Sentences with phrase «lea fund»

In addition to issues you have noted, in Moore we have noticed HUGE increases in class sizes in grades 4 - 12 as a direct result of cuts (after years of using LEA fund balance to maintain those class sizes).

The state also will create a competitive supplemental fund of $ 375,000 per year for innovation in those school districts whose share of funds is within the bottom 20 % of the total share of the LEA funds under this application.

Additional costs for the program can be covered: through grants, State or LEA funds, or federal Title II funding under the Every Child Achieves Act.

Not exact matches

This document is required before the LEA may renew their Agreement with the state agency to administer the federally - funded Child Nutrition Programs for the upcoming year.

While the Department has already spilled a lot of ink describing how to use ESSA funds, there is very little guidance for SEAs and LEAs that may want to take advantage of flexibility in the statute to use those funds to advance school choice.

Without clear permission, local education agencies (LEAs) and SEAs may be hesitant to use school improvement funds to open or expand high - quality schools.

Direct Student Services is an optional, 3 percent state - level set - aside in Title I that awards funds to LEAs to provide innovation to students.

A comprehensive choice and ESSA guidance package could connect the dots for SEAs and LEAs on all the authorities in the statute that could be integrated into a comprehensive vision for school choice, and describe how they can work together: Title I, DSS, Equitable Student Funding Pilot, Magnet Schools Assistance Program, Charter Schools Grants, and the Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) grant.

Overall, we are pleased to see the Department encouraging student - centered and personalized learning and are pleased to see that the Department has created a possibility for additional funding for LEAs that target areas of nonconsumption (Sec.

A «rule of construction» in the legislation explains that states can allocate these funds to statewide districts (like the RSD) or consortia of districts so long as these are legally established as LEAs.

However, in the allocation of Title I funds among participating schools, LEAs may distinguish among CEP schools where the low - income student percentage is capped at 100 percent for school selection purposes.

While eliminating applications raises questions for important aspects of the largest federal K - 12 education aid program, the ESEA Title I program, the policy guidance published by USED in March 2015 provides a wide range of options for states and LEAs to implement CEP with minimal interference with Title I funding allocations or accountability measures.

Additionally, for each LEA that received a school improvement grant, the SEA must report a list of the schools that were served, their NCES identification numbers, and the amount of funds or value of services each school received.

Cohort 2 NGO Version 2B reissue (for Title I LEAs with 100 percent of their schools receiving Title I funds and having school - wide status):

LEA officials meet with the participating private school to inform school leaders about the collected poverty data and the estimated amount of instructional funding that their eligible students generated.

In consultation with private school officials, the LEA may use either an individual school - by - school option or a pooling option to determine how funds will be distributed to participating private schools.

An LEA shall use these grant funds to support direct student services including: (1) a student's enrollment and participation in academic courses not otherwise available at the student's school; (2) credit recovery and academic acceleration courses that lead to a regular high school diploma; (3) activities that assist students in successfully completing postsecondary level instruction and examinations that are accepted for credit at institutions of higher education; and (4) if applicable, transportation to allow a student enrolled in a low - performing school to transfer to another public school.

For states that use alternatives to Census poverty estimates to allocate Title I funds among their small LEAs (total population below 20,000), USED's March 2015 policy guidance provides two options in cases where those states use school meals data in their formulas.

[11] The authority for such reallocation of funds among small LEAs is found in ESEA Title I, Part A, Sections 1124 (a)(2)(B), 1124A (a)(4)(c), and 1125 (d), plus program regulations (34 CFR Section 200.74).

However, in the allocation of funds to individual schools within LEAs, authorized alternatives to the Census poverty measure are used, primarily because it is rarely possible to determine how many students attending a particular school are in poor families by relying on a Census poverty measure.

As plans are developed and funding is identified for implementation of RTI, the LEA must have clearly defined RTI components.

This section explains how data on students receiving free or reduced - price school meals are used in the allocation of Title I funds to LEAs, how allocations are made within LEAs to individual schools, and how allocations can be made for CEP schools.

An LEA may reserve a portion of funds to provide early childhood education programs for eligible children.

However, in at least some cases, free and reduced - price school meals data have been used for this purpose to allocate funds to some LEAs, including all funds for charter schools that are treated as separate LEAs under state law.

EE4NJ Cohort 2 NGO Version 2A (for all districts that are not Title I LEAs with 100 % of schools receiving Title I funds and having schoolwide status, and not participating in EE4NJ Cohort 1)

[12] Thus, school lunch data are used to allocate at least some Title I funds among the small LEAs of ten states.

(Sec. 8019) Under current law, an SEA must reduce funding for a covered program to the extent that an LEA fails to meet certain maintenance of effort requirements.

With respect to SEAs» possible use of FRPL data to adjust USED allocations for some of their LEAs due to recent boundary changes, creation of new LEAs, or for the allocation of Title I funds to charter schools treated as separate LEAs under state law, USED's policy guidance would allow use of any of the alternatives to FRPL data for CEP schools discussed above.

A statutory provision in Title I, known as the «exclusion provision,» permits an LEA, under certain circumstances, to provide comparable services with nonfederal funds to non — Title I students while providing the same services with Title I funds to Title I students.

LEAs may use for this purpose either the same source of data used to select and allocate funds among public schools (i.e., usually free or free and reduced - price school lunch data) or one of a specified range of alternatives, such as data from an income survey of private school families, private school scholarship applications, or estimates based on the assumption that the percentage of students attending a private school who are from low - income families is the same as that for public school students who reside in the same geographic area.

Under current law, an LEA shall reserve funds to serve children and youths who are homeless, delinquent, or neglected.

The second exceptional circumstance under which school lunch data may affect the amount of Title I funds allocated to LEAs involves adjustments that some SEAs must make each year to the allocations calculated by USED for some of their LEAs.

Except as provided in subparagraph (vi) of this paragraph, a local educational agency (LEA) that received funds under title I for two consecutive years during which the LEA did not make adequate yearly progress on all applicable criteria in paragraph (14) of this subdivision in a subject area, or all applicable indicators in subparagraphs (15)(i) through (iii) of this subdivision, or the indicator in subparagraph (15)(iv) of this subdivision, shall be identified for improvement under section 1116 (c) of the NCLB, 20 U.S.C. section 6316 (c) and shall be subject to the requirements therein (Public Law, section 107 - 110, section 1116 [c], 115 STAT.

Unlike most federal elementary and secondary education programs, most Title I funds are allocated to individual schools, although LEAs retain substantial discretion to control the use of a share of Title I grants at a central district level.

The states then subgrant these funds to the LEAs within their state, using developed calculation formulas.

Similarly, the share of funds to be used by each recipient LEA to serve educationally disadvantaged students attending private schools is determined on the basis of the number of low - income children enrolled in private schools and living in the residential areas served by public schools selected to receive Title I grants.

States or LEAs conducting such a survey must not in any way indicate that the survey is required by either USED or USDA, school nutrition funds may not be used for such surveys, and they must clearly indicate that receipt of free school meals is not tied to the survey.

According to the most recent relevant data, approximately 90 percent of LEAs receiving Title I funds use free or free and reduced - price school meals data — sometimes alone, sometimes in combination with other authorized criteria — to select Title I schools and allocate funds among them.

These are complicated provisions and LEAs must consider unique circumstances when discussing the use of federal funds to support RTI.

Alternatively, if LEAs use the Identified Student Percentage multiplied by 1.6 for all of their public schools, such use of a new data source may result in changes in the identification of Title I schools and allocation of funds among them.

The regulations also indicate how EIS funds can be expended, for whom the EIS funds can be spent, how to report EIS spending, how disproportionality based on race and ethnicity affects an LEA's use of EIS funds, and the relationship of EIS to maintenance of effort.

The LEA then estimates how much instructional funding eligible private school students would have generated in their zoned public school had they attended, using the same per - pupil amount spent in the public school.

An LEA must use Title III funds to provide high - quality language instruction programs and high - quality professional development for classroom teachers.

There are components of the multi-tier framework of RTI that are inappropriate for funding by any source other than the LEA's unrestricted general operating budget.

Section II explains the uses of data on students from low - income families in the allocation of Title I funds to states, LEAs, and individual schools within LEAs; the implications of CEP implementation for Title I allocation policies; and the options provided under USED policy guidance to support CEP implementation.

(Sec. 1013) LEAs using title I - A funds to provide early childhood education programs shall develop agreements with Head Start agencies and other entities to carry out such activities.

An LEA shall use such funds to carry out activities and strategies consistent with its parent and family engagement policy, as specified by the bill.

Maintaining the requirement that title I, part A funds be used to supplement, and not supplant, non-Federal funds, but revising the manner in which an LEA must demonstrate compliance with this requirement by requiring an LEA to demonstrate that the methodology it uses to allocate State and local funds to each title I school ensures that the school receives all the State and local funds it would receive in the absence of participation in title I.

[10] In general, these LEA amounts may be reduced by state educational agencies to account for funds reserved for state administration, program improvement, and academic achievement awards; to adjust for recent shifts in LEA boundaries; and to provide grants to charter schools treated as separate LEAs under state law (such charter schools are not considered in the calculation of grants by USED).

The regulations permit an LEA to use not more than 15 % of its IDEA 2004 Part B funds to develop and implement EIS.