Transcript Maintenance of Effort Updates - ESC-20


Two aspects to IDEA MOE:
1. Eligibility Process
 Determines eligibility to receive IDEA-B funds
 Compares upcoming year’s Budget to prior year
Expenditures* (Clarification in other slides)
 Prior to receipt of IDEA-B entitlement
2. Determinations Process
 Determines compliance with MOE requirement
 Compares actual Expenditures from one year to
the next
 After-the-fact
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
2

Fiscal Compliance Requirements
schedule:
› Part 1: LEA MOE (Maintenance of Effort) for
Eligibility
 New Data Collection
› Part 2: MOE Reduction and Coordinated
Early Intervening Services (CEIS)
Requirements
 Existing Data Collection
 Moved from BS6006 Budget Summary to this new
schedule
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
3

Part 2: MOE Reduction and Coordinated
Early Intervening Services (CEIS)
Requirements
› Purpose of moving these sections to new
schedule is for validation.
› System will validate that amounts entered do not
exceed maximum allowable:
1. MOE Voluntary Reduction amount;
2. CEIS amount;
3. Combination of Voluntary Reduction and CEIS
amounts (combination cannot exceed the lesser
of CEIS maximum or Voluntary Reduction
maximum)
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
4
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
5

Part 1: LEA MOE for Eligibility
› As a requirement for receiving IDEA-B funds,
the LEA must first certify they will budget
enough in the new year to be in compliance
with MOE
› Must provide the following:
 Special education Expenditures from prior year
 Special education Budget for upcoming year
 Identify whether meeting MOE based on “state
and local” or “local only” funds
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
6
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
7
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
8

If budget is less than prior year
expenditures:
› LEA must provide a justification for the
decreased budget amount:
 Example: “Using Federal Exception for
Departure of Special Education Personnel. We
have budgeted $<amt> less due to the
retirement of <qty> special education teachers
paid from the general fund.”
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
9
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
10

Information provided in this schedule is
for purposes of grant eligibility only

Actual MOE compliance will be
performed during determinations
process (after-the-fact):
› Actual expenditure comparison
› Assertions for decline in effort will be
reviewed and approved or rejected during
the determinations process
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
11

Questions from prior guidance
concerning the new schedule:
› If the LEA enters estimated amounts during
initial submittal, will the LEA need to submit
an amendment when actual amounts are
known?
› Should the LEA enter estimated expenditure
amounts from the prior year OR final amounts
from the most recent year completed (two
years ago)?
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
12

New Guidance resulting from TEA’s
consideration of the questions:
› The year being used for prior year
expenditure data for the Fiscal Compliance
schedule must be the year in which:
 Expenditure data are final, AND
 The LEA was in compliance with MOE
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
13
Was LEA compliant
2013-2014
Expenditures Final? Yes
Yes
in FY14?
No
No
Look at 2012-2013
Expenditures. Was LEA
compliant in FY13?
Look at 2011-2012
Expenditures. Was
the LEA compliant in
FY12?
Yes
No
Yes
Use 20132014
Expenditures
in 2014-2015
Schedule
Use 2012-2013
Expenditures in
2014-2015
Schedule
Use 2011-2012
Expenditures in 20142015 Schedule
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
14

Implications:
› LEA will need to know which prior years they
were in compliance with MOE and which test
demonstrated compliance (combination of
state and local funds or local only funds)
› Won’t be able to start fresh with the
comparison of FY14 to FY15
› LEA must maintain documentation of all
expenditure and budget data referenced in
the schedule and be able to provide the
documentation to TEA upon request.
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
15
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
16
1.
Retroactive: No longer use ECI (Early
Childhood Intervention) set-aside from SOF
(used to be included in ISDs’ MOE calculations
to lower the amount of decline; N/A for charter
schools)
2.
Retroactive: Must use new method of imputing
“local only” expenditures
3.
Allocation of PIC 99 used in years prior to FY14;
Not used beginning with FY14
4.
Boundy letter effective FY11 (if prior year is
noncompliant, must compare current year to
most recent previous year when compliant)
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
17
5.
Retroactive: For child count data, use
only Child Count Funding Type Code 3
(IDEA-B) from the PEIMS Fall Collection
EDIT+ PRF5D010 Special Education
Child/Counts by Funding Type.
 (Previously, the total of Codes 3 and 0 were
used.)
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
18
6.
Additional Revenue specific to a certain
year, if used for special education:
 SFSF (State Fiscal Stabilization Funds, Fund
287/368) 2009-2010 and/or 2010-2011
 Education Jobs Funds (Fund 287/368) 2010-
2011 and/or 2011-2012
 SHARS Reimbursement Revenue (Revenue
Code 5931) any year, if used for additional
special education expenditures
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
19
7.
Special Education Program Intent Codes
(PICs):

Prior to 2011-2012, PIC 23 was the only PIC used for
special education expenditures.

Effective 2011-2012, PIC 32 was added for all PreK
expenditures.

LEAs would have to use a locally defined option code
to distinguish PreK special education (PPCD)
expenditures from other PreK expenditures.
Effective 2013-2014, PIC 33 was added for PreK
special education (PPCD) expenditures.


PIC 32 is now only used for PreK expenditures that are
not special education, compensatory education, or
bilingual education.
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
20

Question sent to TEA in April 2014:
› What does an LEA do if they don’t have final
budget data available at the time of the
eGrants submission?
› TEA Response 4/15/14:
“Use the budgeted amount at the time of
completion/submission of the application and
keep the appropriate documentation of that
amount in the event the LEA is randomly
selected for validation.”
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
21

Question sent to TEA in April 2014:
› How does the data requirement for assuring
eligibility for IDEA-B funds affect SSAs?
 The draft schedule does not have a drop down box
to select member districts
 If it did, how can a Fiscal Agent be responsible for
reporting member districts’ local data?
› TEA Response 4/14/14:
“Yes, the schedule will need to be completed for
each member of an SSA and there will be various
validations in the schedule to help let the
applicant know if there are corrections to be
made or other information needed, etc.”
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
22

Remember: The Fiscal Compliance
Requirements schedule being presented
in this power point is a draft version

May change before finalized
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
23

Sign up in iLearning via www.esc20.net to
attend a full day IDEA MOE workshop to
learn the basics of MOE and the new
guidance and methodology released by
TEA to date

Presenter: Denise Dusek

iLearning workshop #PD140611-A37

Registration Fee: No Charge

May 2, 2014 9:00 am to 3:00 pm

Lunch on your own
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
24

Contact:
› Denise Dusek
› (210) 370-5378
› [email protected]
› Sherry Marsh
› (210) 370-5411
› [email protected]
Education Service Center, Region 20 | April 2014
25