Community Eligibility Option (CEO)
and
Title I
Update
Suzette Cook
Title I Coordinator
Office of Federal Programs
West Virginia Department of Education
December 11, 2012
Objectives
• Provide a review of the USDA’s
Community Eligibility Option (CEO)
• Identify School Eligibility
Requirements
• Review working knowledge of CEO
and Title I
• Questions and Answers????
CEO Background
• Section 104(a) of the Healthy, Hunger Free Act of 2010
amended the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act to provide an alternative to household eligibility
applications for free and reduced price meals in high
poverty local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools.
• CEO is a four-year reimbursement option for eligible
high poverty LEAs and schools, which began with the
2012-2013 school term.
• LEAs and schools may opt in or opt out each year.
• An LEA may participate in CEO for some or all schools in
the LEA.
CEO Requirements for Schools
• As of April 1, determine the school has
a minimum level (40%) identified
students (NOT your free/reduced
count) in the year prior to
implementing the option.
– April 1, 2013 for the 2013-2014 school
year.
• Agree to serve no-cost lunches and nocost breakfasts to all students for up to
four consecutive years in approved
schools.
CEO Requirements for Schools
• Agree to cover with non-Federal funds
any costs of providing free meals to all
students above amounts provided in
Federal assistance.
• Do not collect free and reduced price
applications from households in
participating schools during the period
of participation in the CEO.
• Maintain a total count of breakfasts and
lunches served to students at the
point(s) students receive meals.
Identified Students
• Identified students:
– Directly certified for free meals on the basis
of their participation in the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) and the extension of benefits to
students within the same household.
– Homeless
– Runaway
– Migrant
– Head Start
– Foster Child
Identified Students
• The percent of Identified Students may
be determined school-by-school, by a
group of schools within the LEA, or in
the aggregate for an entire LEA.
• % Identified Students =
# of Identified Students as of April 1 X 100
Total Enrollment* as of April 1
• *Enrollment is defined as number of
students with access to the NSLP and
SBP enrolled in the school as of April 1,
2013
Identified Students
The percent Identified Students is
then multiplied by the USDA
determined factor of 1.6 for SY 20132014. The resulting answer, capped at
100%, is the percentage of total meals
served reimbursed at the Federal free
rate of reimbursement. The remaining
percentage of meals is claimed and
reimbursed at the paid rate.
Ranking schools over 100%
For Title I purposes, in the event that
schools reach more than 100% for meal
reimbursement purposes – even though
meal reimbursement is capped at 100%
- LEAs may continue to ‘rank’ schools
that are over 100% in order to
determine rank order, per pupil
allocations, school allocations, etc.
CEO Reimbursement
• Reimbursement is based on claiming
percentages derived from the percentage of
Identified Students times a multiplier*
established in the law. The claiming percentages
established for a school in the First Year are
guaranteed for a period of four school years and
may be increased if direct certification
percentages rise for that school/group of
school/district.
• *Multiplier: (Range: 1.3-1.6)*
• 1.6 will be used through SY 2013-2014. After that
time, USDA is permitted to change the multiplier.
Schools electing CEO will use the same multiplier
for the entire four-year cycle.
Example
• School A has 100 students enrolled as
of April 1
• 50 of those students are in the
“Identified Students” group
• School A has an Identified Student
percentage of 50%.
• 50% X 1.6 = 80% Free Reimbursement
Rate and 20% Paid Reimbursement
Rate
• 80 students X per pupil expenditure =
Title I school allocation
Example of Grouping
Schools
# of DC
Students
Enrollment
% of Identified
Students
Qualify for CEO
A
66
133
49.62
Yes
B
22
59
37.29
No
192
45.8
Yes
Grouping A & B 88
For Title I project purposes, the numbers and percentage
rankings remain as individual school numbers. Do not apply the
grouping average to the Title I school allocation process. The
grouping procedure is used only for CEO purposes.
Impact on Other Programs
• It is important for all stakeholders to understand
CEO prior to making the decision to participate
and/or to anticipate issues that may arise.
• Schools that participate in CEO will not have a
student meal application process. You will not
know if Student A is eligible for free, reduced
price, or paid meal benefits.
• All students in a Title I CEO school would be
eligible for Supplemental Education Services and
priority for public school choice would be based
only on lowest-achieving students.
• Students in a CEO school are all classified as
‘Low SES’ for accountability purposes.
Title I Guidance from
U.S. Dept. of Education
• Conference calls with Todd
Stevenson; Title I, U.S. Dept. of Ed.
• Letter to Chief State School Officers
Example of Allocations with a
combination of CEO/non-CEO schools
1
2
3
4
School
CEO
(Y/N)
Enrollment
Purkey
N
Crawford
5
6
7
8
9
5-17
Multi- Identified
needy
plier
Students
students X 1.6 Number
Percent of
needy
students
Per
pupil
amount
Title I
Allocation
500
475
N/A
475
95%
$500
$237,500
Y
600
350
1.6
560
93%
$500
$280,000
Saxe
N
450
400
N/A
400
89%
450
$180,000
Hypes
N
400
200
N/A
200
50%
450
$90,000
Cook
N
500
100
N/A
100
20%
N/A
0
Total
N/A
2450
N/A
N/A
1,735
71%
N/A
$787,500
Without CEO – Crawford School is 58% poverty, drops to fourth in the
Rankings and receives an allocation of $157,500.
Questions Submitted by Email
– What happens with possible new counties/schools being added
to CEO participation? What data will be used for ranking schools
for Title I purposes?
» Direct Certified student data from April 2013 will be used to
add new counties/schools. Counties/schools currently in the
project use their data from April 2012 – unless the April 2013
data would give them a higher reimbursement rate; then,
they could use the April 2013 data.
– What data will be used for the FY ‘14 Title I plan?
» Same as above
– What data will be used for personnel planning?
» The Office of Child Nutrition will make the December 2012
data readily available for personnel planning for the FY ‘14
project. This data will allow counties to have the most recent
data available for the ‘personnel season’. However, the April
2012 and/or April 2013 data will be used for the Title I school
ranking as stated above.
Questions Submitted by Email
– What will be the multiplying factor for next year?
» The multiplier will remain at 1.6 for the 2013-2014 school
year. It will actually remain at 1.6 for three more years for all
schools that were in the project this year. After the 20132014 school year, the USDA may reduce the multiplier for
new counties/schools joining the program – but not lower
than 1.3.
– How should counties focus Title I services when schools of more
than one programmatic level appear in the ‘above 75% poverty’
group after the multiplier is applied. For example, a middle
school or a high school is in the rankings above 75%.
» All schools above 75% poverty must be ‘grouped together’
and considered before serving any schools below 75%. All
schools above 75% must be served in rank order – but there
is no requirement that all schools above 75% be served.
Questions Submitted by Email
– If a county has some schools in CEO now, and would choose to
opt out for FY ‘14, how would those schools get data for Title I
ranking purposes?
» The Direct Certified Students information for April 2013
would be used to rank these schools. At the beginning of
the school term, the lunch application process would be
put back into place – this would provide data for the
FY ‘15 project.
Work Time
• County Data
– 2011-2012 Title I Schools
– October 2012 (5-17) Free/Reduced and
CEO lunch data
– Direct Certified Data
•
•
•
•
Total # of Direct Certified Students
Total Student Count
Percentage Direct Certified
% Meals Claimed as Free
Application and Synthesis
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Review your county’s list of Title I schools for 2012-2013.
Use the October 2012 5-17/CEO report to rank the
schools in your county in order of percent needy –
highest to lowest.
Use the CEO Direct Certified List to rank the schools in
your county in order of percent needy – highest to
lowest.
Compare the list from Number 2 to the list from Number
3. Are the schools in the same rank order? Identify
differences noted. Pay particular attention to any schools
that are above 75% needy.
Review the ‘projected’ Title I schools list for 2013-2014–
determine if ‘grouping’ is a process that might be useful
to the final determination of schools to be served.
Questions