Making Sound Use of Funds Decisions for Title I, Part D

Nicholas Read and Simon Gonsoulin, NDTACJeff Breshears, California Department of Education

Participants will:• Explore a detailed decision making process for

deciding the allowableness and appropriateness of fund use proposals.

• Consider ways to act as a technical assistance (TA) provider to subgrantees in their use of funds.

• Discuss prioritizing funding based on program needs and outcomes—during times of funding excess and scarcity.

• Examine ways of using Part D funds collaboratively with other Federal, State, and local funds. 2

Objectives

1. During application review

– Consider adding guidance/requirements within the application itself

Lay out expectations, priorities, and dos and don’ts.

Be prescriptive up front for easier review and decision making later.

2. Ongoing, after funds are allocated

– Decisions may depend on current circumstances, outcomes to date, and other factors.

3

Times for Making Use of Funds Decisions

• Deciding allowable and appropriate:

– Use clearly defined decision making processes or rules.

– Start with the musts and work through to the shoulds, using:

1. Federal requirements and priorities

2. Part D statute and nonregulatory guidance as well as other Federal regulations

3. State Plan goals and objectives

4. Subgrantee application requirements and expressed needs

5. State and local laws, regulations, and guidelines

6. Elements that facilitate program planning and improvement

Always keep outcomes and needs in mind! 4

Making Sound Use of Fund Decisions

• To feel more confident in deciding appropriateness:

– Facility, program, and student data hold valuable information on:

Outcomes: teacher retention, facility environment, academic progress, credits/degrees earned, successful transitions

Needs: professional development, technology, increased literacy, family/community involvement

• Outcome- and needs-based decisions will hold more weight with USED.

• Such decisions demonstrate to stakeholders that funds are being allocated effectively and efficiently.

5

Using Data for Increased Assurance

• The SEA is not just a “pass through” for funds:

– Coordinators have funding discretion, they:

Should feel comfortable with the decisions and confident in the decision making process

May want to consider the possibility of creating State regulations/guidance

• TA at all levels leads to better uses of funds and implementation of programs

• SAs and LEAs should not act as pass throughs either.

– The relationship between funder and funded should exist at all levels.

6

The Role of the SEA, SA, and LEA Coordinators

Example: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

• Filling immediate needs vs. sustainable programming

What to consider:

• Begin a new pilot program and evaluate impact.

• Expand pilot programs to statewide programming.

• Conduct external evaluation of existing programs.

• Use evaluation data and expand effective/promising programming.

• Increase partnerships that will improve collaboration.

• Increase face-to-face staff development activities.

• Further improve continuous quality improvement efforts.

• Sponsor activities that promote the engagement of parents and the community.

• Braid or blend funding.

7

Creative Uses: Times of “Feast”

Example: Current economic downturn• “Doing more with less” leads to increased emphasis on meeting needs

and addressing outcomes.

What to consider:• Contract with a proven grant writer to secure grant dollars.

• Partner with foundations and other private funders.

• Employ existing technology for staff development.

• Maintain regional pilot programs and collect longitudinal evaluation data.

• Cut programs with poor outcomes and expand programs that suggest or have shown a “cost benefit.”

• Fund evidence-based programs or those professionals feel are effective.

• Maintain effective programs that reach the majority of the youth you must serve.

• Braid or blend funding (e.g., run Institutionwide projects).

8

Creative Uses: Times of “Famine”

• Blended funding

– Example: Institution-wide Projects

• Braided funding

– Example: “Read 180 Lab”

9

Collaborative Funding

1. Read the real-life use of funds proposals.

2. Using your own decision rules and any additional information/data available, decide allowableness and appropriateness.

3. Describe your decision to the group, explaining how and why you decided what you did.

• Also explain whether there are any proactive steps you could have taken to make this decision even easier for you to make.

10

Activity: You Be the Judge