Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Federal Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables consolidated federal funding application after extended questions on Title allocations and certification methods
Summary
Board members questioned Title I/II funding methodology, direct certification, and implications of returning to free-and-reduced applications; after an extended discussion, the board voted to table the consolidated funding application to the June meeting for further review.
The Cumberland County Board of Education debated the district’s consolidated federal funding application for several agenda items before agreeing to table final approval to the June meeting.
Director of Schools Dr. Farley provided background: the district’s Title program bucket totals $2,856,320.54 (excluding special education and CTE funding). Discussion focused on methods for establishing Title I eligibility (direct certification versus free-and-reduced-price meal applications), risks of losing the universal free-feeding program if the district reverted to household applications, and how direct certification and the 1.6 multiplier affect school-level per-pupil allocations.
Board members raised several concerns: whether foster students and others might be missed by direct certification, whether the district should resume collecting free-and-reduced applications to preserve or increase federal allocations (staff said doing so would increase paperwork and could jeopardize universal feeding participation), and the administrative steps needed to verify direct-cert data at the school level. Dr. Farley said schools currently code foster students monthly and that nutrition and attendance offices maintain verification lists but central office staff are not routinely involved at each school.
A board member asked whether class-size-reduction (CSR) teachers had been used; staff said CSR use has been limited and that strict federal requirements and the cost of placing highly effective teachers at multiple schools deter broad adoption. Members asked staff to analyze need-based allocation approaches using test scores, benchmarks and behavioral data rather than an across-the-board fair distribution.
After extended discussion a motion to approve the consolidated application was made, but Chairman King and other members agreed to amend the motion and table final approval to the June meeting to allow staff to supply additional analyses. The board moved and seconded an amendment to table; the motion to table passed on a voice vote. The item will return at the June work session and June meeting for final action.
Ending: Staff will prepare additional documentation — including state recommendations about free-and-reduced applications, verification processes for direct certification, and analyses of CSR teacher options — for the June meeting.
