Table 8

Page 4 of 4

TABLE 8

REPORT ON IDEA PART B MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION (34 CFR §300.205(a)) AND COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (34 CFR §300.226)

FFY 2009

Paperwork Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1820-NEW. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 66 hours per local educational agency (LEA) and 48 hours per State educational agency (SEA) response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202-7100.

States must submit electronic versions of the completed data forms to the Office of special Education Programs’ (OSEP’s) data contractor at [email protected]. OSEP will provide electronic Data Transmission Spreadsheets (DTS) in Microsoft Excel format to facilitate this process.

Authorization: P.L. 108-446, §§613(f)(4) and 618(a)(3)

Due Date: November 1, 2010

Sampling Allowed: No

General Instructions

1. No sampling is permitted for this data collection.

2. Report whole dollar amounts.

Selected Defintions

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) identification number – The 7-character NCES LEA ID number that is used to uniquely identify a school district. These NCES ID numbers are also used to identify LEAs when entering data into the EDEN system.

Specific Instructions for Section A: LEA Allocations

In Column 1A, list the name of each local educational agency (LEA) and educational service agency (ESA) that receives a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state.

In Column 1B, list the NCES identification number for each LEA and ESA that receives a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state. If the ESAs in your state do not have NCES identification numbers, please insert a -9 in this column.

In Column 2A, report the total Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2008 allocation of Section 611 funds each LEA or ESA received for FFY 2008 (i.e., funds available on July 1, 2008 and October 1, 2008).

In Column 2B, report the total FFY 2009 allocation of Section 611 funds each LEA or ESA received for FFY 2009 (i.e., funds available April 1, 2009, July 1, 2009, September 30, 2009, and October 1, 2009). This must include the IDEA regular allocation combined with the IDEA ARRA allocation.

In Column 3A, report the total FFY 2008 allocation of Section 619 funds each LEA or ESA received for FFY 2008 (i.e., funds available July 1, 2008).

In Column 3B, report the total FFY 2009 allocation of Section 619 funds each LEA or ESA received for FFY 2009 (i.e., funds available April 1, 2009 and July 1, 2009). This must include the IDEA regular allocation combined with the IDEA ARRA allocation.

Specific Instructions for Section B: Maintenance of Effort Reduction

In Column 1A, list the name of each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 subgrant from your state.

In Column 1B, list the NCES identification number for each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 subgrant from your state. If the ESAs in your state do not have NCES identification numbers, please insert a -9 in this column.

In Column 2, for each LEA or ESA, report whether the state determined the LEA or ESA ‘met requirements’ in the determination that controls whether the LEA may be able, based on FFY 2009 funding, to reduce MOE during SY 2009-2010.

Above the Section B grid, report which school year’s data (i.e., 2007-08 or 2008-09) was used to make the LEA/ ESA determinations that apply to whether the LEA may be able, based on FFY 2009 funding, to reduce MOE during SY 2009-2010.

In Column 3, report the actual dollar ($) amount that each LEA or ESA reduced of local or State and local expenditures under the IDEA maintenance of effort (MOE) provision in IDEA §613(a)(2)(C) during SY 2009-10. Report the actual amount by which local or state and local expenditures were reduced; do not provide a projection of this amount.

In Column 4, the percent of the available MOE reduction that the LEA or ESA took during SY 2009-10 will be auto-calculated. This is a percent of the amount the LEA is allowed to take for the MOE reduction. The percent of available reduction taken by the LEA/ESA during SY 2009-10 will be calculated in the following way: subtract the FFY 2008 Section 611 allocation (Section A, column 2A) from the FFY 2009 Section 611 allocation (Section A, column 2B) and multiply the difference by 50% (this will equal the largest allowable amount for the MOE reduction). Divide the amount of the reduction of local or State and local funds taken pursuant to Section 613(a)(2)(C) by the LEA/ESA during SY 2009-10 (Section B, Column 3) by the product and multiply the quotient by 100. For example, if an LEA’s FFY 2008 allocation of Section 611 funds was $500,000 and the same LEA’s FFY 2009 allocation of Section 611 funds was $700,000, the allocation would have increased $200,000 from FFY 2008 to FFY 2009. To calculate the amount the LEA could reduce their MOE, they would multiple $200,000 by 50% which equals $100,000. This $100,000 is the maximum allowable amount for the MOE reduction. If the LEA actually reduced their local and/or State funds by $50,000 (reported in Section B, Column 3), the auto-calculated percentage would equal $50,000 divided by $100,000 (the maximum allowable amount for the reduction), multiplied by 100, which equals 50% of the available reduction.

FFY 2009 allocation (Section A, Column 2B)	$700,000
- FFY 2008 allocation (Section A, Column 2A)	-$500,000
Increase in funds between FFY 2008 and 2009	$200,000

Increase in funds between FFY 2008 and 2009	$200,000
x Maximum % MOE reduction______________	x 50%
Maximum allowable amount for MOE reduction	$100,000

Amount reduction taken by LEA (Section B, Column 3)	$50,000	= .50
Maximum allowable amount of MOE reduction	$100,000
Percent of available MOE reduction taken (Section B, Column 4)	.50 x 100 = 50%

Do not report any percentages in Column 4. However, please verify the percentages that are auto-calculated are correct.

Specific Instructions for Section C: Provision of Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS)

In Column 1A, list the name of each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state. An LEA or ESA should be included in the list even if that LEA or ESA does not use IDEA funds for CEIS (voluntary or required).

In Column 1B, list the NCES identification number for each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state. An LEA or ESA should be included in the list even if that LEA or ESA does not use IDEA funds for CEIS (voluntary or required). If the ESAs in your state do not have NCES identification numbers, please insert a -9 in this column.

In Column 2A, report whether the LEA or ESA was required to use 15% of IDEA 611 and 619 funds for CEIS due to significant disproportionality in SY 2009-10 for each LEA or ESA. Under 34 CFR §300.646(b)(2), LEAs (including ESAs) that are identified by the SEA as having significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity in identification, placement, or disciplinary actions must use 15% of IDEA funds for CEIS.

In Column 2B, report the dollar ($) amount that was reserved for CEIS in each LEA or ESA that was required to use IDEA funds for CEIS in SY 2009-10.

In Column 2C, the percent of IDEA funds that the LEA or ESA was required to reserve for CEIS due to significant disproportionality in SY 2009-10 will be auto-calculated using the figures from Section C, Column 2B and Section A, Column 2B and Column 3B. Do not report any percentages in Column 2C. However, please verify the percentages that are auto-calculated are correct.

In Column 3A, report whether the LEA or ESA voluntarily used up to 15% of IDEA 611 and 619 fund for CEIS in SY 2009-10. Under 34 CFR §300.226, LEAs (including ESAs) may use up to, but not more than, 15% of IDEA funds for CEIS.

In Column 3B, report the dollar ($) amount of funds reserved for voluntary CEIS during SY 2009-10.

In Column 3C, the percent of IDEA funds that the LEA or ESA took for voluntary CEIS during SY 2009-10 will be auto-calculated using the figures from Section C, Column 3B and Section A, Column 2B and Column 3B. Do not report any percentages in Column 3C. However, please verify the percentages that are auto-calculated are correct.

Specific Instructions for Section D: Number of Children Receiving Coordinated Early Intervening Services

For Section D, counts should cover the entire school year. Include children in grades kindergarten through 12.

In Column 1A, list the name of each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state. An LEA or ESA should be included in the list even if that LEA or ESA does not use IDEA funds for CEIS (voluntary or required).

In Column 1B, list the NCES identification number for each LEA and ESA that received a Section 611 or Section 619 subgrant from your state. An LEA or ESA should be included in the list even if that LEA or ESA does not use IDEA funds for CEIS (voluntary or required). If the ESAs in your state do not have NCES identification numbers, please insert a -9 in this column.

In Column 2, report the total number of children who received CEIS under IDEA at any point during the course of the reporting year. This is an unduplicated count. This count should include children who received CEIS regardless of whether the Part B funds to support the services were required to be set aside or voluntarily set aside. A child should be included in this count whether the child received CEIS and was later determined to be eligible for special education and related services during the same or subsequent reporting year or was not determined eligible for special education and related services.

In Column 3, report the total number of children who received CEIS under IDEA anytime in the past two school years (including SY 2007-08, SY 2008-09, and SY 2009-10) and received special education and related services in 2009-10. This is an unduplicated count.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PAGE 1 OF 4

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES OMB NO.: 1820-XXXX

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION FORM EXPRIES: XX/XX/20XX

PROGRAMS

STATE: ____________________

TABLE 8

REPORT ON IDEA PART B MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION (34 CFR §300.205(a)) AND COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (34 CFR §300.226)

FFY 2009

SECTION A. LEA ALLOCATIONS

1A. LEA/ESA Name	1B. LEA/ESA NCES ID #1	2. The total LEA/ESA allocation for Section 611 of IDEA (dollars $)		3. The total LEA/ESA allocation for Section 619 of IDEA (dollars $)
		2A. FFY 2008	2B. FFY 2009	3A. FFY 2008	3B. FFY 2009-

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PAGE 2 OF 4

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES OMB NO.: 1820-XXXX

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION FORM EXPRIES: XX/XX/20XX

PROGRAMS

STATE: ____________________

TABLE 8

REPORT ON IDEA PART B MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION (34 CFR §300.205(a)) AND COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (34 CFR §300.226)

FFY 2009

SECTION B. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION

LEA/ESA Determinations: What year’s data were used to make the LEA/ ESA determinations in your state? ______________

1A. LEA/ESA Name	1B. LEA/ESA NCES ID #2	2. Did the LEA/ESA “meet requirements” for the determination that controls whether the LEA may be able to reduce MOE during SY 2009-2010? (Y/N)	3. Reduction of local and/or State funds taken pursuant to Section 613(a)(2)(C) by the LEA/ESA during SY 2009-10 (dollar $ amount)	4. Percent of the available reduction taken by LEA /ESA during SY 2009-10 (PERCENT)3

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PAGE 3 OF 4

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES OMB NO.: 1820-XXXX

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION FORM EXPRIES: XX/XX/20XX

PROGRAMS

STATE: ____________________

TABLE 8

REPORT ON IDEA PART B MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION (34 CFR §300.205(a)) AND COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (34 CFR §300.226)

FFY 2009

SECTION C. PROVISION OF COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (CEIS)

1A. LEA/ESA Name	1B. LEA/ESA NCES ID #4	2. Required CEIS			3. Voluntary CEIS
		2A. Was the LEA/ESA required to use 15% of funds for CEIS due to significant disproportionality in SY 2009-10? (Y/N)	2B. Amount reserved for required CEIS in the LEA /ESA in SY 2009-10 (dollars $)	2C. Percent taken for required CEIS during SY 2009-10 (PERCENT)5	3A. Did the LEA/ESA voluntarily use up to 15% of IDEA 611 and 619 fund for CEIS in SY 2009-10? (Y/N)	3B. Amount reserved for voluntary CEIS in SY 2009-10 (dollars $)	3C. Percent taken for voluntary CEIS during SY 2009-10 (PERCENT)5

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PAGE 4 OF 4

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES OMB NO.: 1820-XXXX

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION FORM EXPRIES: XX/XX/20XX

PROGRAMS

STATE: ____________________

TABLE 8

REPORT ON IDEA PART B MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REDUCTION (34 CFR §300.205(a)) AND COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES (34 CFR §300.226)

FFY 2009

SECTION D. NUMBER OF CHILDREN RECEIVING COORDINATED EARLY INTERVENING SERVICES

1A. LEA/ESA Name	1B. LEA/ESA NCES ID #6	2. Total number of children receiving CEIS under the IDEA in the LEA/ESA during SY 2009-10	3. Total number of children who received CEIS under the IDEA anytime in the past two school years (including SY 2007-08, SY 2008-09, and SY 2009-10) and received special education and related services in SY 2009-10

1 The NCES ID numbers are also used to identify LEAs when entering data into the EDEN system.

2 These NCES ID numbers are also used to identify LEAs when entering data into the EDEN system.

3 THESE PERCENTAGES WILL BE AUTO-CALCULATED. DO NOT REPORT FIGURES IN THIS COLUMN.

4 These NCES ID numbers are also used to identify LEAs when entering data into the EDEN system.

5 THESE PERCENTAGES WILL BE AUTO-CALCULATED. DO NOT REPORT FIGURES IN THIS COLUMN.

6 These NCES ID numbers are also used to identify LEAs when entering data into the EDEN system.