A QUICK PRIMER IN HOW TITLE I FUNDS ARE ALLOCATED IN TPS

Title I funding

Statement of assurances

Title I resources deployed to have the greatest possible positive impact for students and provide services/resources district would not be able to afford otherwise

District staff is knowledgeable about rules, regulations, requirements, and assurances of grant

Grant is submitted annually and reviewed by CSDEDistrict submits an annual Compliance and Evaluation

report to CSDEThis is an overview presentation, as no specific issues

were identified to be addressed in detailPlease keep track of questions that arise, if any-Q&A at

the end of the presentation

Background of Title I

Dates back to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965

Provides supplemental federal funding for school districts with a high percentage of students from low- income families

Funds are distributed to states who then distribute to local educational agencies

Title I programs

At least 40% of the students must come from low-income families to be eligible to be a Title I school-wide program Vogel-Wetmore: 74% in 2010-11 Forbes: 55% Southwest: 59%

School-wide program: resources can be dispensed in a flexible manner

Targeted assistance: schools identify and “target” students who are failing or at risk of failing Based on academic need not poverty

Other programs exist for Migratory students Neglected and abused students Drop-out prevention School improvement

Key terms in Title I

Supplement not supplantAdequate yearly progressHighly QualifiedParental involvementComparability

Increasingly restrictive guidelines

Supplement not supplant Add to, not replace, the cost of existing programming

NCLB added: Adequate yearly progress (AYP) Definition of “Highly Qualified” teachers Annual report cards School choice Supplemental Educational Services

Increased parental involvement (school compacts)

Services have to be provided for eligible public and non-public school sites who meet the criteria

AYP

Year AYP Rdg

Annual Rdg AYP Math

Annual Math

2002-032003-04

57% 57%60%

65% 65%67%

2004-052005-062006-07

68% 68%71%75%

74% 74%77%80%

2007-082008-092009-10

79% 79%82%85%

82% 82%85%89%

2010-112011-122012-13

89% 89%94%98%

91% 91%96%99%

2013-14 100% 100% 100% 100%

Highly Qualified

Applies to all teachers who teach core academic areas

Must hold full state certification as a teacherTeachers should teach in their area(s) of certificationBy law, districts can only hire teachers who meet the

definition of highly qualified in school-wide programs from 2005-06 on

Teachers must receive high quality, job-embedded professional development

Parents should be notified if the teacher is not highly qualified

Staffing models

Staff are selected with required certification for position

Must meet NCLB Highly Qualified requirements

Knowledge of school Collaboration and collegiality with facultySupport staff must work effectively with

administration, other teachers, and students

Parental Involvement

Involvement defined as “regular, two-way, and meaningful communication”

Parental “Right to Know”: teacher professional qualifications must be made available on request

Parents must be informed if child will be taught by a teacher not HQ for four or more consecutive weeks

Child’s CMT/CAPT scores must be available to parentsDistrict must have a Title I Policy

http://www.torrington.org/uploaded/Central_Office/Policy/5000/5061_Comparability_of_Services_for_Title_I.pdf

Schools must have a School-Parent CompactSchools should have an annual parent meeting

Parental involvement

Opportunities for parental involvement in child’s education Literacy and numeracy nights and workshops (see school

calendars)Communication tools

Parent-teacher-school compacts LEA/district report cards http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=50 Parent portal https://powerschool.torrington.org/public/ ,

http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=849

Reporting requirements School report cards, including AYP

http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=846

Parent advisory capacity Forbes’ SGC: http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=1530

Comparability: Parallel structures

District-wide salary schedule http://www.torrington.org/uploaded/Central_Office/HR/TEASalSched11-12.pdf

Comparability in staff rolesCommon professional development experiences

http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=815 Provision of common curriculum and instructional

materials http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=98

Collaboration between literacy leadersExtended day programming for AYP at all schools

Consistency across the district

All elementary schools have an embedded literacy support team

Literacy leaders from each school meet monthly to discuss curriculum, instruction, and assessment

All five schools are served by a math consulting teacher

Expectations for the common delivery of curriculum and instructional program K-5

All schools provided with same program materials (ELA: Good Habits, Great Readers; Math: Growing with Math programs)

Grant budget

Total 2011-12 award: $673, 274Private school allocation, equitable services

(St. Peter/St. Francis): $14,399 (2%)Professional development allocation: $65,888

(10%) ($30,000 for Purch Prof/Tech, $15,000 for salaries/subs, $20, 888 for PD supplies)

Parental involvement: $6700 (1%) (translation services)

Salaries: $584,874 (87%) 8 reading positions, summer literacy planning, extended day program

Spending requirements

ESEA, Title I ranking and allocating funds determines amount of fund for non-public schools based on per-poverty child

Professional development: at least 10%Parental involvement: at least 1% Comparability: provide services that

comparable to services provided in non-Title I schools

All purchase requests for PD, supplies, etc. placed through Central Office and distributed proportionally to schools based on size of staff

Staffing expenses

Forbes 3 Literacy Support teachers

$49,620 $82,455 $82,455* (retiring 2012)

1 Reading/Language Arts Specialist $77,145

Vogel Wetmore 3 Literacy Support teachers

$67,618 $47,500 $77,145

1 Reading/Language Arts Specialist $77,145Literacy support staff may be paid from grant or general budget. Reduction

of grant would result in reduction of positions.

Professional development expenses

Registrations for conferences and workshops Connecticut Reading Association Education Connection SERC National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Presentation, lesson modeling and debriefing by Dr. Nancy Boyles, SCSU ($14,000 for 6 days job-embedded consulting)

Purchase of teacher training materials Getting Ready for the Common Core Standards ($400) Math Work Stations materials Mastering Basic Math Facts Series ($2000) Continuum of Literacy Learning Series ($1000)

Q&A

This presentation will be posted on the district website under “Educational Services”

http://www.torrington.org/page.cfm?p=97