Directed Questions 2025-26 to 2027-28

Paperwork Reduction Act Submission Supporting Statement

Annual Mandatory Collection of Elementary and Secondary

Education Data through EDFacts

November 2024

Attachment D

EDFacts Data Set for School Years 2025-26, 2026-27, and 2027-28:

Directed Questions

OMB No. 1850-0925 v.12

Contents

Introduction 4

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 4

1) Academic Achievement – add aggregation by state performance levels 4

2) Section 1003 Funds – add aggregation by Federal Fiscal Year 5

3) Section 1003 Reserved Funds – new data 6

4) Title I, Part A Foster Care – add aggregation by Grade Level 7

5) Title III English Proficiency Assessment – add question 7

6) Title I, Part D Child Welfare Contact – new data 8

McKinney-Vento 8

7) Subaward – expand subgrant recipient flag and add data 8

8) Liaisons – new data 9

9) Chronic Absenteeism – expand to include EUT and the denominator 10

IDEA Part B 11

10) Children with Disabilities Child Count and Environments – expand to military connected 11

11) Regular Class – add question 12

12) Discipline – change aggregation by Removal Length 13

13) Personnel – change aggregation by Age Groups 14

IDEA Part C 15

14) Child Count and Settings – add options to settings 15

Common Core of Data 15

15) Direct Certification – add aggregation by eligibility type 15

16) School Breakfast Program – add data 16

17) Identified Student Percentage for Community Eligibility Provision – add data 17

18) Staff FTE - completeness 18

19) Staff FTE – change aggregation to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) 18

Federal Statistical Requirements 20

20) Race and Ethnicity Data Standards - updated 20

Operations 22

21) Modernization of EDFacts with EDPass 22

22) Burden at the SEA level 22

23) Burden at the LEA level 23

24) Accountability – align with State Reporting 23

State-specific subgroups 23

Measures for Indicators 24

25) Title III English Proficiency Assessment – add question 25

26) Title I, Part D Programs – add questions 25

27) IDEA Part B – expand questions from age groups to age 26

28) Gun Free Schools Act – change collection approach 28

29) Technical Corrections – category adjustments 28

Retirements 29

30) Migratory Children Eligible – 12 Months (FS121) 29

31) Reconstituted Status (FS029, DG743) 30

32) Federal Programs (FS035) 31

Introduction

This attachment contains specific topics for which the Department would like to obtain input from data submitters and stakeholders.

Every revised or new data collection, if any, in Attachments A, C-1, and C-2 are covered by a question below. While many of these questions are directed to SEA data submitters, comments from all stakeholders on these topics are welcome.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

The questions listed in the section relate to programs under ESEA.

1. Academic Achievement – add aggregation by state performance levels

Data on academic achievement by state performance levels could be used to link state assessment data to the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) to improve the Department’s understanding of student achievement and to better measure achievement gaps among underserved populations.

To make this link, the Department proposes collecting data by state performance levels for grades 4 and 8. This collection of data would include collecting information on the state performance levels and which levels are considered proficient or above.

Questions

1. What is the burden associated with reporting these data?

2. Which school year would the State anticipate being able to begin reporting these data and provide the information about the performance levels?

3. Are there other ways for the Department to obtain this information?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data groups (one for mathematics and one for reading/language arts).

DG Name	Academic performance in mathematics	Academic performance in reading/language arts
DG Definition	The unduplicated number of students in grades 4 and 8 who completed the state assessment in mathematics and for whom a proficiency level was assigned.	The unduplicated number of students in grades 4 and 8 who completed the state assessment in reading/language arts and for whom a proficiency level was assigned.
Levels	SEA, LEA, School	SEA, LEA, School
Reporting Period	Testing Window	Testing Window
Categories for each student group	Assessment Administered M (lower grades) Grade Level (NAEP) State Performance Levels	Assessment Administered RLA (lower grades) Grade Level (NAEP) State Performance Levels
Student Subgroups	All students Major Racial/Ethnic Groups Sex Disability Status English Learner Status Economically Disadvantaged Status Migratory Status Homeless Enrolled Status Foster Care Status Military Connected Status	All students Major Racial/Ethnic Groups Sex Disability Status English Learner Status Economically Disadvantaged Status Migratory Status Homeless Enrolled Status Foster Care Status Military Connected Status

Attachment A Data Category Tab (New60!)

The following categories would be added.

Category Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Category Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
State Performance Levels	A state assigned level of performance.	Levels 1 through 10
Grade Levels (NAEP)	Grade levels assessed in NAEP.	Grade 4 Grade 8

Attachment C-1 Metadata (New60!)

To support this data collection, the following questions would be added to the existing metadata collections.

FS5006 Assessment Metadata - Mathematics

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N1	List the performance levels starting at the lowest level to the highest level.	List For grade levels 4 and 8 by each assessment type
New	N2	Identify the performance levels that are at or above proficiency.	Options: At or above proficiency For grade levels 4 and 8 by each assessment type

FS5007 Assessment Metadata - RLA

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N1	List the performance levels starting at the lowest level to the highest level.	List For grade levels 4 and 8 by each assessment type
New	N2	Identify the performance levels that are at or above proficiency.	Options: At or above proficiency For grade levels 4 and 8 by each assessment type

2. Section 1003 Funds – add aggregation by Federal Fiscal Year

A State may subaward section 1003 funds using Title I, Part A funds reserved from multiple fiscal years during any school year. Section 1003 Funds (FS132) currently collects the dollar amount that each operational public school received for school improvement under section 1003 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) for a school year.

The Department proposes both the total dollar amount be reported, as well as the dollar amounts by the Federal fiscal year from which the State reserved the funds a school received.

Questions

1. Does the SEA currently maintain data on the section 1003 subaward amount by fiscal year at the school level? If not, explain how the sources of subawards are tracked.

2. Are the proposed options of current federal fiscal year, one prior federal fiscal year, and two prior federal fiscal years sufficient for reporting the Section 1003 funds received by a school during a school year? If not, please explain what additional options are needed.

3. When would these dollar amounts be available to report?

4. What is the burden of this change on the SEA?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

To collect the data by Federal fiscal year, a category set would be added to this data group.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
794	School Improvement Funds 1003(a)	NA	Federal Fiscal Year (Receive Funds)

Attachment A Data Category Tab (New60!)

The new category below is used to aggregate the dollars by Federal fiscal year.

Category Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Category Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Federal Fiscal Year (Receive Funds)	The Federal fiscal year that is the source of the subgrant.	Federal Fiscal Year – Current Federal Fiscal Year - One Prior Federal Fiscal Years -Two Prior Federal Fiscal Year - Other

3. Section 1003 Reserved Funds – new data

A State must annually reserve Title I, Part A funds for school improvement consistent with the requirements in section 1003(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). A State may use up to five percent of this required, annual reservation for State administration activities under ESEA section 1003(b)(2).

The Department proposes to collect the total amount of funds each State reserves for school improvement in the prior federal fiscal year and the amount of those funds a State set aside to use for State administration under section 1003(b)(2).

Questions

1. What challenges are associated with reporting the Total Reservation under Section 1003? With reporting the amount set aside for State Administration?

2. When would these dollar amounts be available to report?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data groups which have been assigned to FS132 Section 1003 Funds.

DG Name	Section 1003 reservation	State Administration set aside
DG Definition	The dollar amount reserved by the SEA for school improvement under ESEA section 1003(a).	The dollar amount set aside by the SEA for State administration under ESEA section 1003(b)(2).
Level	SEA	SEA
Reporting period	Federal Fiscal Year	Federal Fiscal Year

4. Title I, Part A Foster Care – add aggregation by Grade Level

Title I, Part A of the ESEA includes nationwide implementation of provisions for educational outcomes for students in foster care.

The Department proposes to expand the current enrollment counts of students in foster care which is a single number by adding counts aggregated by grade level.

Questions

1. Does the State currently have access to the grade levels of students in foster care, and, if so, is the State able to report these data to the Department?

2. If not, describe the steps to be able to report students by grade level.

3. How much time would the State need to be able to collect this new data?

4. What is the burden of this change on the SEA?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

To collect the data by grade level, a category set would be added to this data group.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
893	Title I Part A foster care enrolled	NA	Grade Level (Basic w/13)

5. Title III English Proficiency Assessment – add question

FS139 English Language Proficiency Results and FS050 Title III English Language Proficiency Results contain the counts of students by their progress in learning the English language: attained proficiency, making progress, or did not make progress.

To better understand this data, the Department is proposing adding a question on how students who took the assessment the first time are reported.

Questions

1. Would the question capture the information needed on students taking the assessment for the first time?

2. Besides this question what other information is needed to understand the proficiency data?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (New60!)

The question below would be added to the exiting metadata collection FS5009 Statewide English Language Proficiency Assessment Metadata.

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N2	When reporting on progress made by students toward English proficiency, does the State include students who took the statewide English language proficiency assessment for the first time in the reporting year?	Yes No

6. Title I, Part D Child Welfare Contact – new data

The Sections 1414(c)(20)(A) of the ESEA includes requirements to assist in improving programs and supports to meet the unique needs of children and youth involved in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, including successful transitions from facilities back to local schools, post-secondary education, and their communities as required in section 1418 of the ESEA.

The Department is proposing adding the collection of the aggregate number of children and youth who were in contact with the child welfare system prior to entering a neglected or delinquent program funded through Title I, Part D Subpart 1 grant funds.

Questions

1. Would the SEA be able to report this data for its Subpart 1 grantees?

2. If so, how long would it take the SEA to be able to collect and report it?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data group.

DG Name	Child welfare contact
DG Definition	The number of children or youth participating in a program under Title I, Part D, Subpart 1 of the ESEA that has come into contact with both the child welfare system and juvenile justice system.
Level	SEA
Reporting period	Federal Fiscal Year

McKinney-Vento

The questions in this section relate to the McKinney-Vento program.

7. Subaward – expand subgrant recipient flag and add data

Fiscal information is needed to conduct fiscal analyses of homeless programs such as per pupil amounts or cost per outcome.

The Department proposes expanding the information about LEAs who received subawards to include how the funding of the subaward is managed. The Department also proposes collecting the grant awards.

Questions

1. What difficulties are anticipated in reporting initial McKinney-Vento subaward amounts for LEAs, including regional and consortia grantees, member LEAs, and for direct grants to LEAs from SEA reservations for state-level activities?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)(New60!)

The definition of the existing data group would be changed.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Definition (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
754	McKinney-Vento subgrant recipient flag	An indication of whether the LEA received a McKinney-Vento subgrant.	An indication of whether the LEA received a McKinney-Vento subgrant, including consortia and regional subgrantees.

A new data group would be added.

Data Group Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	McKinney-Vento subgrant
Data Group Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	The dollar amount of McKinney-Vento subgrant funds awarded to an LEA by its SEA in accordance with the McKinney-Vento Act, as amended, and related regulations.
Reporting Period (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Federal Fiscal Period
SEA Level
LEA Level	X
School Level

Attachment A Data Categories Tab (Revised60!)

The category for permitted values, McKinney-Vento Subgrant Recipient Flag would change as follows:

Item	(SY 2024-25)	(SY 2025-26 – Changes Only)
Category Name	McKinney-Vento Subgrant Recipient Flag
Category Definition	The statuses describing LEA subgrants for McKinney-Vento.	The statuses describing LEA subgrants for McKinney-Vento.
Permitted Value List	Yes No	LEA is a McKinney-Vento subgrantee and fiscal agent LEA is a McKinney-Vento regional subgrantee and fiscal agent LEA is served by a McKinney-Vento regional subgrantee LEA is the lead applicant for a McKinney-Vento consortium grant LEA is a member of a McKinney-Vento consortium grant LEA is a direct grantee from the McKinney-Vento SEA administrative funds

8. Liaisons – new data

The McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth program requires LEAs to designate a liaison and carry out required duties and for SEAs to fulfill the functions of the office of the coordinator. Thus, it also supports program monitoring needs as lack of capacity is probably the most common reason for an SEA or LEA not carrying out its duties.

The Department is proposing two new FTE data groups.

Questions

1. Does the state calculate the FTE of staff who are carrying out the statutory duties of the McKinney-Vento Act?

2. If not, what would be required to obtain the FTE of the staff who are carrying out the statutory duties of the McKinney-Vento Act?

3. Does the state or LEA use hired contract staff to perform SEA or LEA duties, or does the state or LEA contract with an external organization, such as a university, to manage the coordination and implementation of the EHCY program? If so, can the FTE of those outside staff be calculated?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data groups.

DG Name	Homeless staff (FTE)	Homeless liaison (FTE)
DG Definition	The number of full-time equivalent (FTE) of SEA State Coordinators and staff carrying out the functions of the office of the coordinator and state plan in sections 722(f) and (g)(1) of the McKinney-Vento Act.	The number of full-time equivalent (FTE) LEA homeless liaisons and staff carrying out the duties of the liaison and LEA requirements under Section 722(g)(3) and (6) of the McKinney-Vento Act.
Level	SEA	LEA
Reporting period	Federal Fiscal Period	Federal Fiscal Period

9. Chronic Absenteeism – expand to include EUT and the denominator

The Department currently collects the unduplicated number of students absent 10% or more school days during the school year at the State and local educational agency (LEA) level for Homeless Enrolled and for Economically Disadvantaged Status. Those data are also collected at the school level by Sex (Membership), Racial Ethnic, Disability Status (Only), Disability Status (504), English Learner Status (Only), Homeless Enrolled Status, Economically Disadvantaged Status. The data are missing a denominator to calculate the percentages of students who are chronically absent.

The Department is proposing expanding the data collected to include the denominator for all levels and expanding the data collected for the state and LEAs to all students.

Questions

1. What are the challenges associated with reporting the unduplicated education unit total at the State-level?

2. What are the challenges associated with reporting the unduplicated education unit total at the LEA-level?

3. What are the challenges associated with expanding to include the denominator values?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)(Retired60!)

The existing data groups 814 and 887 would be retired and replaced with two new data groups summarized below.

Data Group Name	Chronic absenteeism table - SEA/LEA	Chronic absenteeism table - School
Data Group Definition	The unduplicated number of students enrolled during the school year.	The unduplicated number of students enrolled during the school year.
Levels	SEA, LEA	School
Category Sets	The following by Chronic Absentee Status Homeless Enrolled Status Economically Disadvantaged Status	The following by Chronic Absentee Status Sex (Membership) Racial Ethnic Disability Status (Only) Disability Status (504) English Learner Status (Only) Homeless Enrolled Status Economically Disadvantaged Status
Subtotal	Chronic Absentee Status	Chronic Absentee Status
EUT	Yes	Yes
Reporting Period	School Year	School Year

Existing data groups 814 and 887 that will be retired.

DG Number	814	887
Data Group Name	Chronic absenteeism table – School	Chronic absenteeism table - SEA/LEA
Data Group Definition	The unduplicated number of students absent 10% or more school days during the school year.	The unduplicated number of students absent 10% or more school days during the school year.
Category Sets	Sex (Membership) Racial Ethnic Disability Status (Only) Disability Status (504) English Learner Status (Only) Homeless Enrolled Status Economically Disadvantaged Status	Homeless Enrolled Status Economically Disadvantaged Status

Attachment A Data Category Tab (New60!)

A new category would be added to obtain the count of students who were chronically absent.

Category Name	Category Definition	Permitted Values
Chronic Absentee Status	An indication of whether students were absent 10% or more school days during the school year.	Chronic Absent Not Chronic Absent

IDEA Part B

The questions in this section relate to data collected for the IDEA Part B Program.

10. Children with Disabilities Child Count and Environments – expand to military connected

The current data on children with disabilities under Part B of IDEA do not include data by military connected students. Data on the participation and performance of military connected students on statewide assessments are collected.

The Department is proposing to add the count of children with disabilities who are military connected to the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data collected. These data will be collected by educational environment and by disability category for ages 3 through 5 (not in kindergarten) and ages 5 (in kindergarten) through 21.

Questions

1. What challenges are anticipated in reporting these data?

2. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

For school age children, the existing data group in FS002 would be expanded.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
74	Children with disabilities (IDEA) school age table	Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) Age (School Age) Educational Environment (IDEA) SA English Learner Status (Both)	Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) Age (School Age) Educational Environment (IDEA) SA English Learner Status (Both) Military Connected

For early childhood, the existing data group in FS089 would be expanded.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
613	Children with disabilities (IDEA) early childhood table	Age (Early Childhood) Disability Category (IDEA) Educational Environment (IDEA) EC Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both)	Age (Early Childhood) Disability Category (IDEA) Educational Environment (IDEA) EC Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both) Military Connected

11. Regular Class – add question

Although the Department has provided certain parameters around the term “regular class” in the IDEA Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data collection, the Department has learned that there are variations across States in how they operationally define the term beyond those parameters for the purposes of reporting the data in this data collection.

The Department is proposing collecting the statewide operational definition of “regular class” for the purposes of reporting the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data. If the State does not have an operational definition for “regular class,” the State would provide a description of the criteria the LEAs in the State use to determine whether children with disabilities receive educational services in the “regular class” for the purposes of reporting the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data.

Questions

1. What challenges are anticipated in responding to these questions?

2. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (New60!)

These new questions will be added to FS5002 IDEA Part B Child Count Metadata.

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N1	Does the State have a statewide operational definition of “regular class” for the purposes of reporting the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data?	Yes (FQ) No (FQ)
New	N2	If Yes, provide the statewide operational definition of “regular class”	Text box
New	N3	If No, provide a description of the criteria the LEAs in the State use to determine whether children with disabilities receive educational services in the “regular class” for the purposes of reporting the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments data.	Text box

12. Discipline – change aggregation by Removal Length

The current IDEA Section 618 Part B Discipline Data collection does not collect disaggregated data on the disciplinary removals of children with disabilities that occur for a duration of any number of days between two and 10 days, or on the out-of-school suspensions/expulsions and in-school suspensions of children with disabilities that occur for a duration of any number of days less than 10 days. By further disaggregating the data on the number of days children with disabilities are removed from their educational placements for disciplinary reasons, the Department will be able to better target its monitoring activities and technical assistance as well as provide greater transparency on data related to disciplinary removals of children with disabilities.

The Department is proposing to revise the permitted values for both to use the following day ranges:

• 1 day or less

• 2 through 4 days

• 5 through 10 days

• greater than 10 days

Questions

For FS006 Children with Disabilities (IDEA) Suspensions/Expulsions

1. What challenges are anticipated in reporting the discipline data for these more detailed day ranges?

2. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

For FS088 Children with Disabilities (IDEA) Disciplinary Removals

3. What challenges are anticipated in reporting the discipline data for these more detailed day ranges?

4. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

The following data groups would be revised.

FS	DG	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
006	475	Children with disabilities (IDEA) suspensions/expulsions table	Discipline Method (Suspension/Expulsion) Removal Length (Suspensions/Expulsions) Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both)	Discipline Method (Suspension/Expulsion) Removal Length Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both)
088	598	Children with disabilities (IDEA) disciplinary removals table	Removal Length (IDEA) Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both)	Removal Length Disability Category (IDEA) Racial Ethnic Sex (Membership) English Learner Status (Both)

Attachment A Data Category Tab (Retire60!)(New60!)

The following categories would be retired.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)
Removal Length (Suspensions/Expulsions)	Less than or equal to 10 days Greater than 10 days
Removal Length (IDEA)	1 day or less 2 through 10 days Greater than 10 days

The above categories would be replaced with this category.

Category Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Category Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Removal Length	The cumulative number of days were removed from their current educational setting during the school year for disciplinary reasons.	1 day or less 2 through 4 days 5 through 10 days Greater than 10 days

13. Personnel – change aggregation by Age Groups

The Department collects the FTEs of special education teachers and paraprofessionals who are employed or contracted to work with children with disabilities.

The Department is proposing separating the FTE of special education teachers and paraprofessionals further by age. This proposed change would align the age groups reported in the IDEA Section 618 Part B Personnel data with the age groups reported in the IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments public release file.

Questions

1. What challenges are anticipated in reporting these data?

2. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

Attachment A Data Category Tab (Revised60!)

To separate the counts further, the permitted values of the following category would be changed.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Age Group	Age 3 through 5 (not Kindergarten) Age 5 (in Kindergarten) through 21	Ages 3 through 5 (not in Kindergarten) Age 5 (in Kindergarten) through 11 Age 12 through 17 Age 18 through 21

IDEA Part C

The questions in this section relate to data collected for the IDEA Part C program.

14. Child Count and Settings – add options to settings

States report the number of infants and toddlers who are receiving early intervention in: 1) home; 2) community-based setting; and 3) other setting.

The Department is considering revisions to the IDEA Section 618 Part C Child Count and Settings data collection to include a “home and community-based settings” reporting category to better represent infants and toddlers receiving early intervention services in natural environments.

Questions

1. Does the state collect data to differentiate the number of infants and toddlers who are receiving early intervention services in a “home and community-based settings” reporting category from the other Part C settings reporting categories?

2. How might reporting the number of infants and toddlers who are receiving early intervention services in the “home and community-based settings” reporting category improve programs and services for infants and toddlers receiving services under Part C of IDEA?

3. How would the data collection and reporting processes need to change to report the count of infants and toddlers receiving early intervention services in the “home and community-based settings” reporting category? How would these changes impact the burden associated with reporting these data?

Attachment E IDEA Part C Child Count and Setting

Attachment E contains the IDEA Part C data collections.

Common Core of Data

The questions in this section relate to the Common Core of Data.

15. Direct Certification – add aggregation by eligibility type

Currently in FS033 (Free and Reduced-Price Lunch), states have the option to submit: (1) DG565 Free and Reduced-Price Lunch (FRPL) data and/or (2) DG813 Direct Certification (DC) data. This flexibility in reporting means that neither measure is available for all states. For SY 2023-24, 28 states/jurisdictions reported both FRPL and DC; 6 states/jurisdictions reported DC only; and 22 states/jurisdictions reported FRPL only.

School poverty measures play a significant role in research studies and federal program decisions. In recent years, several factors compromised the use of FS033 as a proxy for poverty, including both the incomparability of FRPL and DC data and reporting differences for NSLP under Provisions 2 or 3 or under the Community Eligibility Option (CEO). At the same time, the expanded use of Medicaid to determine categorical eligibility has created the potential for including reduced-price lunch counts in DC data.

Since DC data are based on categorical eligibility (eligibility determined automatically through participation in certain federal assistance programs), it provides a measure that is standard across states.

The Department proposes collecting only DG813 Direct Certification expanded by Free and reduced eligibility.

Questions

1. Can the state provide Direct Certification data for all operational schools?

2. Can the state provide Direct Certification data with separate counts for free lunch qualified students and reduced-price lunch qualified students?

3. What impacts to SEAs are associated with reporting these data?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

This change adds a category set to this data group.

Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Direct certification		Lunch Program Status

This change also adds a data group comment to the data group.

Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Comment (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Direct certification	All states report direct certification

16. School Breakfast Program – add data

The School Breakfast Program is a federally assisted meal program operating in public and nonprofit private schools and residential childcare institutions that began under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. The School Breakfast Program is administered at the federal level by the Food and Nutrition Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (FNS/USDA). The program is at more than 78,000 schools and institutions.

The Department is proposing collecting the counts of students eligible for the School Breakfast Program.

Questions

1. Can SEAs provide School Breakfast Program data for all schools?

2. What impacts to SEAs are associated with reporting these data?

3. If SEAs do not collect the needed information at this time, how long would SEAs need to be able to report these data?

4. Are there known benefits to data users from School Breakfast Program data that are not available through the Free and Reduced-Price Lunch or Direct Certification data already in the Common Core of Data?

5. Do the data for School Breakfast Program share the limitations of Free and Reduced-Price Lunch data discussed previously?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data group which is assigned to FS033 Free and Reduced Price Lunch.

DG Name	School Breakfast Program
DG Definition	The unduplicated number of students who are eligible to participate in the School Breakfast Program under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
Level	SCH
Reporting period	October 1 (or closest school day) or USDA reporting period
Category Set	Breakfast Program Status
EUT	Yes

Attachment A Data Category Tab (New60!)

The data would be disaggregated using this category.

Category Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Category Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Breakfast Program Status	An indication of students' qualification for free or reduced-price breakfast.	Free breakfast qualified Reduced-price breakfast qualified

17. Identified Student Percentage for Community Eligibility Provision – add data

To establish eligibility for participation in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) requires State agencies to publish the Identified Student Percentage (ISP) for every school or LEA with a minimum ISP of 15%. The ISP is the count of identified students over the count of enrolled students as of April 1 of the school year prior to implementing CEP. “Identified students” means students with access to at least one meal service who are determined to be eligible outside of household applications. For example, students directly certified as eligible for free meals through participation in certain federal assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid (if applicable), Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR); or those documented as homeless, migrant, runaway, foster, Head Start, Pre-K Even Start.

While State agencies are only required to publish the Identified Student Percentage (ISP) for schools/LEAs with a minimum ISP of at least 15%, the FNS has found that some State agencies publish ISPs for all schools/LEAs.

The Department proposes adding the collection of ISP data for all schools and LEAs.

Questions

1. Can SEAs provide the Identified Student Percentage (ISP) for all schools/LEAs?

2. What impacts are associated with reporting these data?

3. If SEAs do not collect the needed information at this time, how long would SEAs need to be able to report these data?

4. Are there known benefits to data users from ISP data that are not available through Free and Reduced-Price Lunch or Direct Certification data already in Common Core of Data?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (New60!)

Below is a summary of the new data group.

DG Name	Identified student percentage
DG Definition	The percentage of enrolled students who are directly certified for free meals through the National School lunch program (NSLP), including homeless children, migrant children, runaway children, foster children, and Head Start children directly approved for free school meals without application or verification.
Level	SCH, LEA
Reporting period	April 1

18. Staff FTE - completeness

FS059 Staff FTE is intended to be comprehensive and represent all FTE employed and contract staff in each LEA. As such, the staff reported in the following files should also be reported in FS059 Staff FTE:

• FS067: Title III Teachers

• FS070: Special Education Teachers FTE

• FS099: Special Education Related Services Personnel

• FS112: Special Education Paraprofessionals

• FS203: Teachers).

Questions

1. Do SEAs include FS067, FS070, FS099, FS112, and FS203 FTE counts in FS059 FTE staff reporting?

2. If SEAs do not currently include FTEs reported in EDFacts files FS067, FS070, FS099, FS112, and FS203 in FS059, what changes would be required to include these FTE in FS059, and what impacts are associated with these changes?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

A data comment was added to the data group.

FS Number	DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Comment (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Comment (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
059	528	Staff FTE table		This data group is intended to be comprehensive and represent all FTE employed and contract staff in each district.

19. Staff FTE – change aggregation to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)

The Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system (https://www.bls.gov/soc) is one of several standard classification systems established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for use in the Federal statistical system. All Federal statistical agencies that publish occupational data for statistical purposes are required to use the SOC to increase data comparability across Federal programs. The FTE staff counts in FS059 use a list of permitted values that is not aligned with the SOC. FS059 includes contracted staff who provide work that is part of the district’s regular operations.

The Department proposes changing the current list of permitted values to the SOC codes.

Questions

1. How are staff employed by the SEA, LEAs and schools classified? Do SEAs use SOC for classification of employed staff?

2. How are staff contracted by the SEA, LEAs and schools classified? Do SEAs use SOC for classification of contracted staff?

3. If SEAs do not currently use SOC to classify staff employed or staff contracted, does the SEA plan to move to SOC for classification of employed and/or contracted staff?

4. What impacts are associated with reporting FS059 by SOC?

Attachment A Data Group Tab (Revised60!)

To align with the SOC, the category sets for the data groups in FS059 would be changed.

DG Number	Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Data Group Definition (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Category Sets (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
528	Staff FTE table	The number of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff.	Staff Category (CCD)	Standard Occupational Classification code

Attachment A Data Category Tab (New60!)(Retire60!)

The following category would be added.

Category Name (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Category Definition (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Standard Occupational Classification code	The Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system code to classify workers into occupational categories.	2018 SOC codes

The following data category would be retired.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Definition (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)
Staff Category (CCD)	Titles of employment, official status, or rank.	Pre-Kindergarten Teachers Kindergarten Teachers Elementary Teachers Secondary Teachers Ungraded Teachers Paraprofessionals/Instructional Aides Elementary School Counselors Secondary School Counselors School Counselors Librarians/Media Specialists Library/Media Support Staff LEA Administrators LEA Administrative Support Staff Instructional Coordinators and Supervisors to the Staff School Administrators School Administrative Support Staff Student Support Services Staff (w/o Psychology) School Psychologists All Other Support Staff

Federal Statistical Requirements

This section covers alignment with Federal statistical requirements.

20. Race and Ethnicity Data Standards - updated

Race and ethnicity data in EDFacts have been collected and tabulated based on the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) 1997 Statistical Policy Directive No 15 (SPD 15) on federal race and ethnicity data standards. On March 29, 2024, OMB updated SPD 15 to revise the guidance for measuring, collecting, and tabulating information on race and ethnicity, including:

• Collecting race and ethnicity information using one combined question;

• Adding Middle Eastern or North African (MENA) as a new minimum category;

• Requiring the collection of detailed race and ethnicity categories as a default; and

• Updating terminology, definitions, and question wording.

The revised SPD 15 defined the minimum categories for data on race and ethnicity for federal statistics, program administrative reporting, and civil rights compliance reporting as follows:

American Indian or Alaska Native. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of North, Central, and South America, including, for example, Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana, Native Village of Barrow Inupiat Traditional Government, Nome Eskimo Community, Aztec, and Maya.

Asian. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of Central or East Asia, Southeast Asia, or South Asia, including, for example, Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese.

Black or African American. Individuals with origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa, including, for example, African American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian, and Somali.

Hispanic or Latino. Includes individuals of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican, Guatemalan, and other Central or South American or Spanish culture or origin.

Middle Eastern or North African. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of the Middle East or North Africa, including, for example, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Israeli.

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands, including, for example, Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro, Tongan, Fijian, and Marshallese.

White. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, including, for example, English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, and Scottish.

The revised SPD 15 also requires the collection of detailed data on race and ethnicity beyond the minimum categories. An agency may request an exemption from OIRA if it determines that the potential benefit of the detailed data would not justify the additional burden to the agency and the public or the additional risk to privacy or confidentiality. The revised SPD 15 defined the following detailed categories for the corresponding minimum categories:

Asian: Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese, Another group (for example, Pakistani, Hmong, Afghan, etc.)

Black or African American: African American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian, Somali, Another group (for example, Trinidadian and Tobagonian, Ghanian, Congolese, etc.)

Hispanic or Latino: Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican, Guatemalan, Another group (for example, Colombian, Honduran, Spaniard, etc.)

Middle Eastern or North African: Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, Israeli, Another group (for example, Moroccan, Yemeni, Kurdish, etc.)

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro, Tongan, Fijian, Marshallese, Another group (for example, Chuukese, Palauan, Tahitian, etc.)

White: English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, Scottish, Another group (for example, French, Swedish, Norwegian, etc.)

The deadline for federal agency compliance with revised SPD 15 is March 29, 2029. While OMB predicted that many programs would be able to implement revisions sooner than the 2029 deadline, OMB recognized that collections that rely on data provided by non-federal entities, such as to EDFacts, may take longer within the five-year period to implement revisions.

OMB has required each federal agency to adopt an Action Plan on Race and Ethnicity Data by September 29, 2025. The Department is currently working on the development of an Action Plan.

Questions

Regarding the minimum race and ethnicity categories:

1. What does the state need to do with its current collection of race and ethnicity to align with the new minimum race and ethnicity categories? Does the state currently collect MENA? Will the state need to change how data on Hispanic / Latino are stored to align with the new categories?

2. Does the state expect to have difficulty reporting data for all students using the new minimum race and ethnicity categories by the 2028-29 school year (to meet the deadline of March 2029)? If the state could start reporting before the deadline, for which school year would the state be able to start reporting data using the new categories?

3. To move to the new standards, how and when would the state re-identify students so that the data about the students are aligned with the new minimum race and ethnicity categories?

4. What assistance does the state need from the Department to move to the new minimum race and ethnicity categories?

Regarding the detailed data:

5. Does the state already collect race and ethnicity data using more detail than the minimum race and ethnicity categories as proposed in SPD 15? If so, what are those categories?

6. Would states collect detailed race/ethnicity data aligned with the new standards if such data were not required for aggregate reporting to the Department or other agencies?

7. If detailed race/ethnicity data are required for reporting to the Department, how and when could the state begin collecting the detailed data? What impact would collecting detailed race/ethnicity information have on the districts and schools in the state?

Operations

This section has questions about operations of EDFacts.

21. Modernization of EDFacts with EDPass

The Department is constantly stiving to make data collection and reporting more efficient and less of a burden on states. One of the ways we have done this is by modernizing our data collection tool with EDPass.

Questions

1. How has the transition to EDPass been for your state?

2. What are some ways that EDPass has helped with your data reporting?

3. What are some areas of improvement you would recommend?

22. Burden at the SEA level

Traditionally, the Department measured the burden of reporting EDFacts as one FTE at the SEA. See attachment Part A, A.12 and A.13. Questions about reporting burden are the result of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PL 104-13) and associated regulations. With the move to modernized state and federal (EDP) systems, the Department would like to provide SEAs an opportunity to comment on the current burden of EDFacts.

Questions

4. What is an accurate reflection of the burden that EDFacts reporting puts on states? See guidance on estimating burden on the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) website here.

23. Burden at the LEA and school level

The burden determination for EDFacts has only been at the state level. With the move to modernized state and federal (EDP) systems, the Department would like to provide SEAs an opportunity to comment on the current LEA and school burden of EDFacts.

Questions

1. Are there additional burdens at the LEA and school level, where LEAs and schools are collecting, maintaining, and reporting data for the sole purpose of federal collections?

2. What is an accurate reflection of the burden that EDFacts reporting puts on LEAs and schools in the state? See guidance on the PRA website for how to estimate burden.

24. Accountability – align with State Reporting

State-specific subgroups

A State defines the major racial and ethnic subgroups it uses for ESEA Title I accountability in the State’s ESEA consolidated State plan and may define additional State-specific subgroups.

The Department is proposing adding one additional State-specific subgroup.

Item	Current number	Proposed number
State-defined subgroups	3	4

Questions

State-defined subgroups:

1. Is the proposed number of State-defined subgroups (4) sufficient for the State to report data for all State-defined subgroups the State currently uses for uses for ESEA Title I accountability? Is the proposed number sufficient for the foreseeable future?

2. If not, how many State-defined subgroups are needed for Title I accountability for the State?

Attachment A Data Category Tab (Revised60!)

State-defined subgroups – These categories have been adjusted to add an additional state-defined subgroup.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Major Racial and Ethnic Groups (Accountability)	American Indian \ Alaska Native \ Native American Asian Asian \ Pacific Islander Black (not Hispanic) African American Filipino Hispanic (not Puerto Rican) Hispanic \ Latino Multicultural \ Multiethnic \ Multiracial \ other Native Hawaiian \ other Pacific Islander \ Pacific Islander Puerto Rican White (not Hispanic) \ Caucasian State-defined subgroup 1 State-defined subgroup 2 State-defined subgroup 3	American Indian \ Alaska Native \ Native American Asian Asian \ Pacific Islander Black (not Hispanic) African American Filipino Hispanic (not Puerto Rican) Hispanic \ Latino Multicultural \ Multiethnic \ Multiracial \ other Native Hawaiian \ other Pacific Islander \ Pacific Islander Puerto Rican White (not Hispanic) \ Caucasian State-defined subgroup 1 State-defined subgroup 2 State-defined subgroup 3 State-defined subgroup 4
Identification Subgroups	Economically Disadvantaged (ED) Students Children with one or more disabilities (IDEA) English learners American Indian \ Alaska Native \ Native American Asian Asian \ Pacific Islander Black (not Hispanic) African American Filipino Hispanic (not Puerto Rican) Hispanic \ Latino Multicultural \ Multiethnic \ Multiracial \ other Native Hawaiian \ other Pacific Islander \ Pacific Islander Puerto Rican White (not Hispanic) \ Caucasian State-defined subgroup 1 State-defined subgroup 2 State-defined subgroup 3	Economically Disadvantaged (ED) Students Children with one or more disabilities (IDEA) English learners American Indian \ Alaska Native \ Native American Asian Asian \ Pacific Islander Black (not Hispanic) African American Filipino Hispanic (not Puerto Rican) Hispanic \ Latino Multicultural \ Multiethnic \ Multiracial \ other Native Hawaiian \ other Pacific Islander \ Pacific Islander Puerto Rican White (not Hispanic) \ Caucasian State-defined subgroup 1 State-defined subgroup 2 State-defined subgroup 3 State-defined subgroup 4

Measures for Indicators

A State also defines the measures it uses for each of its indicators for ESEA Title I accountability in the State’s ESEA consolidated State plan. A state has flexibility to define one or more indicator measures for each required indicator.

The Department is proposing the following numbers of indicator measures for each indicator.

FS	FS Name	Current number	Proposed number
199	Graduation Rate Indicator Status	3	4
200	Academic Achievement Indicator Status	6	6
201	Other Academic Indicator Status	6	6
202	School Quality or Student Success Indicator Status	12	12
205	Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Indicator Status	2	4

Questions

3. Are the proposed number of indicator measures sufficient for the State to report data for all indicator measures the State uses for ESEA Title I accountability? Is the proposed number sufficient for the foreseeable future?

4. If not, how many indicator measures are needed for the indicators? Provide specific answers for each indicator.

Attachment A Data Category Tab (Revised60!)

Measures – These categories have been adjusted for the additional measures.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Indicator Type (GRM)	Graduation Rate Measure 1 Graduation Rate Measure 2 Graduation Rate Measure 3	Graduation Rate Measure 1 Graduation Rate Measure 2 Graduation Rate Measure 3 Graduation Rate Measure 4
Indicator Type (ELP)	Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 1 Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 2	Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 1 Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 2 Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 3 Progress Achieving English Language Proficiency Measure 4

25. Title III English Proficiency Assessment – add question

FS137 and FS138 collect data on participation in the annual English proficiency assessment. The options for reporting students include “Medical Exemption.”

The Department proposes to add a question about the state’s use of the medical exemptions.

Questions

1. Is responding to this question burdensome?

2. Are there other questions that should be asked about data on participation in the annual English proficiency assessment?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (New60!)

The question below would be added to the exiting metadata collection FS5009 Statewide English Language Proficiency Assessment Metadata.

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N1	Does the state permit significant medical emergency as an exemption from the statewide English language proficiency assessment for all English learners?	Yes No

26. Title I, Part D Programs – add questions

The Department is proposing adding questions about what Title I, Part D programs that the state has. These questions would eliminate the need to enter zeros and provide data notes for programs that the SEA does not fund under a Title I, Part D Subpart 1 or Subpart 2 grant.

Questions

1. Is responding to these questions burdensome?

2. How much would this reduce the data reporting burden for the Title I, Part D program?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (New60!)

The questions below would be in a new metadata collection FS5027 Title I, Part D

ID	Row	Question	Format
New	N1	Does the SEA award subgrants to one of more State agencies that operate a program for neglected children and youth in an institution for neglected children and youth, or a community day program under Subpart 1?	Yes No
New	N2	Does the SEA award subgrants to one or more State agencies that operate a program for delinquent children and youth in an institution for delinquent children and house, adult correctional institution, or a community day program under Subpart 1?	Yes No
New	N3	Does the SEA award subgrants to one or more LEAs that operate a program for delinquent children and youth in a locally operated correctional facility under Subpart 2?	Yes No
New	N4	Does the SEA award subgrants to one or more LEAs that operate a program for at-risk children and youth under Subpart 2?	Yes No

27. IDEA Part B – expand questions from age groups to age

States current report use of disability categories and educational environments by age ranges. Some data have been erroneously flagged as having data quality concerns because the state had differences in the use of a disability category or environment within the age range.

The Department is proposing expanding the questions about state use of disability categories and educational environments from age ranges to ages.

Questions

1. What challenges does the state anticipate in reporting this information?

2. What steps can be taken to address these challenges?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (Revised60!)

For disability categories in FS5002 IDEA Part B Child Count Metadata, the question would be:

ID	Row	Question	Format
5011	1	Which disability categories are used by the state?	Used Not used For each Disability Category Autism Deaf-blindness Development delay Emotional disturbance Hearing impairment Intellectual disability Multiple disabilities Orthopedic impairment Specific learning disability Speech or language impairment Traumatic brain injury Visual impairment Other health impairment For each age from Age 3 through Age 21 (with Age 5 as both in Kindergarten and not in Kindergarten)

For educational environments school age in FS5003 IDEA Part B Environments – School Age, the question would be:

ID	Row	Question	Format
5013	1	Which educational environments are allowable for school age children?	Allowed Not Allowed For each Educational Environment Inside regular class 80% or more of the day Inside regular class 40% through 79% of the day Inside regular class less than 40% of the day Separate School Residential Facility Homebound/Hospital Correctional Facilities Parentally placed in private schools For each Age from Age 5 (Kindergarten) through Age 21

For educational environments early childhood in FS5004 IDEA Part B Environments – Early Childhood, the question would be:

ID	Row	Question	Format
5014	1	Which educational environments are allowable for early childhood?	Allowed Not allowed For each Educational Environment Services in Regular Early Childhood Program (at least 10 hours) Other Location Regular Early Childhood Program (at least 10 hours) Services in Regular Early Childhood Program (less than 10 hours) Other Location Regular Early Childhood Program (less than 10 hours) Separate Class Separate School Residential Facility Home Service Provider Location For each Age: Age 3 Age 4 Age 5 (Not Kindergarten)

28. Gun Free Schools Act – change collection approach

The GFSA metadata collection includes collecting the lists of LEAs by name and address that did not provide required assurances on expulsion or referrals to law enforcement. These data have been collected through webpages requiring SEAs to type the names of the LEAs and their addresses into a web screen. These data could be collected using a file similar to FS131 LEA End of School Year Status.

Questions

1. What would be the impact on the State of changing the collection of these LEAs from the webpage to a file?

2. Would this change reduce burden?

3. Would this change impact the data quality of the list of LEAs?

Attachment C-1 Metadata (Retire60!)

Below is the respondent information proposed to be retired.

ID	Row	Question	Format
2034	1	GFSA respondent information – Name	Short Text (up to 50 characters)
2034	2	GFSA respondent information – Title	Short Text (up to 50 characters)
2034	3	GFSA respondent information – Email	Short Text (up to 50 characters)

29. Technical Corrections – category adjustments

Three categories are marked with a status of “Technical Corrections.” These are corrections to the words that are used that should not change how the data are collected or reported.

Questions

1. What concerns, if any, are there with these changes?

Attachment A Data Category Tab

For this category, the explanation on allowable permitted values was expanded.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
Language (Native)	ISO-639-2 language codes	Languages that have native speakers from the ISO-639-2 language code list (https://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php).  If the SEA is unable to find a suitable codes for a language on the ISO-639-2 list, SEAs may request the addition of language codes from the ISO-639-3 language code list (https://iso639-3.sil.org/code_tables/639/data).

For this category, the tense of the permitted value descriptions was changed.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
English Learner Accountability	Attained proficiency Making progress Did not make progress	Attained proficiency Made progress Did not make progress

For this category, the generic terms in the permitted value descriptions were replaced with specific terms.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2025-26 - Changes Only)
REAP Alternative Fund Use Authority Status	Exercising authority Eligible but not exercising authority Not eligible for REAP alternative funding status	Exercising AFUA SRSA-eligible but not exercising AFUA Not SRSA-eligible

Retirements

This section lists the data groups and metadata questions that are proposed to be retired. The retirements of the following data groups are listed in earlier directed questions:

• Chronic absenteeism table – School (FS195/DG814)

• Chronic absenteeism table – SEA/LEA (FS195/DG887

• Free and reduced-price lunch table (FS033/DG565)

The retirements of the following categories are listed in earlier directed questions:

• Removal Length (IDEA)

• Removal Length (Suspensions/Expulsions)

• Staff Category (CCD)

30. Migratory Children Eligible – 12 Months (FS121)

The package proposes retiring FS121 (Migratory Children Eligible - 12 Months) where the Migrant Education Program (MEP) currently collects data about whether migratory students are identified as Priority for Services, English Learner Status, and Disability Status, as well as the race and ethnicity of migratory students. The package proposes for Priority for Services, English Learner Status, and Disability Status to be collected via the Migrant Student Information Exchange (MSIX) only beginning in 2026-2027.

Questions

1. Would retiring FS121 entirely make reporting other MEP data more difficult, less difficult, or would there be no change in difficulty?

2. Do States compare the data they report through EDFacts/EDPass with the data they report in the Migrant Student Information Exchange (MSIX)?

Attachment A Data Group Tab

Below is a summary of the DG that is proposed for retirement.

FS Number	121
File Spec Name	Migratory Children Eligible - 12 Months
DG Number	634
Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Migratory children eligible 12-month table
Data Group Definition (SY 2024-25)	The unduplicated number of eligible migratory children.
Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Age/Grade (w/o 13) Racial Ethnic Age/Grade (w/o 13 and BT2) Priority for Services (Only) English Learner Status (Only) Disability Status (Only) Mobility Status (12 months)

Attachment A Data Category Tab

The retirement of this data group will also retire this category.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Definition (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)
Mobility Status (12 months)	An indication that the children’s qualifying arrival date (QAD) occurred within 12 months of the end of the reporting period (8/31).	QAD occurred within 12 months

31. Reconstituted Status (FS029, DG743)

The reconstituted status was added to the Directory to identify schools that were changed because of the state’s accountability system.

The Department is proposing retiring this data group.

Questions

1. What information is lost if this data group is retired?

2. What burden is removed from the removal of this data group?

Attachment A Data Group Tab

Below is a summary of the DG that is proposed for retirement.

FS Number	029
File Spec Name	Directory
DG Number	743
Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Reconstituted Status
Data Group Definition (SY 2024-25)	An indication that the school was restructured, transformed or otherwise changed as a consequence of the state's accountability system under ESEA or as a result of School Improvement Grants (SIG), but is not recognized as a new school for CCD purposes.
Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Reconstituted Status

Attachment A Data Category Tab

The retirement of this data group will also retire this category.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Definition (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)
Reconstituted Status	An indication that the school was restructured, transformed, or otherwise changed as a consequence of the state’s accountability system under ESEA or as a result of School Improvement Grants (SIG), but is not recognized as a new school for CCD purposes.	Not a reconstituted school Reconstituted school

32. Federal Programs (FS035)

The Department has been collecting the federal dollars distributed to LEAs to meet requirements in GEPA 424. The data are submitted in June for the fiscal year two years previous. The same data are now collected by USA Spending.

Because the data are duplicative, the Department is proposing retiring this data group retroactive to the data to be submitted in June 2025.

Questions

No directed questions for this retirement.

Attachment A Data Group Tab

Below is a summary of the DG that is proposed for retirement.

FS Number	035
File Spec Name	Federal Programs
DG Number	547
Data Group Name (SY 2024-25)	Federal programs funding allocation table
Data Group Definition (SY 2024-25)	The amount of federal dollars distributed to local education agencies (LEAs) and the amount retained by the state education agency (SEA) for program administration or other approved state-level activities (including unallocated, transferred to another state agency, or distributed to entities other than LEAs).
Category Sets (SY 2024-25)	Federal Program Code Funding Allocation Type

Attachment A Data Category Tab

The retirement of this data group will also retire these categories.

Category Name (SY 2024-25)	Category Definition (SY 2024-25)	Permitted Value Description List (SY 2024-25)
Federal Program Code	The unique five-digit number assigned to each federal program as listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA).	Adult Education State Grant Program Title I Grants to Local Education Agencies Migrant Education - Basic State Grant Program Title I Program for Neglected and Delinquent Children Special Education - Grants to States Career and Technical Education - Basic Grants to States Special Education Preschool Grants Education for Homeless Children and Youth Charter Schools Program 21st Century Community Learning Centers Special Education State Personnel Development Grants GEARUP State Awards Rural Education Achievement Program English Language Acquisition, State Grants Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants Comprehensive Literacy Development Grants Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants
Funding Allocation Type	The types of allocation or distribution made.	Retained by SEA for program administration, etc. Transferred to another state-level agency Distributed to entities other than LEAs Unallocated or returned funds