Preliminary Guidance for Title I, Part C - Pg 15
In determining the size and recipients of MEP subgrants, SEAs must take into account the special educational needs of the state’s migrant children (as addressed through a comprehensive needs assessment and service delivery plan described in Section 1306. Also see Section 1304(b)(5).) In addition, the state (and its operating agencies) is required to give priority for services to migrant children who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s challenging content standards and student pe rformance standards, and whose education has been interrupted during the regular school year (Section 1306). SEAs may also wish to consider additional factors, including the number of migrant children and youth enrolled in the schools in the LEA and the ability of the LEA to meet the special needs of such children and youth. Additionally, in awarding subgrants, SEAs may wish to consider the following factors: the extent to which the LEA will coordinate services with other state and local agencies serving migrant children and youth; how the proposed use of funds will facilitate the enrollment, attendance, and success in school of migrant children and youth; and other crit eria that the SEA deems appropriate.
Example of Factors to be Considered in Making Subgrants
- Number of students and extent of the need of students selected for participation;
- Number of students whose education has been interrupted during the regular school year;
- Personnel required, both numbers and types;
- Availability of MEP funds, and availability of instructional and other services from other funding sources; and
- Facility and equipment needs.
The statute does not authorize states to apply a hold-harmless provision when determining the amount of MEP funds to be provided to local operating agencies. (Hold-harmless provisions cap the year-to-year change in subgrant amounts (e.g., +/- 15 %), regardless of the numbers or needs of migrant students to be served each year by the various local operating agencies.) States have great flexibility in determining the best way to distribute MEP funds among their local operating agencies. However, in exercising this flexibility, S EAs need to ensure that their subgrant procedures are compatible with their responsibilities under the state-administered MEP to use program funds on a statewide basis in ways that best address the needs and service priorities of migrant children.