| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to resolve all deficiencies noted during Categorical Program Monitoring site visits within 225 days. For 28 of 41 site visits tested, the LEAs were significantly late with their resolutions. In addition, Education was not prompt for an additional eight of 16 site visits tested in resolving the corrective actions once it received the resolutions from LEAs. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education continuously works with LEAs to resolve all deficiencies noted during monitoring visits with the understanding that, in some instances, complete corrective action may require time beyond the standard timeframes. However, to emphasize the importance of timely corrective action, staff are provided resolution training, and LEAs are informed and reminded of the timeframes for resolving items following a monitoring review. |
118 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education's current maintenance of effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure that they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Specifically, Education was using unaudited local educational agency expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the MOE requirements instead of using the final audited expenditures. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education is working with the U.S. Department of Education’s Risk Management Service and Office of Inspector General in exploring feasible and acceptable options for enhancing Education’s existing MOE calculation process, including the use of unaudited versus audited data; as part of this cooperative effort, other States' processes will be considered. |
110 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education's current maintenance of effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure that they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Specifically, Education was using unaudited local educational agency expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the MOE requirements instead of using the final audited expenditures. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education is working with the U.S. Department of Education’s Risk Management Service and Office of Inspector General in exploring feasible and acceptable options for enhancing Education’s existing MOE calculation process, including the use of unaudited versus audited data; as part of this cooperative effort, other States' processes will be considered. |
110 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to resolve all deficiencies noted during Categorical Program Monitoring site visits within 225 days. For 28 of 41 site visits tested, the LEAs were significantly late with their resolutions. In addition, Education was not prompt for an additional eight of 16 site visits tested in resolving the corrective actions once it received the resolutions from LEAs. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education continuously works with LEAs to resolve all deficiencies noted during monitoring visits with the understanding that, in some instances, complete corrective action may require time beyond the standard timeframes. However, to emphasize the importance of timely corrective action, staff are provided resolution training, and LEAs are informed and reminded of the timeframes for resolving items following a monitoring review. |
118 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education's current maintenance of effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure that they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Specifically, Education was using unaudited local educational agency expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the MOE requirements instead of using the final audited expenditures. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education is working with the U.S. Department of Education’s Risk Management Service and Office of Inspector General in exploring feasible and acceptable options for enhancing Education’s existing MOE calculation process, including the use of unaudited versus audited data; as part of this cooperative effort, other States' processes will be considered. |
110 |
| Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers |
Education's current maintenance of effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure that they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Specifically, Education was using unaudited local educational agency expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the MOE requirements instead of using the final audited expenditures. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education is working with the U.S. Department of Education’s Risk Management Service and Office of Inspector General in exploring feasible and acceptable options for enhancing Education’s existing MOE calculation process, including the use of unaudited versus audited data; as part of this cooperative effort, other States' processes will be considered. |
110 |
| Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund |
Education requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to resolve all deficiencies noted during Categorical Program Monitoring site visits within 225 daysof the exit date. For 28 of the 41 site visits tested, Education received the resolutions after 225 days. In addition, Education was not prompt for an additional eight of 16 site visits tested in resolving the corrective actions once it received the resolutions from LEAs. |
2008-09 |
| Partially corrected. Education continuously works with LEAs to resolve all deficiencies noted during monitoring visits with the understanding that, in some instances, complete corrective action may require time beyond the standard time frames. However, to emphasize the importance of timely corrective action, staff are provided resolution training, and LEAs are informed and reminded of the timeframes for resolving items following a monitoring review. |
132 |
| Child Care and Development Block Grant |
Education requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to resolve all deficiencies noted during Categorical Program Monitoring site visits within 225 daysof the exit date. For 28 of the 41 site visits tested, Education received the resolutions after 225 days. In addition, Education was not prompt for an additional eight of 16 site visits tested in resolving the corrective actions once it received the resolutions from LEAs. |
2008-09 |
| Partially corrected. Education continuously works with LEAs to resolve all deficiencies noted during monitoring visits with the understanding that, in some instances, complete corrective action may require time beyond the standard time frames. However, to emphasize the importance of timely corrective action, staff are provided resolution training, and LEAs are informed and reminded of the timeframes for resolving items following a monitoring review. |
132 |
| State Fiscal Stabilization Fund--Education State Grants, Recovery Act |
Education needs to enhance the timeliness and scope of its subrecipient monitoring activities to ensure subrecipients are administering federal awards in compliance with applicable federal compliance requirements. |
2009-10 |
| Fully corrected. To ensure subrecipient compliance with federal requirements, Education conducts on-site and on- line State Fiscal Stabilizing Fund (SFSF) monitoring reviews. To maximize SFSF fiscal monitoring coverage with limited resources, Education utilizes a risk-based methodology in consideration of local educational agencies' unresolved prior year Single Audit findings and to capture the largest federal funding allocations. |
118 |
