4888
Kyle Heislen | Region E | 573-526-2582
Kelly Kempker | Region F | 573-751-5386
Kathleen Schwartze | Region G | 573-751-4192
Chris Hoecker | Region H | 573-522-5811
Julie Bock | Region I | 573-522-6268
Donna Cash | Charter Schools | 573-522-8763

- These are the supervisors who will be approving your consolidated budget, conducting your desk audits, reviewing your self assessments (desk monitoring) and coming on-site for the on-site reviews.
- If you have questions about a particular question in the self assessment this is the best person to go to because they can tell you exactly what they are looking for while reviewing the documentation.

14

Questions?

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; fax number 573-522-4883; email civilrights@dese.mo.gov.

15

title:A Brief Overview of Federal Programs
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T18:44:40Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T18:46:05Z
document template:powerpoint template 2011
edit minutes:1
word count:1990
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:272
slides:15
slide notes:15
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Data Collection

Office of Data System Management

Amber Castleman

Melissa Bardwell

September 28, 2017

1

Agenda

2

- Data Collection

- MOSIS
- Core Data

- Resources
- Timelines
- Requesting Access

MOSIS is a student-level record system that contains a randomly generated state identification number for every student receiving service in the public schools.

- MOSIS IDs can be assigned for grades PK-12.
- The MOSIS ID then follows the student throughout their education.
- It is NOT used to associate a student with any entity.

MOSIS ID Overview

3

Data Collection Overview

4

- MOSIS - Missouri Student Information System

- Replaces aggregate data collections manually entered into Core Data screens
- Record-level collection that allows districts to submit data files for validation and certification to the Department.

- MOSIS data are collected in cycles throughout the school year with additional collections for precoding for state assessments. Data collected are used for populating the Core Data System, state and federal reporting, accountability, and funding purposes.

- Core Data

- Web based data collection system
- Collected in 5 cycles throughout the year
- About half of the screens are still manual entry, while the other half are populated from Certified MOSIS Trials in the MOSIS Data
  Collection System

MOSIS Data Collection System

5

CYCLE | COLLECTION | DUE
August | Student Enrollment and Attendance | August 15
October | Student Core | October 15
Educator Core
Educator School
Course Assignment
Student Assignment
December | Student Core | December 15
February | Student Core | February 15
Graduate Follow-Up
April | Student Core | April 30
June | Student Core | June 30
Student Enrollment and Attendance
Student Discipline Incident
Summer Course Assignment
Summer Student Assignment
Student Course Completion
Referrals
Career Technical Student Organization (CTSO)
ASVAB
End of Course Exceptions
Throughout Year | Assessment ID Cleanup | TBD
Assessment Precode
Direct Certification

MOSIS Data Collection System

6

CD Screen | Screen & Cycle (bolded screens populated by MOSIS)
Screen 02 | District Data (August, October Cycle)
Screen 02A | Charter Board Members (August Cycle)
Screen 03 | District Contact Personnel (August Cycle)
Screen 03A | Non LEA Charter Contact (August Cycle)
Screen 04 | District Directory (August Cycle)
Screen 06 | District Tax Data (August Cycle)
Screen 08 | Attendance Center (August, February, June Cycles)
Screen 09 | Discipline Incidents (June Cycle)
Screen 10 | School Calendar (August, June Cycles)
Screen 11 | Special Education Placement Counts by Age (December Cycle)
Screen 12 | Special Education Exiter Counts by Age (June Cycle)
Screen 13 | Secondary Headcount (June Cycle)
Screen 14/14A/14B | Attendance (June Cycle)
Screen 15 | Home School/Free and Reduced Lunch (October, February Cycle)
Screen 16 | Enrollment, Membership and Summer School (August, October, February Cycles)
Screen 17 | Physical Fitness Assessment (June Cycle)
Screen 18 | Educator Data (October Cycle)
Screen 18A | Educator Evaluation (June Cycle)
Screen 20 | Course and Assignment Data (October Cycle)
Screen 21 | Educator Vacancy (October Cycle)
Screen 22 | Sending School Courses and Enrollment (October Cycle)
Screen 24 | Summer School Courses and Enrollment (June Cycle)
Screen 24A | Summer School Application (June Cycle)
Screen 25 | Gifted Education (August Cycle)
Screen 26 | Career Education Follow-up (February Cycle)
Screen 27 | Career Education Follow-up Sending School (February Cycle)
Screen 29 | Post Secondary Adult Follow-up (February Cycle)
Screen 35/35A | December 31 Fund Balance/Non LEA Charter Dec 31 Balance (February Cycle)

1/6/2011

2

Resources

7

- http://dese.mo.gov/data-system-management

- http://dese.mo.gov/data-system-management/core-datamosis

- MOSIS/Core Data Manual
- File Layouts/Business Rules/Excel Templates
- Code Sets
- MCDS Portal
- Listserv Archives
- Webinars

3

Resources

8

- Core Data & MOSIS Reference Manual

- Collection Timeline (Pg. 9)

- Exhibit 10 - Course Codes (Pg. 301)
- Exhibit 15 - Reporting Guidelines for Federal Programs (Pg. 347)
- Exhibit 16 - Reporting Guidelines for Special Education Programs (Pg. 357)
- Exhibit 17A - Reporting Guidelines for Early Childhood Programs (Pg. 361)
- Exhibit 17B - Parents as Teachers (Pg. 363)
- Exhibit 25 - Reporting Guidelines for State Approved Gifted Programs (Pg. 385)
- Exhibit 29 – Reporting Guidelines for School Age Community/Afterschool Programs (Pg. 397)
- Exhibit 34 – Reporting Instruction via Technology (Pg. 413)

- Contact Information (Pg. 277)

4

Timelines

- MOSIS/Core Data Reporting Timelines

http://dese.mo.gov/data-system-management/core-datamosis/timelines

9

Timelines

- Data Acquisition Calendar

https://apps.dese.mo.gov/DataAcquisitionCalendar/Data_Cal.aspx

- Organized by month
- Date due
- Download form if applicable
- Office responsible

10

August Cycle - MOSIS

11

- Student Enrollment Attendance (SEA)

- Report a single record for each student attending summer school including the number of hours of summer school attendance
- Only submit file if your district had an approved summer school

5

August Cycle - MOSIS

12

Screen 02 – District Data

Top Portion – Used for School Directory

Bottom Portion - Complete the Support Staff FTE

Screen 02A – Charter Board Members/Non LEA Charters

Screen 03 – District Contact Personnel

Used for communicating to districts

Screen 03A – District Contact Personnel Non LEA Charters

Non LEA charter reports LEA Administrator on Line 1

Screen 04 – District Directory

Report on Line 1 the LEA Administrator

Screen 08 – Attendance Center

Screen 10/10a – School Calendar

Report Planned Calendar

Screen 16 – Summer School Enrollment, Membership

Populated by Student Enrollment Attendance

Screen 25 – Gifted Education

6

October Cycle - MOSIS

13

- Student Core

- Enrolled on Count Date -last Wednesday in September (September 27, 2017)
- One Prior Ten Day Attendance – ‘N’ if student attended at

least one of the ten prior school days

- NAEP sample districts need file certified by October 15th

- Educator

- Educator Core
- Educator School

- Assignment

- Course Assignment
- Student Assignment

7

October Cycle – Core Data

14

Screen 02 – District Data

- STC populates LEP-ELL field

Screen 15 – Home School/Free and Reduced Lunch

- STC populates Federal Programs Headcount fields

Screen 16 – Enrollment, Membership, Summer School

- STC populates enrollment, membership

Screen 18 – Educator Data

- Populated by Ed Core, Ed School

Screen 20 – Course and Assignment Data

- Populated by Course Assignment, Student Assignment

Screen 21 – Educator Vacancy

Screen 22 – Sending School Courses and Enrollment

- Populated by Course Assignment, Student Assignment

8

Core Data Screens

- Screen 02A – Charter Board Members

- August Cycle
- Enter and update charter board members
- Board President and Board Secretary are automatically pulled from data on Screen 2 for charter LEAs
- Non LEA charter will manually enter the Board President and Board Secretary

15

Core Data Screens

- Screen 03/03A – Contact Personnel

- August Cycle
- List of personnel for various program areas
- Charter LEAs complete 03, non LEA charter completes 03A

16

Core Data Screens

- Screen 35/35A – December 31 Fund Balance Data

- February Cycle
- Report unrestricted ending fund balances in General (incidental) and Special Revenue (Teachers) Funds as of Dec 31 of the year
- Charter LEAs complete 35, non LEA charter completes 35A

17

Requesting MOSIS/Core Data Access

- Request access through your LEA’s User Manager.

- MOSIS ID System (PIN Required)
- MOSIS Data Collection (PIN Required)

- Data Collection (Core Data)

- If the LEA’s User Manager is unable to grant access, submit the Web Systems User ID Request form to the Department.

http://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/dac_forms/MO5002377.pdf

- Security Pin Codes are required for granting access to MOSIS.

- If needed, contact dsm@dese.mo.gov

18

19

Requesting MOSIS/Core Data Access

Accessing Data Collection

21

22

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; fax number 573-522-4883; email civilrights@dese.mo.gov.

Email: coredata-mosis@dese.mo.gov | 573-526-5287

Accountability Data - 573-526-4886

Special Education - 573-751-7848

Career Education -573-751-3524

Federal Programs - 573-751-2643

Contact Information

23

23

9

title:Data Collection
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T19:01:40Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T19:03:17Z
edit minutes:1
word count:1102
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:336
slides:23
slide notes:9
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Improvement and Innovation

Missouri Department
of Elementary and Secondary Education

How ESSA and MSIP Work Together to Help Create Improved Learning

Type comments here.

1

Begin with “Why?”

Successful students equal a better Missouri.

All means all

Each means each

2

Educational Policy Alignment

Federal

State

Local

3

Proper Perspective

Improvement Drivers

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and InnovationPolicy Drivers

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

MSIP

ESSA

CSIP

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

MSIP

ESSA

CSIP

4

State vs Federal Perspective

- Performance of students

- Focus on districts

- Equitable access to educational opportunities

- Focus on schools and subgroups

MSIP

ESSA

5

1/6/2011

2

School Improvement in Missouri

- Missouri School Improvement Program

- Articulate the State's Expectations
- Distinguish Performance of Schools and Districts
- Empower All Stakeholders
- Promote Continuous Improvement and Innovation

- Every Student Succeeds Act

- Protection of equitable access to educational opportunities

6

1/6/2011

3

ESSA Plan Contents

- Title I, Part A: Improving Basic Programs
- Title I, Part C: Education of Migratory Children
- Title I, Part D: Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk
- Title II, Part A: Supporting Effective Instruction
- Title III, Part A: English Language Acquisition
- Title IV, Part A: Student Support and Academic Enrichment
- Title IV, Part B: 21st Century Learning Centers
- Title V, Part B: Rural and Low-Income School Program
- Title VII, Subpart B: Education for Homeless Children and Youth

7

Another Perspective

ESSA Funding

(millions)

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and InnovationSales

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improving Basic Programs

Assessment

Migratory Students

Neglected and Delinquent

Excellent Educators

English Learners

Student Support

21st Century

Rural and Low Income Schools

Homeless

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improvement and Innovation

Improving Basic Programs

Assessment

Migratory Students

Neglected and Delinquent

Excellent Educators

English Learners

Student Support

21st Century

Rural and Low Income Schools

Homeless

8

Watching federal budget process

Title II > Endangered Excellent Educators

Title IV > Endangered

Sig funding > School Improvement (7%, not taking optional 3%)

Optional > Leadership development, supported by field

All that we can goes to you

4

ESSA School Identification

- Lowest 5% (Title I)

- Graduation rate <67% (All HS)

- Subgroup like Comprehensive

Comprehensive

Targeted

9

9

ESSA Identification Method

K-8 | High School | Ranked Metric | Weight
Academic Achievement English Language Arts Mathematics | Combined 3 yr MPI | 40% / 50%
Student Growth English Language Arts Mathematics | Graduation Rate | Growth NCE / Rate | 30% / 37.5%
English Language Proficiency | AEP Index | 20% / -
Attendance | Percent >= 90% | 10% / 12.5%

10

ESSA: Title I.A, 1003(a)

- School Identification

- Lowest 5% of Title I schools
- High Schools with Graduation Rate < 67%
- Comprehensive Support and Improvement
- State

- Subgroup Identification

- Subgroups performing like lowest 5%
- Targeted Support and Improvement
- Local

11

MSIP 6

- Performance

- Academic Achievement
- Success-Ready Graduates

- Processes

- Effective and Stable Leadership and Governance
- Effective Educators and Instructional Practices
- Climate and Culture

12

MSIP 6 is an iteration that began in 1990.

Many states use only ESEA for improvement

Resource only to broad to performance and back

MASA – Effective Schools research

DESE strategic plan

Engaged in Standard and Indicator writing

1/6/2011

5

Emergent Themes - MSIP 6

- Balance of Processes and Performance

- Current Health
- Actions to Improve

- Local Context Matters
- Focus on Individual Children
- Hunger for Innovation
- Emphasis on Collaboration

13

I’d like to share a bit about the recommendations in general

Don’t get hung up on measurement

6

DRAFT

Performance measures - MSIP 6

- Academic Achievement

- Continue to examine all students and subgroups
- Report on additional groups

- Gifted
- English learners

- Success-Ready Graduates

- Examine “readiness” at each level of schooling

14

Continue to wrestle with EL issue – be specific

7

Success-Ready Graduates - MSIP 6

Follow-up

Education

Employment

Military

High

Coursework

Assessments

Certificates / Credentials

Authentic Experiences

Middle

Numeracy (7th)

Attendance

Elementary

Literacy (3rd)

Attendance

Entrance

Ready for Kindergarten

15

DRAFT

Process Measures - MSIP 6

- Climate and Culture

- High expectations for all students
- Collaboration around sustaining the vision, mission and positive environment
- Leadership contribution to culture
- Multi-tiered system of support for students
- Safe and caring environment
- Use of climate and culture data

16

DRAFT

Process Measures - MSIP 6

- Effective Educators and Instructional Processes

- Effective educators in every classroom
- Comprehensive, rigorous, and viable curriculum
- Effective instruction for all learners
- Comprehensive assessment program
- Professional learning
- Collaboration

17

DRAFT

Process Measures - MSIP 6

- Leadership

- Visionary
- Instructional
- Managerial
- Transformational
- Equitable and Culturally Responsive

18

DRAFT

Process Measures - MSIP 6

- Governance

- Ethics
- Policy
- Superintendent Role
- Comprehensive School Improvement Plan and Continuous Improvement
- Management
- Evaluation
- Communication
- Collaboration
- Professional Learning

19

School Improvement

- ESSA

- Improve the lowest performing schools
- Support low performing subgroups

- MSIP

- Drive improvement of systems
- Evaluate student outcomes
- Examine systems and processes
- Promote innovation

20

Timeline for MSIP 6, ESSA

- Spring 2017 MSIP 6
- Development Team Meetings, S’s & I’s, System Development
- Fall 2017 MSIP 6
- Rulemaking to State Board of Education
- Metrics and Reporting Development
- January - Spring 2018 MSIP 6
- Final Rulemaking to State Board of Education
- Piloting of New Processes and Reporting
- Sept 2017 ESSA was submitted to U.S. Dept. of Ed
- 120 day window for response

21

Jocelyn.Strand@dese.mo.gov

Kevin.Freeman@dese.mo.gov

Questions?

22

title:Improvement and Innovation
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T18:46:19Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T18:54:20Z
edit minutes:8
word count:766
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:246
slides:22
slide notes:7
hidden slides:1
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

The Office of Educator Quality

Missouri Department
of Elementary and Secondary Education

September 2017

Charter School

Administrative Summit

ESSA

Educator Support

Welcome and Introductions

1

ESSA: Supporting Excellent Educators

Educator Equity- §299.18(c): SEA’s determine, consistent with section 1111(g)(1)(B) of the Act, whether low-income and minority students enrolled in schools that receive funds under Title I, Part A of the Act are taught at disproportionate rates by ineffective, out-of-field, or inexperienced teachers:

“Ineffective Teacher”- replaces term: “Unqualified Teacher”

“Out-of-Field Teacher”- Teaching Outside Certification Area

“Inexperienced Teacher”- First Year Teacher

2

ESSA: Supporting Excellent Educators

In adherence to the guidelines of section 1111(g)(1)(B) of the Act, LEA’s may:

- Use a portion of its Title II, Part A funds to provide low-income and minority students greater access to effective teachers, principals, and other school leaders; and
- Describe in its Title II, Part A plan or consolidated local plan how it will use Title II, Part A funds to address differences in rates between Title I and non-Title I schools.

3

4

These seven areas, which have are known as the 7 Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation, are key ingredients of an evaluation system that can determine and grow a teacher’s effectiveness.

Evaluation systems not only aligned to these principles, but committed to them, are systems able to meet the requirements of the new education law. More importantly, they are systems that are very good for the students of your district.

This year marks the end of several years of implementation. Districts across the state have been aligning their local evaluation process to these principles. The final phase of implementation happens this year when student growth is included in the summative evaluation process.

2

Why is Educator Evaluation Important?

5

The single most important influence on student learning is the quality of the teacher.

Charlotte Danielson

-Importance of teacher evaluation…supporting quote…

Said another way:

The most direct and influential way to improve the learning of students is to improve the quality of teaching.

3

The greatest challenge that most students experience is the level of competence of the teacher.

John Hattie

Why is Educator Evaluation Important?

6

-Importance of teacher evaluation…supporting quote…

Said another way:

Most students are challenged less by the complexity of content and the learning process than they are the competence of their teacher.

4

The effect of “increases in teacher quality” swamps the impact of any other educational investment, such as reductions in class size.

Goldhaber, 2009

Why is Educator Evaluation Important?

7

-Importance of teacher evaluation…supporting quote…

Said another way:

Of all the things that you can invest in to improve student learning, absolutely none of them has comes close to what happens when you improve the quality of the teacher delivering the content.

5

Having a high-quality teacher throughout elementary school can substantially offset or even eliminate the disadvantage of low socio-economic background.

Rivkin, Hanushek and Kain, 2002

Why is Educator Evaluation Important?

8

-Importance of teacher evaluation…supporting quote…

Said another way:

If we are serious about addressing the inequity of education issues in our state, then the most profound strategy is to ensure all students have access to an excellent teacher.

6

Why?
What value do each of the seven principles have in ensuring learning for each and every student?

1. Measures educator performance against research-based proven practices
2. Differentiated levels of performance
3. Probationary period
4. Measures of growth in student learning
5. Meaningful and descriptive feedback
6. Training for evaluators
7. Results and data informs decisions regarding personnel, employment, and policy

9

Ask for 6 volunteers to give their opinion of how each of the first seven principles will increase student learning. This can show the level of understanding of how each of these impact learning.

7

MAB

DESE Resources – Missouri Teacher Standards - Model Educator Evaluation System

8

Supporting Missouri’s Beginning Teachers

- Driving Documents…

- Beginning Teacher Assistance Program Guidelines
- New Teacher Induction and Mentoring Standards

11

https://dese.mo.gov/educator-quality/educator-development/professional-learning-guidelines-student-success

9

Seven Essential Principles of Effective Educator Evaluation

1. Measures educator performance against research-based proven practices
2. Differentiated levels of performance
3. Probationary period
4. Measures of growth in student learning
5. Meaningful and descriptive feedback
6. Training for evaluators
7. Results and data informs decisions regarding personnel, employment, and policy

12

BB

ESSA 2017 -State Board EES expectation remains

areas of waiver

1. College and Career Ready – MLS
2. MISP 5
3. Educator Evaluation System

10

Principle # 3
Probationary Period

1. Complies with the Missouri statute indicating the first five years are probationary
2. Includes two years of required mentoring
3. Aligns mentoring support to the state mentor standards
4. Includes confidential, non-evaluative support
5. Focuses on important practices particularly significant for new practitioners, with appropriate pacing

13

BB

Screen 18 A – Indicators

A strong induction process will need to be in place to ensure Principle 3.

11

A Focus on Growth…

14

The most valuable evaluation model will not only meet state legislative requirements, it must produce gains in student learning. Next-generation models emphasize teacher growth and development.

As teachers' classroom instructional practice improves, districts should see a corresponding improvement, measurable and consistent, in student achievement.

Robert Marzano

-Supporting quote

The new era of teacher evaluation, one consistent with ESSA, is a system to not only accurately determines teacher effectiveness, but includes mechanisms to growth and enhance it.

12

Principals are key to student learning

- Principals are “second only to classroom instruction among all school-related factors that contribute to what students learn at school.”

-- How Leadership Influences Student Learning,

Kenneth Leithwood, et al,

University of Minnesota,

University of Toronto, 2004

15

13

Competence and Persistence

16

“While highly effective principals create significant changes each year, it takes an average of five years to put a mobilizing vision in place, improve teaching staff, and fully implement policies and practices that positively impact the school’s performance.” (Churn: The High Cost of Principal Turnover, 2014)

How important is an effective principal to student success?

- Pick the right school leader and great teachers will come and stay. Pick the wrong one and, over time, good teachers leave, mediocre ones stay, and the school gradually, or not so gradually, declines. Reversing the impact of a poor principal can take years. (Mitgang, 2008)

17

Reality

- One-fourth of the country’s principals leave their schools each year
- 50% of new principals quit during their third year in the role
- 50% of new principals stay beyond three years – less than 30% stay beyond year five (Churn: The High Cost of Principal Turnover, 2014)
- Average principal career – 7 years

18

How does Missouri stack up?

- High School 77% 47% 29%

- Middle School 77% 49% 28%

- Elementary 78% 51% 35%

19

- Workload and extensive managerial tasks that prevent more meaningful instructional leadership efforts
- Personal Costs – Long hours, physical and psychological demands
- Local and state policy obstacles
- Profound isolation on the job

Reasons for Leaving

20

Principals are critical
to improving struggling schools

“…there are virtually no documented instances of troubled schools being turned around without intervention by a powerful leader. Many other factors may contribute to such turnarounds, but leadership is the catalyst.”

-- How Leadership Influences Student Learning,

Kenneth Leithwood, et al,

University of Minnesota,

University of Toronto, 2004

21

14

- Ongoing Professional Development
- Meaningful Network Opportunities
- One-to-one Support (Beyond first two years)
- Restructure Roles and Policies

Retaining Effective Principals

22

Emerging Level Learning Experiences

- Critical Firsts
- Recognizing and Developing Excellent Instruction
- Understanding Self and Others
- A Primer on Decision Making
- Reading and Shaping School Culture
- Making Time for Instructional Leadership

24

25

Developing Level Learning Experiences

- Critical Firsts
- Recognizing and Developing Excellent Instruction
- Understanding Self and Others
- A Primer on Decision Making
- Reading and Shaping School Culture
- Making Time for Instructional Leadership
- Designing and Leading Change
- Communications and Influencing Skills
- Human Resource Leadership

26

Finally -

We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need to do that. Whether or not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.

Ron Edmonds, 1979

27

title:The Office of Educator Quality
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T18:54:42Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T18:56:15Z
edit minutes:1
word count:1405
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:205
slides:27
slide notes:14
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Charter School Administrative Summit
ESSA Finance
Presented by Pat Kaiser

Missouri Department of Elementary
and Secondary Education

September 2017

1

Allocation Criteria – Title I and II.A

ESEA statute requires the use of census data in computing allocations.

Because Census poverty data is not available for charter school LEAs, DESE must derive a Census poverty and population count.

DESE uses the number of children ages 5 through 17

- enrolled in the charter school; and
- free and reduced lunch or CEP count as source of poverty data.

Based on these derived data, DESE determine the number of Census poverty and population children who transfer to Charter LEAs.

2

In 20 minutes, I will provide you with new ESSA allocation formulas on charter LEAs and what to expect in the future.

DESEs source of data:

MOSIS/Core Data screen 15 - free/reduced/paid lunch: “Federal Programs Headcount of children ages 5-17 (as of the prior October 1) whose eligibility has been documented. Include PK students only if they meet the appropriate age span”

CEP buildings – total age 5-17 * identified student percent (ISP)

Allocations are computed by using the count poverty children age 5 through 17.

The eligible population for services are children not older than age 21 who are entitled to a free public education through grade 12.

2

New/Expanding Charter LEAs

Consistent with 34 CFR 76.787, “significant expansion of enrollment means a substantial increase in the number of students attending a charter school due to a significant event that is unlikely to occur on a regular basis, such as the addition of one or more grades or educational programs in major curriculum areas. The term also includes any other expansion of enrollment that the SEA determines to be significant.”

3

In addition to the enrollment and poverty data from the prior October MOSIS submission, new and expanding charter LEAs have the opportunity to submit projected poverty and enrollment counts for the upcoming school year.

Regulations state the significant expansion of enrollment means a substantial increase in the number of students attending a charter school due to a significant event that is unlikely to occur on a regular basis. States have unfettered discretion in determining any expansion of enrollment to be significant.

3

Significant Expansion defined

For ESEA programs, DESE defines a significant expansion of enrollment as an additional grade level or an increase in school enrollment of 25 or more students.

4

4

Allocation Process –
New/Expanding Charter Schools

- Charter School Sponsors must notify DESE by March 15
- The charter school must provide DESE with a reasonable estimate of its enrollment and poverty of children ages 5-17
- New or expanding Charter Schools receive an estimated allocation by July 1
- In the Fall, allocations are finalized using actual data

5

Use of projected data ensures that each newly opened or significantly expanded charter school LEA receives an allocation that reflects its current student count even though allocations may be calculated before the identity and characteristics of the students enrolling in the charter school LEA are fully determined.

5

ESSA Title I Allocation

- 95% LEA Allotment
- 4% for School Improvement (1003(a)
- 1% SEA Administration

- 92% LEA Allotment
- Up to 7% for School Improvement 1003 Funds (17-18 forward – may not reduce an LEAs allocation below the prior year’s amount)
- 1% SEA Administration

NCLB

ESSA

6

When comparing allocations, NCLB has total of 5% off the top vs ESSA’s total of 8% off the top.

92% of the Title I allocation is available to eligible LEAs based on the formula.

To support school improvement activities, 7% reservation nearly equals the 1003(a) and 1003(g) SIG grants under NCLB.

Under ESSA, eliminated SIG as a separate funding source.

7% reservation in FY17 impacted all LEAs. Beginning with 2018-2019 grant year, DESE may not reduce the amount of Title I.A funds any LEA received the prior year. This might limit how much DESE can reserve under 1003.

6

Title I Hold Harmless Amounts

Percentage of LEA formula children ages 5 to 17, as a percentage of its total population of children ages 5 to 17, and variable hold-harmless percentage

- 30 percent or more: 95 percent
- 15 percent or more but less than 30 percent: 90 percent
- Less than 15 percent: 85 percent

7

Title I has a hold harmless provision. An LEA can generally expect that its Title I.A allocation will be at least the hold-harmless guarantee percent of 85 (less than 15 poverty percent), 90 (15-29 poverty percent), 95 (30 or more poverty percent) of the prior year’s amount.

Because of the 7% for all LEAs in 2017-2018, some LEAs received a minimum of 78, 83, or 88% of the prior year’s funding.

The 2018-19 allocation will be based on the 85, 90 or 95%

The hold harmless amounts are based on the districts level of poverty. Again, depending on availability of funds, the greater the poverty, the less degree of cut applies.

Hold harmless prevents an LEA from drastic cuts.

7

ESSA Requirement Sec 4306(c)

Special Hold-Harmless Provisions for Newly Opened and Significantly Expanded Charter School LEAs

For purposes of implementing the 85, 90, or 95 hold-harmless percentage protections under Title I, an SEA must calculate a hold-harmless base for the prior year that reflects the new or significantly expanded enrollment of the charter school LEA.

8

The Title I hold harmless provision was in place under NCLB. Now it is in ESSA law.

The ESEA now specifically requires an SEA to generate a hold harmless base for a newly opened or significantly expanded charter school LEA that reflects its new or expanded enrollment.

This provision is necessary to give effect to ESEA section 4306(a) that requires an SEA to take measures to ensure that every charter school LEA that newly opens or significantly expands its enrollment receives the Federal funding for which the charter school LEA is eligible, notwithstanding the fact that the identity and characteristics of the students enrolling in the charter school LEA are not fully and completely determined until the charter school LEA actually opens or significantly expands.

Because newly opened and significantly expanded charter school LEAs are treated differently under section 4306(a) from other LEAs, including other charter school LEAs, it is important to ensure that the operation of the hold-harmless protections in ESEA sections 1122(c) and 1125A(f)(3) do not unduly negate increases in Title I allocations based on the increased student population in the charter school LEAs. Accordingly, an SEA must generate a “prior year” base amount for each newly opened and significantly expanded charter school LEA in order to apply the 85, 90, or 95 hold-harmless percentage described above. With respect to newly opened charter school LEAs, this means creating a hold-harmless base where none exists. With respect to a significantly expanded charter school LEA, which is defined consistent with 34 CFR 76.7873, this means adjusting the prior year’s hold-harmless base to create a new base that reflects the increase in the formula count for the current year.

This process will ensure that a newly opened charter school LEA is not disadvantaged by the fact that it had no Title I allocation in the prior year against which to apply the hold-harmless percentage or that an expanding LEA will not loose the increase due to Title I School Improvement reservations.

8

Title II Allocations to States

Changes to State allocations may fluctuate:

- The hold-harmless is phased out over a series of three years starting with the 2017-18 allocations.
- The share of funds allocated based on ages 5-17 in poverty relative to the share of funds allocated based on ages 5-17 population increases.
- 2020-21 and beyond will be weighted 20% on population and 80% on poverty.

9

Just as allocations are distributed to LEAs by formula, the allocations are distributed to States.

Under NCLB, the amount of each State’s allocation above the hold harmless was weighted at 35 percent based on the State’s population of children ages 5-17 and 65 percent on the population of children ages 5-17 from families in poverty.

The weights that ED uses to calculate FY 2017 allocations was the same as under NCLB.

Beginning in FY 2018, weights will shift by 5 percent until FY 2020 and beyond, when the amount of each State’s allocation above the hold harmless will be weighted at 20 percent based on the State’s population of children ages 5-17 and 80 percent on the population of children ages 5-17 from families in poverty.

These weights are relative to the numbers of such children in all States.

Basically, States will gradually shift from the hold harmless base to 20% census population and 80% census poverty. LEAs did not have the gradual shift.

9

Title II.A Allocation Formula

Hold Harmless = 100% of

2001-2002 Title II Eisenhower funds + 2001-2002 Class Size Reduction funds.

Additional funds over the hold harmless are distributed as follows:

- 80% based on census poverty
- 20% based on census population ages 5-17

Hold Harmless is eliminated. LEA funding changes.

Funds are distributed as follows:

- 80% based on census poverty
- 20% based on census population ages 5-17

NCLB

ESSA

10

Under NCLB, funding under this program had very little variance since the majority of funding had a hold harmless rate based on Title II and Class Size Reduction funding levels prior to NCLB in 2001.

Once the HH amount was reserved, the remaining funds were distributed on census population and census poverty. In 2016-2017, HH was 93%!

ESSA changed the formula by eliminating the hold harmless. LEAs generate Title II.A funds based on their number of 5-17 year olds (20%) and their number of low-income 5-17 year olds (80%).

Eisenhower PD program = half of the funds were allocated based on each LEA’s share of public and private enrollment; the other half were allocated on the basis of funds received in the previous FY under Title I.

Class Size Reduction = funds were distributed to LEAs based on the number of children in poverty (80%) and school enrollment (20%).

10

Title II.A Impact

- LEA funding: $36,402,691
- Hold harmless was 93% of funding

- KC $1,490,568
- St. Louis $2,943,351

- LEA funding: $32,546,713 (-10%)
- Loss of hold harmless impact of 37%

- KC $941,104
- St. Louis $1,832,891

NCLB in 2016-17

ESSA in 2017-18

11

Charter LEAs are located in Kansas City and St. Louis and derive census poverty and population from those regions.

Although MO distributed 10% less to LEAs from 2016-17 to 2017-18, the impact was great for the KC and St. Louis regions.

Remember, under NCLB, 93% of the Title II.A funds to LEAs was at a hold harmless rate. Elimination of the hold harmless under ESSA had a great impact on KC and St. Louis. Each received about 63% of prior year levels.

11

Pat Kaiser
573-751-8643

Jennifer Frank

573-751-2641

ESEA/essa Finance

federalfinancial@dese.mo.gov

CONTACT INFORMATION

12

12

title:Charter School Administrative Summit ESSA Finance Presented by Pat Kaiser
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T18:56:34Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T18:57:49Z
document template:powerpoint template 2011
edit minutes:1
word count:1948
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:161
slides:12
slide notes:12
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Missouri Assessment Program
2017

Missouri Department of Elementary
and Secondary Education

September 2017

Charter School Administrative Summit

1

2

Assessment | Authorization | Timing Guidelines*
GLA ELA and Mathematics (grades 3-8) | Required by ESSA | 90-250 min
GLA Science (grades 5 and 8) | Required by ESSA | 90-150 min
EOC Algebra I, Biology, English II | Required by ESSA | 180-220 min
EOC American Government | Required by MSIP 5 | 60-80 min
EOC Algebra II, American History, English I, Geometry, Personal Finance, Physical Science | Optional | 180-220 min

Required Assessments

*Estimated time necessary to complete a single assessment. Missouri assessments are not timed.

Maximum time on testing occurs in grade 8 and represents less than .9% of total instructional time.

3

ACT is gone for now.

In compliance with federal requirements (ESSA) for accountability and state accountability (MSIP), these are the components of the Missouri Assessment Program.

Note that for students who take Algebra I in middle school, Algebra II (or less commonly Geometry) is required for high school accountability.

2

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7*

Grade 8*

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7*

Grade 8*

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7*

Grade 8*

*7th and 8th grade students who

took the Algebra I End-of-Course

assessment are not included in

these totals.

Grade-Level Mathematics

Proficient and Advanced

4

3

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

5

Grade-Level English Language Arts

Proficient and Advanced

4

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2015

47.5

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 5

Grade 8

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

42.7

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 5

Grade 8

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Grade 5

Grade 8

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2015

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2016

Percent Proficient and Advanced 2017

Grade 5

Grade 8

6

Grade-Level Science

Proficient and Advanced

5

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172015

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Biology

Government*

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172016

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Biology

Government*

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Biology

Government*

2015

2016

2017

Biology

Government*

*MSIP Requirement Only

7

End-of-Course Required Assessments

Proficient and Advanced

6

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172015

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Algebra II

American History

English I

Geometry

Physical Science

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172016

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Algebra II

American History

English I

Geometry

Physical Science

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Algebra II

American History

English I

Geometry

Physical Science

2015

2016

2017

Algebra II

American History

English I

Geometry

Physical Science

8

End-of-Course Optional Assessments

Proficient and Advanced

20,053

7,113

13,163

8,045

2,951

2017

Students

Tested

7

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172015

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

English

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Composite

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017Column1

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

English

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Composite

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172016

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

English

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Composite

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 20172017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

Missouri Assessment Program 2017

English

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Composite

2015

Column1

2016

2017

English

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Composite

9

ACT® Composite Scores

Missouri Graduates

8

Next Steps in State Assessment

- New tests in 2017-2018
- Additional quality assurances
- Assessment work group will review certain processes

- Length of testing windows
- Assessment results release timeline
- Technology variations across districts and charter schools

10

9

11

Mathematics and English Language Arts

- All Grade-Level and EOC 2016-2017 assessments retire
- New assessments in 2017-18

- Initial operational administration

- Cut scores established in summer 2018
- Score reports and data available in fall 2018

Next Steps in State Assessment

10

Next Steps in State Assessment

12

Science

- All Grade-Level and EOC 2016-2017 assessments retire
- New assessments in 2017-2018

- Required census field test

- No score reports available for 2017-2018

11

Next Steps in State Assessment

Social Studies

- Test development activities underway
- No changes to operational assessments in 2017-2018

Personal Finance

- Revised standards approved by SBE
- New test planned for 2019-2020

ACT®

- No 11th grade census administration in 2018

13

12

Items of Note

14

Grade-Level

Blueprints, tools and accommodations

- https://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/asmt-gl-blueprint.pdf
- https://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/asmt-gl-tools-accommodations.pdf

October 16 | Training, test setup, user guide, test management available in eDIRECT
November 13 | Practice tests available
April 2- May 25 | Summative 2018 test window

13

Items of Note

15

EOC

Blueprints, tools and accommodations

- https://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/asmt-eoc-blueprint.pdf
- https://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/asmt-eoc-tools-accommodations.pdf

October 2-January 19 | Fall 2017 test window
October 9 | Nextera training for DTCs available
October 2 | Practice tests available
February 18-May 25 | Spring 2018 test window

14

Questions

16

573-751-3545 - Assessment

573-522-4003 - Standards, Curriculum, Instruction

assessment@dese.mo.gov

curriculum@dese.mo.gov

15

title:Missouri Assessment Program 2017
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T19:00:03Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T19:00:38Z
document template:powerpoint template 2011
edit minutes:0
word count:524
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:177
slides:16
slide notes:15
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

Charter Schools and Special Education: Everything You Need to Know for Compliance

Presentation for
DESE Charter School Summit

September 28, 2017

Hi, and welcome to the Special Education Compliance portion of this workshop. I am Betty McKinzie, Assistant Director, and this is Cheryl Stock, Compliance Supervisor, assigned to work with the charter schools. In addition, our team also includes Susan Borgmeyer from the Kansas City Regional Professional Development Center and Jeanne Rothermel from the St. Louis Regional Professional Development Center. Both Susan and Jeanne are available to provide technical assistance to charter schools in their respective regions of the state.

Our presentation today will focus on the important issues for Charter Schools and their special education programs. It is important for charter schools to remember that you are responsible for providing a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) by following both state and federal laws related to special education for any student with a disability or suspected of having a disability enrolled in your charter school.

1

The IDEA

2

Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA) Federal Regulations

Missouri State Plan Standards and

for Special Education Indicators Manual

Local Compliance Plans

and

Assurance Statements

Anyone involved with students with disabilities MUST be familiar with the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. This is the federal law that governs special education. The Federal Regulations provide guidance on implementing IDEA. The Missouri State Plan for Special Education is based on the IDEA and documents how Missouri will stay in compliance with the requirements of the IDEA. This document is revised and updated any time changes are made in IDEA, Federal Regulations or OSEP (US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs) guidance. The most recent revisions became effective in February, 2017. All public agencies responsible for providing services to students with disabilities are required to develop a Local Compliance Plan for Special Education that aligns with IDEA and the Missouri State Plan for Special Education. In addition, each school year, the school board of every public agency responsible for providing services to students with disabilities must have an assurance statement indicating that they will comply with the state and federal laws in regards to students with disabilities. Please note that currently this assurance statement is included with your ePeGs budget and when you "open” your budget, your district automatically makes these assurances.

2

3

Policies Related to Special Education

- Board approved Local Compliance Plan

- Board policy for Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE)

- Board policy for Extended School Year (ESY)

- Board policy for use of seclusion and restraint

- Board policy for using RTI for eligibility determination IF district decides to use this method.

As a Charter School, there are several board approved policies that must be addressed related to students with disabilities.

The first is the Board approved Local Compliance Plan for Special Education. As a reminder, because the State Plan was revised in February, 2017, every LEA in MO (including Charter Schools) will have to revise their Local Compliance Plan. All Charter Schools MUST update their local compliance plans if they have not already done so.

The second is a board policy for Independent Education Evaluations (IEE). While this is not required, it is recommended that a policy is in place to guide the LEA in handling such requests.

The third is a board policy for Extended School Year (ESY). Again, while this is not required, it is recommended that a policy be in place to guide decisions regarding ESY services for students with disabilities.

The fourth is a board policy for use of seclusion and restraint. This IS a required Missouri policy and affects both students with and without disabilities.

The fifth is a board policy that IF your school decides to use RTI for eligibility determination.

You can find more information about each of these types of policies on the DESE website or get additional information by contacting Special Education Compliance at (573)751-0699.

3

4

Key Elements for Compliance

1. Sponsor provides resources to support special education compliance.

2. Relationship with Compliance Supervisor and RPDC Compliance Consultants.

3. Having special education staff and administrators trained in the special education process.

We found six keys for compliance for charter schools to be successful with special education.

The first key to compliance is ensuring the charter sponsor provide resources to support special education compliance. With anything, if you have the resources to do your job you will be more successful.

The second key element is your relationship with your Compliance Supervisor and your RPDC Compliance Consultants. Your RPDC Compliance Consultants are available to provide trainings and technical assistance. Your Compliance Supervisor can assist you with monitoring questions or any other compliance question you may have. Do not be afraid to call. We are here to help.

The third key to compliance is making sure you have special education staff and administrators who are trained in the special education process. Knowledge equals success.

4

5

Key Elements for Compliance Success Continued…

4. Having procedures and practices in place to implement the special education process at the charter school.

5. Collaboration between administration and special education staff.

6. Ongoing training and networking with other charter schools and public agency special education administrators (LASE, MO-CASE, CEC conferences, MCPSA, Special Education Network Meetings, RPDC trainings etc.).

The fourth key to compliance is having procedures and practices in place to implement the special education process at the Charter School. It is important to train staff on these as they help ensure compliance.

Collaboration between administrators and special education staff is the fifth key. Communication in both directions (administrator to staff/staff to administrator) is important.

Finally, ongoing training and networking with other Charter School and public school special education administrators such as LASE, MO-CASE, CEC conferences, Special Education Network Meetings, etc. is the sixth key to successful compliance. This helps staff stay current on special education issues and hot topics.

5

6

Special Education Compliance Tiered Monitoring

2017-18 School Year

Cohort 1 = Self Assessment Year

Cohort 2 = Maintain/Retrain Year

Cohort 3 = Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

Special Education Compliance Tiered Monitoring is part of the federally required cyclical monitoring process of every school district in Missouri. Cyclical monitoring is conducted every three years using a cohort model for grouping of districts. Each LEA is assigned to a cohort.

Please take a few seconds to locate this list-and make note of the cohort to which your LEA belongs.

The first year of the monitoring cycle is the Self-Assessment Year. The second year of the monitoring cycle is the Corrective Action Plan Year. And the third and final year of the monitoring cycle is the Maintain and Retrain Year.

This school year (2017-2018), Cohort 3 just received their Special Education Program Review Report Letter that details your compliance status. You are moving this school year into the Corrective Action Plan Year, if any indicators were found “OUT” of compliance.

Cohort 1 is participating in the Self-Assessment Year of the process, and Cohort 2 is participating in the Maintain and Retrain Year of the process.

6

7

http://dese.mo.gov/communications/webinar/transfer-process-students-disabilities

One common area that Charter Schools frequently find challenging involves the Transfer Process. Although not all of the students coming to your Charter Schools will be transfer students, many will be. DESE has developed a webinar on the Transfer Process which is available on our website. In addition, model forms are available on the Special Education Compliance page of our website to guide staff through both “in-state” and “out-of-state” transfers of students with disabilities.

It is important for you to remember that enrollment cannot be denied to students with IEPs because of the fact that they are disabled or because you are awaiting IEP and/or evaluation paperwork. Special Education and related services must begin on day one of enrollment.

7

8

Contracting for Evaluations and Services

The final challenging area for charter schools involves contracting for evaluation and special education services including related services such as OT, PT, and Speech/Language.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with contracting for these types of services; however, the problem is when the Charter School assumes that the contractor understands special education compliance. This is because the Charter School has the responsibility to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE)-Not the contractor.

8

9

Contracting for Evaluations

Contractor MUST:

- Follow timelines
- Write assessment results consistent with the Standards and Indicators.

We noted that many charter schools contract with an outside agency or company for your special education evaluations. How many of you contract for evaluations?

The first challenge is meeting the evaluation timelines in accordance with the special education standards and indicators. The second challenge is ensuring the eligibility determination is based on meeting the specific criteria for each categorical disability as stated in the Standards and Indicators manual.

9

10

Remember when Contracting…

- The Charter School is ultimately responsible for the entire special education process

…...NOT the contractor.

When choosing a contractor, it is very important that the contractor be able to accomplish their requirements. Remember-it is not the outside agency that is monitored by the Office of Special Education Compliance. It is your Charter School. Therefore, if something is omitted from the process, it is your Charter School that will be found out of compliance

10

11

Questions…

Any questions if there is time.

11

12

Office of Special Education - Compliance

Betty McKinzie Cheryl Stock

Assistant Director Supervisor

573-751-2332 573-751-0727

Betty.Mckinzie@dese.mo.gov Cheryl.Stock@dese.mo.gov

Regional Professional Development Center (RPDC)

Susan Borgmeyer Jeanne Rothermel

Compliance Consultant (KC) Compliance Consultant

(Kansas City) (St. Louis)

816-235-5957 314-692-1239

borgmeyersk@umkc.edu jrothermel@edplus.org

Thank you for participating!

Thank you for attending the Charter School Summit on Special Education Compliance. If you have any questions, please contact any of us at any time. We would be happy to help! Our contact information is up on the screen and we have business cards available.

12

Contact Us

13

- www.dese.mo.gov
- Email: communications@dese.mo.gov
- Phone: 573-751-3469

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; email civilrights@dese.mo.gov.

13

title:Charter Schools and Special Education: Everything You Need to Know for Compliance
author:Julie Boeckmann
last saved by:Julie Boeckmann
revision number:1
creation date:2017-09-29T19:04:04Z
Last Saved Date:2017-09-29T19:04:45Z
edit minutes:0
word count:1925
source:Microsoft Office PowerPoint
presentation format:On-screen Show (4:3)
Count Paragraphs:147
slides:13
slide notes:13
hidden slides:0
multimedia clips:0
Scale Crop:no
company:State of Missouri
links up to date:no
shared doc:no
Links Dirty:no
Application Version:14.0000

    36.84% 7
    63.16% 12
    Q1 What position do you have at your charter school? Answered: 19 Skipped: 0
    TOTAL 19
    Sponsor
    Administrator
    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
    ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
    Sponsor
    Administrator
    1 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    36.84% 7
    63.16% 12
    Q2 Given multiple changes in state and federal compliance rules, all sessions were held in one room.  Do you prefer break-out sessions or whole group sessions? Answered: 19 Skipped: 0
    TOTAL 19
    Break-out sessions
    Whole group sessions
    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
    ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
    Break-out sessions
    Whole group sessions
    2 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q3 What concerns do you have for charter schools? Answered: 17 Skipped: 2
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 SLPS lawsuit in St. Louis. I want to know if state has a plan to make up the difference if SLPS gets what they want. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM
    2 I would like to see that public people know more about charter public schools. It is good to help public to understand public school and charter public schools are the same for many aspects. 10/2/2017 8:49 AM
    3 Keeping up with all the changes to reporting - especially with federal grants. 10/2/2017 7:05 AM 4 State funding 10/1/2017 7:08 PM
    5 School funding formula and how it impacts charter schools. Managing the work of an LEA, while often operating as a single, independent school 9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 Long term funding model 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 None 9/29/2017 9:40 PM
    8 More requirements for changes. 9/29/2017 4:12 PM
    9 Equity in funding for charter schools in Kansas City. The local tax issue will soon be a problem. Equity in buildings. It is a travesty that school buildings sold to charter schools are paid for twice by public funds. It would be mutually beneficial for charter schools and KCPS to collaborate on purchases (materials and supplies), transportation, food services, and insurance. It might be a revenue stream for KCPS if meals and buses were contracted with the charter schools. The lawsuit between SLPS and DESE. Pre-K funding in Kansas City. Funds from a proposed levy increase for Pre-K will go directly to KCPS (understandably) and will be distributed to pre-schools that KCPS approves. It's doubtful that many charter pre-schools will be selected. State Board of Education members and some DESE personnel do not understand the differences between districts and charter school LEAs. Many sponsors would be willing and able to provide an inservice to help board and staff members better understand similarities and differences between charter schools and non-charter districts. Board member training is offered, but not utilized as it should be. More monitoring is being done to inform board members how much training each member has had. It's impossible to make board members attend training unless there is remedial plan or probationary requirement. When Food Services Audits are placed on the DESE website (as required), the letter that indicates a school has corrected all findings is not added to the DESE website. It would be helpful if the letter could be placed on the website as well.
    9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    10 Facilities, equitable funding, relationships with the district. 9/29/2017 3:03 PM 11 Maintaining fair accountability in the face of uncertain evaluation factors.. 9/29/2017 2:16 PM 12 Achieving quality 9/29/2017 2:12 PM
    13 Will we be represented when we need to be. 9/29/2017 2:06 PM
    14 I am not sure that DESE employees really understand when there are different requirements for charter schools as compared to traditional public schools. When they have conferences, this is not apparent in the presentations. It is changing slowly.
    9/29/2017 1:52 PM
    15 Financial concerns because of local money that will start to decrease once the charter enrollment goes above the district's. 9/29/2017 1:42 PM
    16 The lack of resources for Title I and Title II. 9/29/2017 1:28 PM
    17 DeVos is very scary. Concerns include strengthening MCPSA and enrollment. 9/29/2017 1:27 PM
    3 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q4 What did you like most about the DESE Charter Summit? Answered: 18 Skipped: 1
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 The speakers were timely, it wed very smooth. Also, appreciated for the lunch. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM 2 It is good to hear regulations and changes from DESE employees. 10/2/2017 8:49 AM 3 The update on assessment 10/2/2017 7:05 AM
    4 Timing of presentations and info presented 10/1/2017 7:08 PM
    5 Informative, efficient sessions 9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 Networking with other Charters 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 Each presentation was a good synopsis of the main points needed in for topic covered. A lot of information was covered in an efficient manner. 9/30/2017 6:00 AM
    8 The fact that Margie makes it important to show up and greet people. 9/29/2017 9:40 PM 9 The fact that were are separate but come together as a unit to learn and share items both positive and not so positive. 9/29/2017 4:12 PM
    10 The whole group session. The consideration of the time limits. And, lunch. Thank you very much. There was virtually no down time. 9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    11 all in one room 9/29/2017 3:03 PM
    12 I liked that everyone was hearing the same information at once (admitting that not all info may be relevant for everyone).. And must add that lunch was great! 9/29/2017 2:16 PM
    13 The presentation on Educator Quality by Jim Masters was excellent 9/29/2017 2:12 PM 14 Very informational 9/29/2017 2:06 PM
    15 I know that it is difficult to do in one day, but I really did like everyone hearing the same information with one big meeting. 9/29/2017 1:52 PM
    16 I liked the variety of information. All departments were represented so schools could get a face and a name together. 9/29/2017 1:42 PM
    17 To meet other people and to be updated in what is new from DESE 9/29/2017 1:28 PM 18 Friendliness and welcoming attitude. Contact numbers provided for help throughout the year. Compassion for principals. 9/29/2017 1:27 PM
    4 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q5 What question was not answered for you? Answered: 17 Skipped: 2
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 N/A. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM
    2 They are all answered. 10/2/2017 8:49 AM
    3 How the Algebra EOC scores will/won't affect APR and do's/don'ts of sharing that information publicly 10/2/2017 7:05 AM
    4 none 10/1/2017 7:08 PM
    5 Why the Science assessment results will not be shared, even if only internally. It seems like a waste of resources if schools are not also able to glean information from these tests. 9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 Funding for future years 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 Still have some questions regarding MSIP 6, but I am assuming there are some aspects of this being finalize. I am sure we will receive more clarity of it when the process is completed. 9/30/2017 6:00 AM
    8 None of my questions were answered. 9/29/2017 9:40 PM
    9 none 9/29/2017 4:12 PM
    10 What will be done to ensure charter schools and districts will not be harmed by the comparability issues with the 2017 Algebra I and English II EOCs? APRs affect whether or not charter schools will: be placed on probation, face possible closure in the future, trigger the implementation of a remedial plan, or fail to receive the high school readiness points (for K-8 schools). The dilemma appears to have a more negative impact on K-8 charters. No district K-8 will be placed on probation or face closure because of the quagmire.
    9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    11 it was a good conference 9/29/2017 3:03 PM
    12 There were several questions that I would have liked to delve into deeper, though felt that this program format did not allow for the discussion. 9/29/2017 2:16 PM
    13 I thought there would be some time spend on ADA for Pre-K (new 4% rule). the funding is great but there are no quality guidelines to with it. 9/29/2017 2:12 PM
    14 none 9/29/2017 2:06 PM
    15 I was fine with the presentations. 9/29/2017 1:52 PM
    16 1.What will be the result, especially for K-8 schools, whose students took the EOC. How will this be fairly resolved? What assurances can be given that this won't happen again? (I realize that the department is probably more upset with this than the schools!) 2. The change in account numbers has business managers nervous. I realize this is being worked on with the software providers, but timelines are not clear.
    9/29/2017 1:42 PM
    17 N/A 9/29/2017 1:28 PM
    5 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q6 What would you like to see done differently at next year's DESE Charter Summit? Answered: 18 Skipped: 1
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 Time to meet/interact with others school leaders for areas of cooperation and partnership. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM 2 I like the pace of the sessions. It was also nice to be at the same room. It would be good if ppt are shared with the participants who put check mark on the sign in sheet under a column marked share ppt.
    10/2/2017 8:49 AM
    3 A more specific piece about teacher certification and how the federal grant regulations apply to charter schools 10/2/2017 7:05 AM
    4 Breakouts and more time to interact with other schools 10/1/2017 7:08 PM 5 Some differentiation could be valuable. For folks who are new to the summit, it was hard to keep up. However, I liked the format. 9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 More breakout sessions 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 If we had a copy of the power point or notes of the major points as we were listening to each presentation, this would be helpful to "digest" all the information given. 9/30/2017 6:00 AM
    8 Breakouts and for people speaking to understand charter schools and speak to our issues instead of delivering pro forma presentations. 9/29/2017 9:40 PM
    9 unknown 9/29/2017 4:12 PM
    10 I would like to have an opportunity to have DESE personnel listen to a panel of charter school sponsors to educate the DESE staff on the nuances that set charters apart from districts. I appreciated the information at the 2017 Summit. Most of the topics were redundant for sponsors and administrators who have worked in the charter school sector form more than 3-5 years. Topics of discussion could be requested from administrators, sponsors, and business managers (many were in attendance this year.)
    9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    11 the food was horrible. 9/29/2017 3:03 PM
    12 Perfect lead-in. I would like to see a more interactive format that allows for charters to delve deeper into topics/issues specific to the sector while also allowing DESE staff to better understand the perspectives/needs of our schools. Much of the info that was presented is already available on the DESE site.
    9/29/2017 2:16 PM
    13 So much information in such a condensed period of time. rather have two days to be able to digest so much information. 9/29/2017 2:12 PM
    14 Nothing 9/29/2017 2:06 PM
    15 This year's format was fine. 9/29/2017 1:52 PM
    16 I do like the breakout sessions because people generally feel free to ask questions. 9/29/2017 1:42 PM 17 fewer breaks 9/29/2017 1:30 PM
    18 N/A 9/29/2017 1:28 PM
    6 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q7 What topic would you like more information about that was not covered by presenters or at the information tables? Answered: 15 Skipped: 4
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 School safety was a topic last year but not this year. I think we always need updates and more guidance on that. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM
    2 None. 10/2/2017 8:49 AM
    3 same as #6 10/2/2017 7:05 AM
    4 none 10/1/2017 7:08 PM
    5 I'm not sure. I would have appreciated the PPTs ahead of time. Then I could have taken notes as we went. 9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 NA 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 None that I can think of at this time. 9/30/2017 6:00 AM
    8 Data. 9/29/2017 9:40 PM
    9 During closures, how can DESE help charter schools protect the school's reserves? It would be helpful to create a system - during closures only - to distribute funds only by reimbursement for expenses the school incurs. The school/sponsor transition team would have a better way of tracking expenditures during the months the school is preparing to close.
    9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    10 good job 9/29/2017 3:03 PM
    11 Most info still in question is yet under development. 9/29/2017 2:16 PM
    12 Pre-K ADA 9/29/2017 2:12 PM
    13 This year's presenters were fine. 9/29/2017 1:52 PM
    14 Already shared this above. Thanks 9/29/2017 1:42 PM
    15 Homeless Transportation. Transferred Students 9/29/2017 1:28 PM
    7 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017

    Q8 What is something great going on in your charter school? Answered: 14 Skipped: 5
    # RESPONSES DATE
    1 Strengthening high school programs. 10/2/2017 11:29 AM
    2 This is college bound school and there are tons of stuff really going well in my charter schools. We also focus on STEAM and there are good number of achievements. 10/2/2017 8:49 AM
    3 Hawthorn is starting its second year implementing a mentoring program for 8th grade girls in partnership with women who work at World Wide Technology. About 25 women from WWT supported our 8th graders last year in planning and executing 8th grad capstone leadership projects. From fundraising for a new salad bar to getting 4 new trees planted on our campus, our students were able to identify problems in the local and school communities and execute plans to address the problem. We are continuing the partnership this year.
    10/2/2017 7:05 AM
    4 Moving all the students into one building at KCIA 10/1/2017 7:08 PM
    5 We have been working to develop our middle school program. Part of that design work has been an innovative, problem-based design class called Investigations. The students thrive during that class and are diving deep into content, while also having fun!
    9/30/2017 10:15 PM
    6 Expansion! 9/30/2017 9:21 AM
    7 Growth 9/29/2017 4:12 PM
    8 Schools are continuing to improve curriculum through a systematic, research-based action plan. Instruction and assessments are more tightly aligned with Missouri Learning Standards and Next Generation Science Standards. Special Education compliance issues are few. Food service audits will be monitored more closely. Reserves in all schools are well above the 3% threshhold.
    9/29/2017 3:07 PM
    9 high grad rate......winning sports teams. 9/29/2017 3:03 PM
    10 Many, many things. A great lunch program for charter successes would be to allow some of these schools the time to present their programs. i.e. what is the "secret sauce" for University Academy to be so successful?
    9/29/2017 2:16 PM
    11 Kansas City Public Schools is the sponsor and LEA for the Kansas City Neighborhood Academy Charter School. KCPS is also the recipient of Missouri Preschool Program funding. KCPS placed two MPP classrooms in the KCNA charter. Those two classrooms were among the first KCPS Pre-K classrooms to achieve state accreditation . It was a great accomplishment for the district while at the same time creating a great pipeline of ready children for KCNA.
    9/29/2017 2:12 PM
    12 We're presently supporting schools in the development of new teachers. It was an area that administrators felt they needed help with. It has been evolving by working closely with mentors and administrators.
    9/29/2017 1:42 PM
    13 We have reorganized our schools in one school. Helping us to be more organized. 9/29/2017 1:28 PM 14 Our theme of growing together. 9/29/2017 1:27 PM
    8 / 8
    Charter Summit Survey 2017