IDEA Fiscal Timeline

Developed by CIFR, IDC, and NCSI, the IDEA Fiscal Timeline helps SEA staff plan and monitor the work they need to do to meet the fiscal requirements of IDEA. The tool helps directors of special education and supervisors of IDEA fiscal work customize an overview of state-level IDEA fiscal activities with links to external resources on fiscal topics. The IDEA Fiscal Timeline is accompanied by customization instructions and an explanation of the IDEA fiscal-year cycle.

Understanding the IDEA Grant Funding Cycle and Different Fiscal Years

Developed by CIFR, this document reviews the life cycle of an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) state grant and how that cycle corresponds to federal and state fiscal years. It includes an illustrated overview, with definitions and examples, of the forward funding period, the award year funding period, the Tydings period, the period of performance and the liquidation period. Understanding these periods and the relationships among fiscal years will be particularly important for users of the IDEA Fiscal Timeline, a tool designed to help state staff manage IDEA section 611 and section 619 grants.

IDEA Part B Subgrant Base Payment Adjustment Calculators

IDEA Part B subgrants to LEAs are made up of a base payment and payments tied to population and poverty measures. Under IDEA, base payments must be adjusted in certain circumstances. Developed by CIFR, these calculators help states make the adjustments accurately and consistently using the two methods described in Examples of Adjustments to IDEA Subgrant Base Payments for Local Educational Agencies.

Developing Written Procedures for the Allocation of IDEA Part B Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies

Developed by CIFR, this practice guide assists states in the development of written procedures for allocating IDEA Part B subgrants. The guide presents recommended components and provides key questions to consider during the development, as well as sample text for states to adapt.

Examples of Adjustments to IDEA Subgrant Base Payments for Local Educational Agencies

This CIFR-developed practice guide provides examples of circumstances in which states need to adjust IDEA Part B section 611 and section 619 subgrant base payment amounts. The guide outlines two approaches to making adjustments and sample calculations for each circumstance requiring adjustment, including in the case of new and significantly expanding charter school LEAs.

Quick Reference Guide on the Allocation of IDEA Part B Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies

This CIFR-developed reference guide provides an overview of the IDEA requirements regarding Part B subgrants to LEAs; the base payment, population, and poverty calculations states must make; and circumstances in which the base payment must be adjusted. The guide includes questions for states to consider and resource suggestions.

Writing Exemplary Data Notes for Local Educational Agency Maintenance of Effort Reduction Data and Coordinated Early Intervening Services Data

This practice guide was written to help states develop effective data notes to respond to any LEA allocation, MOE Reduction, and CEIS data quality inquiries. The document describes the value of well written explanations of data warnings, provides an overview of OSEP’s data-quality review process, and offers examples of both inadequate and exemplar data notes for several common warning messages.

618 Data Pre-submission Edit Check Tool — Part B MOE and CEIS

This tool was developed by the IDEA Data Center (IDC), in collaboration with CIFR, to help states prepare their Part B MOE and CEIS data submission. States can use the tool to identify potential edit check errors or errors in subtotals or totals prior to submitting the data to OSEP.

Link > https://ideadata.org/resources/resource/162/618-data-pre-submission-edit-check-tool-part-b-moe-and-ceis

EMAPS User Guide: IDEA Part B Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Reduction and Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS)

This user guide is intended to provide assistance to users of the EDFacts Metadata and Process System (EMAPS) for the IDEA Part B MOE reduction and CEIS reporting requirements. It demonstrates the steps necessary to enter the data and navigate in EMAPS.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/edfacts/emaps-idea-part-b-moe-reduction-ceis-user-guide.pdf

Part B OSEP 2017 Fiscal Monitoring Protocol: LEA Allocations

This monitoring protocol was implemented in 2016 as part of OSEP’s system of Differentiated Monitoring and Support (DMS) with states involved in intensive engagement with OSEP. The document is intended to ensure that states correctly allocate IDEA sections 611 and 619 funds to LEAs. To effectively monitor this area, OSEP developed a protocol addressing five specific components of the LEA allocations process: (1) base payments, (2) base payment adjustments, (3) allocations based on population and poverty, (4) new and significantly expanding charter school LEAs, and (5) section 619 allocations to LEAs if funding is below the 1997 level.

Link > https://osep.grads360.org/#communities/pdc/documents/13532f

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) Frequently Asked Questions about the Rights of Students with Disabilities in Public Charter Schools under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

This document emphasizes that children with disabilities who attend charter schools and their parents retain all rights and protections under Part B of IDEA just as they would at other public schools. It also addresses the provision of free appropriate public education and the SEA’s general supervisory authority over all educational programs for children with disabilities in the state, including charter schools, child find and evaluations, placement, procedural safeguards, IDEA funding, IDEA obligations related to charter school closures, and other topics. IDEA funding topics start on page twenty-three.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/faq-idea-charter-school.pdf

Letter to Chief State School Officers on School Lunch Program

This letter provides guidance on the potential impact of changes in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) on the allocation of IDEA Part B funds to LEAs.

Link > https://ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/school-lunch-program.pdf

Letter to Manasevit

This OSEP letter addresses questions related to the calculation of IDEA Part B allocations based on population and poverty for a School for the Blind and a State Department of Juvenile Services. OSEP concludes that, assuming the state has determined the School for the Blind is eligible to receive a subgrant under the IDEA, the School would receive a base payment and payments based on population and poverty. The population would be the number of children enrolled in the School for the Blind and the poverty calculation would be based on the relative numbers of the population living in poverty, based on the same standard the SEA uses for its other LEAs. For the State Department of Juvenile Services, the answers are essentially the same, based on the assumption that the Department is determined by the state to be eligible for a subgrant under the IDEA.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2009-1/manasevit021309subgrants1q2009.pdf

Letter to Hokenson

This OSEP letter responds to questions regarding Part B subgrants to educational service agencies (ESAs) and individual LEAs that do not participate in an ESA. OSEP explains that states may award subgrants to entities that meet the definition of LEA and that LEAs may not subgrant to another LEA. Part B funds provided to member districts by ESAs may not be provided through subgrants, but ESAs may provide Part B funds to its member districts through a contract.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2009-1/hokenson020409subgrants1q2009.pdf

Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII) Dear Colleague Letter to States on Funding Charter Schools

This letter reminds SEAs of their obligation to ensure charter schools receive the federal education funds to which they are entitled. Additionally, the document refers SEAs to guidance pertaining to how to allocate funds to charter schools that are opening for the first time or significantly expanding their enrollment.

Link > https://osep.grads360.org/#communities/pdc/documents/13252

Federal Register Vol. 73, No. 231, 34 CFR Part 300: Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities

Published December 1, 2008, this document includes regulations 300.705, .815, and .817, subgrants to LEAs and reallocation of LEA funds, as well as commentary. Commentary to the regulations can be found on pages 73023-73025. Topics include eligibility for Part B subgrants of charter schools that operate as LEAs regardless of whether they serve children with disabilities; the responsibility of public charter school LEAs to meet the eligibility requirements for IDEA Part B funds; the reallocation of Part B funds and when states may use funds from an LEA that does not need them to provide FAPE; and the requirement of an SEA to monitor the obligation of Part B funds. The final language for regulations 300.705, 300.815, and 300.817 begin on page 73028.

Link > https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-12-01/pdf/E8-28175.pdf

Letter to Bass

This OSEP letter responds to a question about the formulas for IDEA sections 611 and 619 funds not taking into consideration growth in the number of children provided a free appropriate public education. The letter explains that, as the appropriations for sections 611 and 619 increase, a larger portion of section 611 and section 619 funds will be distributed based on population and poverty, rather than the base payment which is calculated based on a prior year’s child count.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2001-4/bass121801grants.pdf

Letter to Manasevit

This OSERS letter addresses several questions related to the high cost fund established under 34 CFR §300.704(c) and the reallocation of IDEA funds before the beginning of the last year of availability for obligation of those funds. OSERS concludes, in the majority of the questions, that many of the responses are dependent on the content of the state’s high cost fund plan. For states that have a high cost fund, this letter highlights specific reallocation provisions related to the fund, specifically at 34 CFR §300.704(c)(9).

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2006-4/manasevit112006allotment4q2006.pdf

Letter to Cort

This OSERS letter addresses two questions: one regarding the permissibility of LEAs suballocating IDEA funds to counties and private preschool and school-aged providers and another regarding the allowable uses of those funds by the counties and private providers. OSERS addresses the requirement of the state and its LEAs to ensure the provision of special education and related services and the permissibility of using IDEA funds to do so. OSERS notes that there is no provision of IDEA that would permit LEAs to subgrant – or suballocate – the funds they receive from the SEA. Regarding the use of funds, OSERS discusses the allowability of using funds for the purposes of Part B of the IDEA and that costs must be reasonable and necessary for those purposes.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2005-2/cort062005funds2q2005.pdf

Letter to Simonson

This letter reiterates a previous conclusion from OSEP and Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) that for-profit charter schools are not eligible to receive funds under the IDEA or Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Under Arizona state law, both for-profit and non-profit charter schools function as LEAs in the state; however, based on the definitions of “elementary school” and “secondary school” in both ESEA and IDEA, the letter concludes that for-profit charter schools are not eligible subrecipients as LEAs because they do not have direction or control of a school that meets the federal statutory definition of elementary or secondary school.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2005-2/simonson060305charter2q2005.pdf

Letter to Jordan

This OSERS letter explains the legal obligations for SEAs to flow through IDEA Part B grant funds to LEAs, including the permanent formula under IDEA §611(g)(2)(B) that defines a certain minimum amount of the SEA’s IDEA Part B grant that must be distributed to its LEAs.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2004-3/jordan091304subgrants3q2004.pdf

Nonregulatory guidance pertaining to programs with advance appropriations in FY 2002

This letter explains the concept of forward funding for federal grant awards, including the IDEA. IDEA makes a portion of the grant award that is appropriated for October 1st of each grant year available on July 1st of that year. Although this letter is specific to fiscal year 2002, it explains how funds are advanced and how funds should be subsequently provided to subgrantees because of the advance funding process and the period of availability of those funds for obligation. This concept remains the same for any fiscal year.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/cte/splitmemo02.html

Nonregulatory Guidance: Allocating Federal Funds to Charter Schools

This nonregulatory guidance addresses how state or local educational agencies should allocate federal funds to charter schools that are opening for the first time or significantly expanding their enrollment. Sections A & B cover general requirements that are applicable to federal formula grant programs. Section F (pages 37-51) addresses IDEA funds specifically.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/cschools/cguidedec2000.pdf

Letter to Walk

This OSEP letter responds to a question about the implementation of formulas for IDEA sections 619 and 611 funds as well as the options available for distribution of funds.

Link > https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/letters/2000-3/walk72800allocationssec.pdf