ESEA Flexibility (June 7, 2012) () ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions (August 3, 2012) () ESEA Flexibility Addendum to Frequently Asked Questions (March 5, 2013) () Letter to Chief State School Officers on Granting Administrative Flexibility for Better Measures of Success (September 7, 2012) () Letter and Enclosure on Flexibility in Schoolwide Programs (September 13, 2013) () Non-Regulatory Guidance on Title I, Part A Waivers (July 2009) () Guidance on School Improvement Grants Under Section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Revised June 29, 2010) () Guidance on Fiscal Year 2010 School Improvement Grants Under Section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (March 1, 2012) (). Two documents contain guidance applicable to the cross-cutting requirements affected by the Education Jobs Fund program (Ed Jobs). They include: Guidance – When to Treat Expenditures of Education Jobs Funds as State or Local Funds for Purposes of the Fiscal Requirements under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (November 2010) () Part B IDEA MOE Guidance for States on the Education Jobs Fund Program (May 2011) (). (Source: 2015 OMB Compliance Supplement, Part 4) Additional Guidance: ODE Document Library: OMB Compliance Supplements: AOS Guidance on federal sampling – Fall 2014 V. Reporting in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Removal of ARRA Programs from Clusters Many of the ARRA programs have been deleted from Parts 4 and 5 of this Supplement based on their completion or limited amount of funds still subject to audit. However, if an entity has Federal awards expended from these programs they would be treated consistent with any other programs not included in this Supplement or not part of a cluster of programs. For example, if programs were deleted from a cluster: (1) the program would not be considered as part of a cluster for periods covered by this Supplement, as this Supplement does not include the program in a cluster, and (2) if the program was part of a cluster which was audited as a major program in a prior year, the normal OMB CircularA-133 major program selection criteria and risk-based approach would apply and the program would be considered as audited in
ESEA Flexibility (June 7, 2012) () ESEA Flexibility Frequently Asked Questions (August 3, 2012) () ESEA Flexibility Addendum to Frequently Asked Questions (March 5, 2013) () Letter to Chief State School Officers on Granting Administrative Flexibility for Better Measures of Success (September 7, 2012) () Letter and Enclosure on Flexibility in Schoolwide Programs (September 13, 2013) () Non-Regulatory Guidance on Title I, Part A Waivers (July 2009) () Guidance on School Improvement Grants Under Section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Revised June 29, 2010) () Guidance on Fiscal Year 2010 School Improvement Grants Under Section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (March 1, 2012) (). Two documents contain guidance applicable to the cross-cutting requirements affected by the Education Jobs Fund program (Ed Jobs). They include: Guidance – When to Treat Expenditures of Education Jobs Funds as State or Local Funds for Purposes of the Fiscal Requirements under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (November 2010) () Part B IDEA MOE Guidance for States on the Education Jobs Fund Program (May 2011) (). (Source: 2015 OMB Compliance Supplement, Part 4) Additional Guidance: ODE Document Library: OMB Compliance Supplements: AOS Guidance on federal sampling – Fall 2014 V. Reporting in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Removal of ARRA Programs from Clusters Many of the ARRA programs have been deleted from Parts 4 and 5 of this Supplement based on their completion or limited amount of funds still subject to audit. However, if an entity has Federal awards expended from these programs they would be treated consistent with any other programs not included in this Supplement or not part of a cluster of programs. For example, if programs were deleted from a cluster: (1) the program would not be considered as part of a cluster for periods covered by this Supplement, as this Supplement does not include the program in a cluster, and (2) if the program was part of a cluster which was audited as a major program in a prior year, the normal OMB CircularA-133 major program selection criteria and risk-based approach would apply and the program would be considered as audited in
A133%20FACCR%2084010%20Title%20I%202015%20(non-ARRA%20%20non-UG)%20Sept15.docx