In this 2019 letter, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) announced that it is granting prior approval for two direct cost categories to ease the burden on states. This prior approval permits formula grant funds administered by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) to be used for certain allowable purposes in a timely fashion. The accompanying FAQ provides details on which types of uses no longer require prior approval and which proposed activities continue to require prior approval before the funds can be expended.
This comprehensive guide includes information on how to determine the allowability of indirect costs, how to calculate a restricted indirect cost rate, and answers to common questions about restricted indirect cost rates. Pages 27–30 describe the method to calculate restricted indirect cost rates and pages 85–92 have links to examples and more specific considerations for calculations. There is also information about how to distinguish between direct and indirect costs. This guide reviews common issues with calculating restricted indirect cost rates disclosed in ED reviews.
This OSEP letter to the Part C lead agency in New Mexico explains the requirement for the lead agency to have an approved restricted indirect cost rate, as opposed to having a negotiated indirect cost rate. There are several citations and references to resources for how a restricted indirect cost rate may be calculated.
This Q&A document from the Office of Special Education Programs addresses inquiries concerning the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C use of funds in the current COVID-19 environment as of June 2020. It addresses the types of activities that are allowable for use of Part C funds and how those funds may be used to ensure the provision of early intervention services through virtual delivery methods.
This OSEP memorandum includes background and guidance for lead agency directors on the restricted indirect cost rate. Restricted indirect cost rates are used under awards, such as IDEA Part C, that have supplement, non-supplant requirements. This guidance includes the formula for calculating the rate and definitions for what is allowable under each category of the formula (general management, fixed costs, and other expenditures). Although this document was released in 1999, it is still used as a relevant resource in OSEP’s annual IDEA Part C grant application materials.
This letter responds to questions from the Illinois State Board of Education regarding whether proposed language for Illinois education appropriations is consistent with the provisions related to maintenance of state financial support (MFS) in IDEA. Given the appropriations language, the state asks if they would be penalized for not meeting MFS requirements if a local education agency (including a state-authorized charter school) fails to expend the amount allocated by the state for special education and related services. The letter explains the history and purpose of the MFS requirement and responds to the state’s question.
This OSEP memo clarifies actions that state and local educational agencies (SEA and LEA) must take to identify and act upon disproportionality of racial and ethnic groups in special education. The regulations state that the SEA must require any LEA identified as having significant disproportionality to reserve 15 percent of the flow-through funds under IDEA Part B to provide comprehensive CEIS to serve children not identified with disabilities. This document describes the differences between the requirements for significant disproportionality and CEIS and the requirements related to disproportionate representation as a result of inappropriate identification. See 20 U.S.C. §1416(a)(3)(C), 34 CFR §300.600(d)(3), and 34 CFR §300.646(b)(2).
This letter responds to the Maryland Special Needs Advocacy Project and addresses two IDEA fiscal topics, one of which is CEIS. The CEIS question regards calculation of the proportionate share of IDEA funds that must be used by a local educational agency (LEA) to provide equitable services to children with disabilities who are parentally placed in private schools when that LEA is required to provide comprehensive CEIS. For comprehensive CEIS, an LEA is required to reserve exactly 15 percent of its IDEA funds to provide these services when it has been identified with significant disproportionality. OSEP explains that the calculations for the percentage of IDEA funds to reserve for comprehensive CEIS and the proportionate share must be based on the total amount of the IDEA subgrant the LEA receives under 34 CFR §§300.705 and 300.815.
This letter to the Division of Rehabilitation Services and Special Education at the University of Maine, Farmington, discusses the possible uses for CEIS funds including a tiered support system such as response to intervention (RTI) and funding teachers.
This letter to the Michigan Department of Education addresses three IDEA fiscal topics, two of which are maintenance of effort (MOE) and coordinated early intervening services (CEIS). The CEIS question asks about the possibility of reallocating CEIS funds not expended by an LEA. OSEP explains that the funds can only be used for the purposes stated in IDEA and any funds not expended by the LEA when required to expend them due to significant disproportionality would revert to the U. S. Department of Education at the end of the expenditure period for those funds.