Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grants And Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clovis Schools outlines Title I and Title III allocations; FAA fine‑arts grant application submitted
Summary
District staff presented the 2025–26 Title I and Title III grant applications (Title I approximately $2.0–2.1 million; Title III $99,861) and described how funds will be spent. The district also prepared an FAA fine‑arts grant application (previous year ~$1.4M) for K–6 arts programming and travel.
District staff briefed the board on three federal grants and how the district plans to spend the funds.
Title I: staff said the district’s Title I allocation for 2025–26 is approximately $2.0–2.1 million, an estimated decrease of about $300,000 from the prior year attributed to lower enrollment and changes from the state’s enrollment tracking system. Staff explained how funds will be distributed: roughly 65% to school sites (discretionary for family services, intervention assistants and site programming), about 13% for the district program office to administer grants, 5% for the bilingual seal and data coordinator, 3% to support migrant/immigrant program liaisons, and approximately 7% for the state‑set indirect cost. Staff said about $300,000 in carryover is also proposed to support summer programming, transportation and a biliteracy consultant.
Title III: staff asked the board to sign the Title III application after the meeting. The 2025–26 allocation was presented as $99,861 (about $6,000 less than last year) and staff recommended continuing the English‑learner instructional initiative director who has provided embedded coaching and conducted roughly 140 coaching sessions this year.
FAA fine‑arts grant: the district explained the Federal Arts and Activities (FAA) grant funds K–6 fine arts (visual arts, theater, music) and supports travel, instrument repair, supplies, teacher training and school productions. Presenter noted the district typically uses nearly the full allocation (last year about $1.4 million) and requested the board chair’s signature for the application.
Board members asked clarifying questions about carryover and program priorities and expressed appreciation for the grant administration work. Motions to approve and sign the grants (where signatures were required) were recorded or scheduled as part of routine consent/consideration items.
