OSPI August 17, 2012 Title I, Part A Office USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY.

OSPIAugust 17, 2012

Title I, Part A Office

USE OF Title I, PART A FUNDS and ESEA FLEXIBILITY

Why did Washington State apply?This is the right decision for Washington State. Over 1176 schools and 113 districts across our state were identified as “in improvement” based on 2010-11 state assessments. And, by 2014, nearly every school and district would be identified as in improvement. So we know our current AYP system doesn’t work.

We need a new way to measure progress and provide resources to support our work. This request gives us the opportunity to set new annual learning targets and frees up to $58 million across our state to address the needs of struggling students and schools. It provides the flexibility Washington needs to ensure ALL students graduate with college- and career-ready skills.

Randy Dorn, Superintendent of Public Instruction2

What does ESEA FLEXIBILITY require from states?

1. Ensure college- and career-ready expectations for all students (Common Core State Standards [CCSS] and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium [SBAC] in Washington).

2. Implement state-developed system of differentiated recognition, accountability, and support.

3. Support effective instruction and leadership (Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project [TPEP] in Washington).

4. Reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on school districts by the State.

3

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED1. The requirements in ESEA section 1111(b)(2)(E)-(H)

that prescribe how an SEA must establish annual measurable objectives (AMOs) for determining adequate yearly progress (AYP) to ensure that all students meet or exceed the State’s proficient level of academic achievement on the State’s assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics no later than the end of the 2013–2014 school year.

The SEA requested this waiver to develop new ambitious but achievable AMOs in reading/language arts and mathematics in order to provide meaningful goals that are used to guide support and improvement efforts for the State, Districts, schools, and student subgroups.

4

Accountability System Based on ESEA REQUEST

ESEA Request Accountability System

Used to identify Reward, Priority, Focus, and Emerging schools 

Washington State’s New Accountability System

Used to identify Reward, Priority, Focus, and Emerging schools for Title I and non-Title I schools

School Improvement

•Uses AYP calculations to identify schools and districts in a step of improvement (Title I)

•Uses PLA Methodology based on AYP calculations to generate list of Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools (PLASs)

SBE/OSPI Achievement Index

Used to identify Award Schools

AYP Determinations•Sanctions for schools and districts “in improvement”•Set-asides required for Public School Choice and Supplemental Education Services

Up to 2011-12Up to 2011-12 2012-13 and 2013-14

2012-13 and 2013-14

2014-15 and beyond

2014-15 and beyond

AMO Calculations•Annual targets intended to close proficiency gaps by half by 2017; uses 2011 as baseline and adds equal annual increments (1/6 of proficiency gap) to get to 2017 target; each subgroup, school, district, and state have unique annual targets.•Calculations reported on Report Card•No AYP sanctions based on identification of schools and districts “in improvement”•Requires districts to set-aside up to 20% for Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools

55

STATE Uniform Bar GOALS Under Old NCLB Requirements

6

Set ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

NEW Annual Measurable Objectives (Targets): Cut Proficiency Gap by Half by 2017Sample High School - 10th Grade Reading

NEW for 2012-13

7

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

2. The requirements in ESEA section 1116(b) for an LEA to identify for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, as appropriate, a Title I school that fails, for two consecutive years or more, to make AYP, and for a school so identified and its LEA to take certain improvement actions.

The SEA requested this waiver so that an LEA and its Title I schools need not comply with these requirements.

8

Flexibility

Schools are no longer identified as in improvement.Only Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools are identified.

All schools must write school improvement plans. [Chapter 180-16-220(2)(b)WAC]

Only Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools must send their Student and Success Action Plan (school improvement plan) to OSPI for review.

Elimination of AYP determinations and associated sanctions for schools in improvement, including 20% set-aside of Title I, Part A funds for Public School Choice and Supplemental Education Services and 10% set-aside for professional development for schools.

[See B-9 through B-10a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

9

REWARD SCHOOLS

* The school cannot have significant gaps among subgroups, which means the school is not on the list of Focus Schools or the list of Emerging Schools.

Category DescriptionHIGHEST

PERFORMING TITLE I

SCHOOLS*

•Title I schools only•Met AYP in all students group and/or in all subgroups for 3 years in both R and M; highest performing at each level over 3 years

HIGH-PROGRESS

TITLE I SCHOOLS*

•N = up to 92 (10%) Title I schools showing greatest improvement and performance in R/M or graduation rates over 3 years•Ratio of current performance to improvement is 1:1

10

PRIORITY, FOCUS, & EMERGING SCHOOLS

Category

Description

PRIORITY

• Lowest performing in all students group over 3 years

• N = at Districts 46 (5%) schools; includes 27 SIGs

• Remaining 19 chosen using PLA methodology for R/M (Title I schools) and grad rates < 60% (Title I and Title I-eligible secondary schools that graduate students)

FOCUS

• Lowest performing subgroups over 3 years• N = 92 (10%) Title I schools only• Uses PLA methodology for R/M and grad rates <

60%• Identified from bottom of ranked list of all

subgroups• School could be identified for multiple

subgroups

EMERGING

• N = 138 • Includes next 5% up from bottom of Priority

Schools list (46 schools) and next 10% up from bottom of Focus Schools list (92 schools)

11

Priority: Based on “All

Students” Performance

Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools

Lowest 5% (N=46)

Lowest 10% (N = 92)

Next 10% (N=92)

Next 5% (N=46)

Focus: Based on

“Subgroup” Performance

Emerging: Next 5%

of Priority and 10% of FocusTotal N =

13812

Dear Parent/Guardian:

We hope this letter finds you enjoying the last few days of summer and preparing for another year of learning as your son/daughter returns to ______________ School.

The purpose of this letter is to reaffirm our commitment to the success of ALL students and to inform you that we are still working to improve. During the summer, your school, _________________________________was identified as a (Priority, Focus, or Emerging) school based on an analysis of student achievement in relationship to how we compare with other schools in our state. This analysis, specifically identified that our________________ (sub group or all students) has/have not met our goals or expectations over the past three years (on state assessments in Reading and Mathematics OR with respect to graduation rates).

To increase learning outcomes for all of our students, we are taking the following action steps over the course of the school year:

•Participate in a Needs Assessment to identify strengths and challenges in our school; the assessment will also include recommendations for improvement. •Identify next steps we will take to improve learning outcomes for our students, by completing our “Student and School Success Action Plan”; the plan must be submitted to the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction for review and approval. •Implement our plan and examine a variety of data to ensure we are making progress.•Engage parents/guardians and our school community in our improvement efforts.

Attached is a brief description of the basis for the school’s identification as a (Priority, Focus, or Emerging) school.

More details about the movement of our state, district, and school in pursuit of ongoing improvement for all our students can be found at http://www.k12.wa.us/ESEA/PublicNotice.aspx).

We are committed to continued growth as we work together to support our most valuable resource, our children.

Sincerely, A letter must be sent by September 14, 2012

SAMPLE Notification -- Letter for Priority–Focus–Emerging Schools

13

Requirement for Priority, Focus, and Emerging

schools

14

PRIORITY, FOCUS, AND EMERGING SCHOOLS

15

RequirementPriori

tyFocu

sEmergi

ng

Engage in Needs Assessment (Sept – Oct)

√ √ √

Develop Student and School Success Action using findings from Needs Assessment (Oct – Nov)

√* √* √**

Implement Plan aligned with Turnaround Principles

√ √***

Implement Plan aligned with meaningful interventions that match unique needs of school and subgroups

√ √ √

Districts set-aside up to 20% of Title I, Part A funds; ensure school(s) implements Plans as designed; build capacity to sustain

√ √ √*Use findings from external Needs Assessment (NA)**Use findings from internal Needs Assessment (NA)***If Emerging School is identified from Priority Schools list15

Provide strong leadership. Ensure that teachers are effective and able to improve

instruction. Redesign the day or school year to provide additional time for

student learning and teacher collaboration. Ensure instructional program is research-based, rigorous, and

aligned with standards in order to meet the academic needs of all students.

Use data to inform instruction and for continuous improvement and provide time for collaboration on the use of data.

Improve school safety and discipline and other non-academic factors, such as students’ social, emotional, and health needs.

Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement.

Implement Turnaround Principles

16

SUPPORTS AND SERVICES

17

PRIORITY, FOCUS, AND EMERGING SCHOOLS

18

Supports and ServicesPriori

tyFocu

sEmerging

Leadership Coaching, Technical Assistance, and Progress Monitoring (Differentiated)

√ √ √

Needs Assessment √ √

Support to conduct

using web-based tools

Data Packages √* √**

Review of Plan by OSPI √ √ √

Access to OSPI and ESD PD and services

√ √ √

Minimal iGrants to support engagement in PD and services

√ √*Generated with support of Student & School Support Coach and external partners before Needs Assessment**Generated with support of Student & School Support Coach as part of Needs Assessment process18

20% Set-aside – Title I, Part A ApplicationPage 4-Program Plan (Q. 10) If applicable, describe the actions the school district will take to assist any schools which

have not met Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) regardless of whether they receive Title I, Part A funds. [Sec. 1112 (b)(1)(L)]

(Q. 11) Are any schools in the district identified as Priority, Focus or Emerging?   If yes, Districts complete the following:

---Identify number of schools identified as Priority, Focus or Emerging ---Amount of up to 20% reservation set-aside (Page 5, Cell B)

Briefly describe: Why the amount set-aside is adequate to support schools identified as Priority, Focus or

Emerging in their efforts to implement turnaround criteria, How the funds will be used to support these schools, and How the district will evaluate the effectiveness of the use of these funds on student academic

achievements.

---------Date notification of schools identified as Priority, Focus, and/or Emerging was sent to the community.

Page 5-Required Expenditures - Buildings in Improvement (Q.B) The district must reserve up to 20% of its Title I, Part A allocation to ensure their Priority,

Focus and Emerging schools receive sufficient resources and support to implement meaningful interventions aligned with the school’s needs as articulated in the school’s improvement plan.

[See B-10. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

iGrants Form Package 201

19

Office of Student and School Success iGrants’ Applications

Coming soon for schools identified as Priority and Focus Schools.

Form Package 636 Form Package 637 More details soonForm Package 638

Notification will come from OSSS to District contacts.

20

Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions

Question: In an ESEA flexibility State, if a student has

transferred under the public school choice provisions of section 1116 of ESEA, may she stay at the school she attends until completion of the highest grade for the school?

Answer: Yes. The student must be allowed to stay at the

school as the ESEA flexibility waiver pertaining to public school choice did not waive this requirement.

[See ESEA 11169b)(13), 34CFR 200.44(g), B-8 Public School Choice Non-Regulatory

Guidance]

21

Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions

Question: May an LEA continue to use Title I, Part A funds to pay for the Public School Choice transportation of a student that had transferred in the previous years?

Answer: Yes, as long as the LEA takes into consideration the other needs of its Title I program.

[See ESEA 11169b)(13), 34CFR 200.44(g), B-8 Public School Choice Non-Regulatory Guidance]

22

Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions

May Title I, Part A funds be used to provide Supplemental Educational Services?

A District may continue to provide SES as long as it is an activity identified in the Priority, Focus and Emerging school’s school improvement plan.

OSPI is no longer required to select or monitor SES providers.

Districts may contract directly with tutoring providers.23

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

3. The requirements in ESEA section 1116(c) for an SEA to identify for improvement or corrective action, as appropriate, an LEA that, for two consecutive years or more, fails to make AYP, and for an LEA so identified and its SEA to take certain improvement actions.

The SEA requested this waiver so that it need not comply with these requirements with respect to its Districts.

24

Flexibility

Districts are no longer identified as in improvement.

Eliminates the requirement to write a district improvement plan.

Eliminates the 10% set-aside for professional development for districts.

25

Using Title I, Part A Funds for Professional Development

Background

ESEA requires a District identified for improvement to spend not less than 10% of its Title I allocation to “address the professional development needs of the instructional staff.”

Change

Districts may not use Title I professional development funds to support non-Title I staff.

[See B-12a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

26

ESEA Flexibility – Requested and Approved

4. The requirements in ESEA sections 6213(b) and 6224(e) that limit participation in, and use of funds under the Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) and Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) programs based on whether an LEA has made AYP and is complying with the requirements in ESEA section 1116.

The SEA requested this waiver so that an LEA that receives SRSA or RLIS funds may use those funds for any authorized purpose regardless of whether the LEA makes AYP.

27

Flexibility

What does the flexibility include with respect to rural districts?

Permits districts that receive Small, Rural School Achievement Program or Rural and Low-Income School Program funds to use those funds for any purpose authorized under the applicable program regardless of AYP status.

Removes the requirement that rural districts that had not made AYP be required to only use the funds for activities under 1116.

[See B-14. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

28

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

5. The requirement in ESEA section 1114(a)(1) that a school have a poverty percentage of 40 percent or more in order to operate a schoolwide program.

The SEA requests this waiver so that an LEA may implement interventions consistent with the turnaround principles or interventions that are based on the needs of the students in the school and designed to enhance the entire educational program in a school in any of its Priority and Focus schools that meet the definitions of “Priority schools” and “Focus schools,” respectively, set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility, as appropriate, even if those schools do not have a poverty percentage of 40 percent or more.

29

Flexibility

A Priority and a Focus school may implement a schoolwide program with less than 40% poverty .

Title I, Part A funds may then be used to implement interventions aligned with the turnaround principles, which would affect the entire educational program of the school in which they are implemented.

[See C-28. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]30

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

6. The requirement in ESEA section 1003(a) for an SEA to distribute funds reserved under that section only to Districts with schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

The SEA requests this waiver so that it may allocate section 1003(a) funds to its Districts in order to serve any of the State’s Priority and Focus schools that meet the definitions of “Priority schools” and “Focus schools,” respectively, set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.

31

ESEA 1003(a) School Improvement Funds

Based on approval of iGrant applications:

Priority Schools receive up to $50,000

Focus Schools receive up to $20,000

32

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

7. The provision in ESEA section 1117(c)(2)(A) that authorizes an SEA to reserve Title I, Part A funds to reward a Title I school that (1) significantly closed the achievement gap between subgroups in the school; or (2) has exceeded AYP for two or more consecutive years.

The SEA requested this waiver so that it may use funds reserved under ESEA section 1117(c)(2)(A) for any of the State’s Title I reward schools that meet the definition of “reward schools” set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.33

Title I, Part A Awards

2012-13 Title I Distinguished Schools Memorandum No. 044-12M.Exceptional student performance for 2 or more

consecutive years.Significantly closed the Achievement Gap

between student groups.

2012-13 Academic Achievement Award ProgramMemorandum No. 044-12M.Met AMOs in all cells for the last year (2012)

and AYP in all cells in 2009-10 and 2010-11.

Due October 1, 2012

34

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

8. The requirements in ESEA section 2141(a), (b), and (c) for an LEA and SEA to comply with certain requirements for improvement plans regarding highly qualified teachers.

The SEA requested this waiver to allow the SEA and its Districts to focus on developing and implementing more meaningful evaluation and support systems.

35

Upcoming TPEP Webinars

August 23 and August 30 from 1:30 to 3:30

Register on-line at http://tpep-wa.org/2012/08/14/tpep-webinar-update/

Resources at http://tpep-wa.org/

36

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

9. The limitations in ESEA section 6123 that limit the amount of funds an SEA or LEA may transfer from certain ESEA programs to other ESEA programs.

The SEA requested this waiver so that it and its Districts may transfer up to 100 percent of the funds it receives under the authorized programs among those programs and into Title I, Part A.

37

Flexibility - TransferabilityDistricts may transfer program funds from Improving Teacher Quality State Grants (ESEA section 2121- Title II, Part A) to Title I, Part A. This authority would apply to all Districts notwithstanding the limitations on such transfers and the restrictions on the use of the transferred funds in ESEA section 6123(b)(1).

Must meet private school equitable share requirement under Title II, Part A.

[See B-19 through B-22a. ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions]

38

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

10. The requirements in ESEA section 1003(g)(4) and the definition of a Tier I school in Section I.A.3 of the School Improvement Grants (SIG) final requirements.

The SEA requested this waiver so that it may award SIG funds to an LEA to implement one of the four SIG models in any of the State’s Priority schools that meet the definition of “Priority schools” set forth in the document titled ESEA Flexibility.

39

Waiver Number 11

OSPI did not request

21st Century Community Learning Centers

40

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

12. The requirements in ESEA sections 1116(a)(1)(A)-(B) and 1116(c)(1)(A) that require Districts and SEAs to make determinations of adequate yearly progress (AYP) for schools and Districts, respectively.

The SEA requested this waiver because continuing to determine whether an LEA and its schools make AYP is inconsistent with the SEA’s State-developed differentiated recognition, accountability, and support system included in its ESEA flexibility request.

The SEA and its Districts must report on their report cards performance against the AMOs for all subgroups identified in ESEA section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v), and use performance against the AMOs to support continuous improvement in Title I schools that are not Reward schools, Priority schools, or Focus schools.

41

Report Card – Prior to 2012-13

42

DRAFT for 2012-13 Report Card

43

ESEA FLEXIBILITY – REQUESTED and APPROVED

13. The requirements in ESEA section 1113(a)(3)-(4) and (c)(1) that require an LEA to serve eligible schools under Title I in rank order of poverty and to allocate Title I, Part A funds based on that rank ordering.

The SEA requested this waiver in order to permit its Districts to serve a Title I-eligible high school with a graduation rate below 60 percent that the SEA has identified as a Priority school even if that school does not rank sufficiently high to be served.

44

Title I Eligible High School

Section 1113 waiver allows a District to serve “out of rank order” a Title I eligible high school with graduation rate below 60 percent that has been identified as a Priority school.

If a Priority school becomes a Title I schoolthen Title I requirements apply to the school

and an “equitable share” for private schools must

be provided.45

Waiver Impact on Ranking and AllocationSchool Grades

servedWaiverSchool(Y/N)

Enrollment Number oflow-incomestudents enrolled*

Percentage of low-incomestudents enrolled in school

Number oflow-incomestudents that attend privateschools andreside in school'sattendancearea

1 K‐5 N 500 450 90% 10

2 6-8 N 1,200 940 78% 15

3 K-5 N 500 300 60% 20

4 9-12 N 1,500 825 55% 15

5* 9-12 Y 1,500 750 50% 10

6 K-5 N 500 100 20% 20

School Number 5* had a graduation rate less than 60% over a number of years

46

Waiver Impact on Ranking and AllocationSchool Grades

servedTotal number oflow‐incomeStudents enrolled inschool

Per‐pupilamount

AllocationtoSchool

1 K-5 450 $600 $270,000

2 6-8 940 $475 $446,500

3 K-5 300 $0 $0

4 9-12 825 $0 $0

5 9-12 750 $500 $375,000

6 K-5 100 $0 $0

47

Waiver Impact on Ranking and Allocation

Example:Now that Schools 1, 2, and 5 are Title I schools, the equitable service requirements apply.

As indicated in the first table, in the attendance areas ofSchools 1, 2, and 5, there are 10, 15, and 10 students from low-income families, respectively, who attend private schools.

Amounts for equitable services generated by School 1’s, School2’s, and School 5’s private school students are:$6,000 (10 students multiplied by $600/student);$7,125 (15 students multiplied by $475/student); and$5,000 (10 students multiplied by $500/student),

respectively.

48

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Supplement not Supplant Requirements:

Apply to Title I, Part A funds used to implement ESEA flexibility

ED may not waive the supplement not supplant requirements.

49

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Schoolwide Program:

Must receive all of the non-Federal funds it would otherwise receive if it were not a Title I school.

50

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Targeted Assistance:

Must use Title I, Part A funds only for activities that supplement those that would be available for Title I students from non-Federal funds in the absence of the Title I, Part A funds.

Applies to funds reserved by an LEA or to funds allocated to a targeted assistance school.

51

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Targeted Assistance Presumptions:

Required by state law.

Non-Federal funds used in prior year.

Same activity provided to non-Title I students with non-Federal funds.

52

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Required by law (ESEA flexibility):Presumption is that State laws that an SEA has

incorporated into its ESEA flexibility request stem from that request and would not have been required of Districts in the absence of ESEA flexibility.

Using Title I, Part A funds to implement elements of its SEA’s ESEA flexibility request that are required by State law or regulations would not violate the “required by law” presumption of supplanting.

53

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Non-Federal funds used in prior year (ESEA flexibility):

Using Title I, Part A funds for an allowable activity that an LEA provided in the prior year with non- Federal funds raises a presumption of supplanting.

May rebut presumption by documentation that the activity would not have continued to be supported

with non-Federal funds.54

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Same activity provided to non-Title I students with non-Federal funds (ESEA flexibility):

Using Title I, Part A funds to provide activities to Title I students that an LEA provides to non-Title I students with non-Federal funds raises a presumption of supplanting.

Activity must meet Title I, Part A’s intent and purposes and be supported with supplemental non-Federal funds.

55

Supplement not Supplant and ESEA Waivers

Example of Exclusion:A State identifies both non-Title I schools and

Title I schools as priority schools.

The State provides supplemental State funds to the non-Title I priority schools to implement interventions consistent with the turnaround principles; the Title I priority schools use Title I funds to implement the same interventions.

56

Using Title I, Part A Funds for all Students in a District

Principle remains the same:

Generally, Title I funds may not be used to conduct activities that benefit all students or teachers in an LEA, except when specifically authorized.

57

Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions

Scenario:

A district turnaround specialist who worked withTitle I schools in restructuring was originally

supported withTitle I funds. Because the LEA needed to use the

full 20 percentof its Title I allocation to provide choice and SES

in more Title Ischools, the LEA switched his salary to local

funds.58

Use of Title I, Part A Funds Questions

Question: Now that some of the Title I schools are priority schools,

maythe LEA pay the specialist again with Title I funds as more of itsTitle I funds are now available to allocate to schools because ofESEA flexibility?

Answer: Possibly. If the district turnaround specialist’s work was

redesigned and that person was assigned to a Priority school, this would not violate the supplement not supplant requirement.

59

WHAT DOES ESEA FLEXIBILITY PROVIDE FOR STATES?

Highlights:

1. Flexibility to determine new ambitious and achievable annual targets for reading, mathematics, and graduation rates.

2. Elimination of AYP determinations and associated sanctions for schools in improvement, including 20% set-aside of Title I, Part A funds for Public School Choice and Supplemental Education Services and 10% set-aside for professional development for schools.

3. Elimination of associated sanctions for districts in improvement and the 10% set-aside for professional development for districts.

60

Requirements for Operating a Title I Program Remain Essentially the Same

Examples of unchanged requirements:Operation of a schoolwide program or

targeted assistance programEquitable services to private schoolsFiscal requirementsParent involvementCalculation of graduation rateSEA and LEA allocationsCivil rights lawsCost principles in OMB Circular A-87

61

ResourcesU.S. Department of Education’s ESEA flexibility website(includes FAQs and approved requests):http://www.ed.gov/esea/flexibility

U.S. Department of Education’s Title I Fiscal Guidance:http://www.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/fiscalguid.doc

U.S. Department of Education’s Title I Equitable Services to Private School Students:

http://www.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/psguidance.doc

OSPI’s Flexibility Waiver http://www.k12.wa.us/ESEA/PublicNotice.aspx

62

OSPI Contacts• Bob Harmon, Assistant Superintendent Special

Programs and Federal Accountability – [email protected]

• Andrew Kelly, Assistant Superintendent Office of Student and School Success – [email protected]

• Gayle Pauley, Director, Title I/LAP/CPR – [email protected]

63