FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Special Education Funds
SY 2013-14 High Risk Schools
Webinar - October 20, 2014




To provide information on BIE,DPA Special
Education Fiscal Management
To provide the 2013-14 Desk Audit findings
To initiate technical assistance to the schools
To provide a time for schools to request
clarification, ask questions and provide input
to delivery of technical assistance and
training

Challenges unique to SY 2013-14
 FBMS created delays in allocating funds to the
schools
 National formats no longer a way of disseminating
training and information; increased use of
webinars, emails, conference and phone calls
 Due dates were adjusted to accommodate changes
 Native Star was used for the first time to submit
documents
 Web Budget was used for the first time
 DPA Special Education staff decreased from 11 to 6
Procedures
The Fiscal Monitoring Procedures for Special
Education ensures a school’s compliance to
certain fiscal and administrative requirements
for special education funds, 15% ISEP
Instructional Funds and IDEA Part B
Supplemental Funds.

The procedure is established to ensure:
 Program and fiscal policies and procedures are
developed and implemented to meet certain fiscal
and administrative requirements;
 Appropriate use of special education funds for the
intended purpose, Free and Appropriate Public
Education in the Least Restrictive Environment;
 Problems are identified and remediated; and
 Oversight is provided that would result in improved
student outcomes.
Each school submits all fiscal documents in the
Native Star link on the BIE website with the
exception of the Unmet Needs Request. Each
document, with a timeline, is used for the fiscal
desk audit completed on each school in June.

The BIE reviews and rates the following fiscal
documents:
 LEA School Part B Application and if applicable, the
Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS) Plan;
 BIE Web Budget, BIE Operated Schools only; or
Consolidated School-Wide Budget, Tribally
Controlled Schools (TCS) only;
 Fiscal Accountability Self-Assessment (FASA)

The IDEA Fiscal Risk Level Scoring Sheet is
used to communicate to the schools the risk
level for each school
 Low Risk: minimal concerns identified for meeting
fiscal and administrative requirements
 Medium Risk: concerns identified for meeting fiscal
and administrative requirements
 High Risk: numerous concerns identified for
meeting fiscal and administrative requirements


Written notification of risk level is issued to
the school
Targeted technical assistance is provided to
medium and high risk level schools
An on-site visit provides an intensive level of
fiscal review, and is the result of continuing
violations of federal and IDEA fiscal
requirements

Criteria – if a school meets 2 of the following, the
school is identified for an on-site fiscal review:
 High risk level for two consecutive years;
 Administration Financial Reviews (BIE Operated Schools);
 Recommendation for an on-site fiscal review from the
Integrated Accountability and Support (IA&S) monitoring
report;
 Indian Student Equalization Program (ISEP) Special
Education Certification submitted by the Education Line
Office (ELO) that identifies findings of noncompliance;
and/or
 Annual Report (TCS)


Written notification of an on-site fiscal review
is sent by January 31
On-Site Fiscal Review Activities:






Entrance meeting
Demographic data and budget
FASA and Fiscal Rating
Verification of expenditures
Evaluation of fiscal review process
Exit meeting


Analysis of data collected during the on-site
fiscal review
Written report (also referred to as the written
notification) issued to the school within 90
days of an on-site visit to inform of the
intensive review results and if applicable,
findings of noncompliance and corrective
action.
BIE identifies and corrects finding(s) of
noncompliance as follows:
A. Schedule conference call with school(s)
within 15-days of written report:
◦ Review findings of noncompliance
◦ Provide clarification/guidance
◦ Review correction process
B.
C.
Conduct quarterly progress checkpoints
Ensure timely correction on noncompliance
 School corrects within required timeline
 BIE verifies correction of noncompliance
 BIE issues close-out letter within 30-days of
verification
 School does not timely correct; placed in continuing
status of noncompliance




BIE issues written notification
BIE applies enforcement
BIE verified correction
BIE issues close-out letter within 30-days of
verification
The data from the desk audit and on-site fiscal
review activities are analyzed and summarized
to examine patterns and trends. The BIE offers
training and targeted technical assistance to
ensure fiscal resources are directed to areas
needing improvement.
An evaluation is performed to assist the BIE in
improving the fiscal monitoring procedures,
activities include:
 School completes post-fiscal review
evaluation form
 BIE assembles representatives from the BIE
Administration, BIE Advisory Board for
Exceptional Children, ELO staff and schools to
evaluate the fiscal monitoring process.

School Part B Application: 4 Points
 Timely submission (1)
 Complete application (1)
 Signature after School Board Approval (2)

BIE Web Budget/Consolidated S W Budget
◦ K-8 Schools (19)
◦ K-12 Schools (23)


FASA (45)
CEIS (9)
Number of
Low Risk
Schools
Number of
Medium Risk
Schools
Number of
High Risk
Schools
Total
Number of
Schools
East
1
25
29
55
Navajo
1
20
40
61
West
2
16
42
60
4
61
111
176
Regions
Total


Timely submission of the budget with
appropriate signatures?
Were there adequate allocations and
justification provided to support the
allocation?
 FTEs for personnel (special education teachers,
education technicians, related service providers,
special education coordinators, secondary
transition specialists) per the ratio of students with
disabilities (SWD) and their service needs
 Supplies, materials, equipment and assistive
technology
◦ Professional Development for total school staff, for
special education staff, and/or provided based on
needs of individual SWD
 Transportation as a related service for SWD
 Parent Training
 Child Find Activities
 Least Restrictive Environment placements in
settings away from the school (incarceration,
intensive specialized instruction or therapy, illness
of student)
Most schools demonstrated appropriate use of
Special Education funds in the following areas:
 Transportation
 Personnel
 Related Services
 Education Technicians
 Special Education Teachers


Majority of schools provided Budgets and
used the BIE format
Few entries of “Inappropriate and Non
Allowable Costs”

Questionable Costs (based on 164 schools
submitting budgets, not all used the BIE format)
Budget Item
# of Schools/Percent
Parent Training
116/70%
Assistive Technology
98/59%
Child Find
98/59%
Equipment (92/56%)
Materials (76/45%)
Supplies (69/42%)
48% (Average)
Staff Training
76/46%
Secondary Transition
Specialist
26 (60 HS)/43%
Work Study Programs
20 (60 HS)/33%

School received the score because:
 No information/description was not entered (90%)
 WebEx on October 28, 2014
 The upload documents were not available in Native
Star for review (87%)
 Travel and training to achieve the goals & objectives
were not reasonable and necessary.
 Use of indirect cost
 Separation of duties
 Special education coordinator/lead teacher not
involved in the verification of purchase of supplies,
and contracts.
 Justification of unusual items
Regions
East
Low Risk
Medium Risk High Risk
Total
18
5
4
27
Navajo
6
1
10
17
West
5
8
9
22
24
14
23
61
TOTAL


Schools will be issued findings of
noncompliance if there are violations of IDEA
requirements.
Schools received a score of 0 because:
 a CEIS Plan was not submitted or was not
submitted by the due date;
 Schools exceeded the threshold of 15%. Schools
may use the option to use up to 15% of their Part B
allocation for the given year if they are meeting the
IDEA requirements; however, the Part B amount for
CEIS cannot exceed the 15% threshold.

The CEIS rating was based on the following:
 The Part B allocation was below the 15% Part B
threshold
 The “Responsible Person” for CEIS at the school was
identified
 The “targeted audience” was identified
 The School’s CEIS program was described
 The number of student participants was provided
 The entrance and exit tools and criteria were
provided

Parent Training – examples of topics
 Procedural Safeguards (Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act)
 Overview of Special Education procedures &
processes
 Parenting a child with a disability
 Overview of the Individualized Education Program
(IEP)
 Developing your child’s IEP
 Supplementary aids & services; accommodations &
modifications; Assistive Technology
 Nurturing Self-determination
 Assistance is available for parents
 100 Parent Centers across the nation at least one is
located in each state
 Sometimes they are referred to as Parent Training and
Information Centers (PTIs) and/or Community Parent
Resource Centers (CPRCs)
 They help parents to participate effectively in the
education of their children at school and at home, thereby
improving outcomes for children with disabilities
 Native American Parent Technical Assistance Center
(NAPTAC): Education for Parents of Indian Children
with Special Needs (EPICS)
 Judy Wiley, Lead Training Specialist
judy@epicsnm.org
(541) 210-4062
Assistive Technology
 Assistive technology devices or services, or both, are
made available to a child with a disability if required
as part of the child’s special education, related
services, or supplementary aids and services.
 The child’s IEP team determines if an assistive
technology service and/or devise is necessary for the
child to benefit from his or her education program
 There are a broad range of assistive devices:
 Low-tech examples: pencil grips, highlighters, paper
stabilizers, magnifiers, books on tape
 High-tech examples: computers, computer based assistive
technology, voice synthesizers, Braille readers

IEP Goal Example
 Present Level of Education Performance
Trisha demonstrates knowledge of basic computer
functions using a standard keyboard and word
processor. She dictates sentences and uses a
scribe for transcription. She uses a spell checker
to write short sentences. Typically she makes five
spelling, four punctuation, and three grammar
errors per page of familiar material.
 Measurable Annual Goal
Trisha will compose paragraphs and classroom
assignments using a word processor for
correction of spelling, punctuation and grammar
 Short-Term Objectives or Benchmarks
 Using a word processor, Trisha will compose a complete
paragraph consisting of four sentences, with fewer than a
total of three spelling, punctuation, or grammar errors on a
final report completed in the resource room on a topic
identified the previous day
 Using a word processor, Trisha will correct spelling on
selected classroom assignments at 90% accuracy for five or
more consecutive assignments
Accommodations/Modifications Example
Skill Area: Written Expression
Accommodations:

Method
Material
Technology
Accept outlines or
notes
to reduce written
work
Create sentences
aloud
Do not grade for
spelling
Extra time for
completion
Process reminders
on
chalkboard or desk
Provide writing
sample
shorten
assignments Study
carrel for solo work
Pocket dictionary
Pocket thesaurus
Process reminders
on
chalk board or desk
Electronic dictionary
Electronic thesaurus
Spell check
Use computer or
word
process for writing
Use tape recorder to
do
assignments
verbally
Word Prediction
software

Some AT Resources, there are many
 National Center for Learning Disabilities

http:/ncld.ort/students-disabilities/assistive
technology-education
 Parent Training and Information Centers
 Alliance for Technology Access Resource Centers
http://www.ataccess.org
 State Tech Act Projects
 Education World
www.educationworld.com
Child Find
 is a component of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act that requires States and
Local Education Agencies to identify, locate, and
evaluate all children with disabilities residing in
the State, regardless of the severity of their
disabilities, and who are in need of special
education and related services.
 is a continuous process of public awareness
activities, screening and evaluation designed to
locate, identify, and evaluate children with
disabilities who are in need of Early Childhood
Intervention Programs or Special Education and
Related Services

Examples of Child Find activities:
 The school publishes a child find notice in the local
newspaper or the school’s newsletter
 school participates in conjunction with community
agencies such as Headstart, preschool services, and
other area preschools; Child find notices are sent to
all area clinics, doctors, preschools and daycare
centers in conjunction with preschool screening
activities
 All children entering kindergarten are screened to
identify children with suspected disabilities
 The files of all children transferring to the school
are screened to identify children who may have
been receiving special services in their prior school
 Parents of older children who enter the school for
the first time are given a document, which explains
the school’s special services and who to contact if
they suspect their child may have a disability
 For children attending the school ages 5 to 21, the
primary child find process is parent and teacher
referrals. In-service activities to assist teachers in
making appropriate referrals are provided annually
 The school student services team reviews the files
of all students with a health plan to screen for
suspected disabilities
 Student Assistance Team (other names may be
used) ensure appropriate interventions have been
utilized to help the student overcome their learning
problems before beginning a referral for special
education services
 Child find is integrated with ESEA:
Under ESEA, each LEA (school) must have an
improvement plan developed to guide school and
staff in the improvement of student performance for
all student groups in order to attain state standards. The
school improvement plan must include strategies for
improvement of student performance such as:
instructional methods designed based on the needs of
student groups not achieving; processes for addressing the
needs of children in special programs; integration of technology
in instructional and administrative program; positive behavior
supports; staff development for educators; and accelerated
instruction

Conduct school data grass roots analysis to
determine improvement needs in the
following areas:
 Equipment, supplies, materials
 Staff Training
 Include training on School Records and Confidentiality;
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

Secondary Transition
 Training to be provided to all BIE High Schools
(refer to the DPA Special Education Unit Calendar of
Activities and Due Dates for SY 2014-15 – posted
to the BIE Website)



When we receive input from schools on
training and technical assistance needs, DPA
will review and identify subsequent activities
in this area.
Please send your input to rachael.nicholasmark@bie.edu
Thanks!
Gloria Yepa (505) 563-5264
gloria.yepa@bie.edu
Laura N. Tsosie (505) 563-5275
laura.tsosie@bie.edu
Connie Albert (505) 563-5180
connie.albert@bie.edu