Title I Achievement-Focused Monitoring


OSS Monitoring


Choose a State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Michigan Hawaii Alaska West Virginia Delaware District of Columbia Maryland Maryland New York New Hampshire Maine Hawaii New Jersey Massachusetts Massachusetts Rhode Island Rhode Island Connecticut Connecticut New Hampshire Vermont Vermont Pennyslvania New Jersey Delaware Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Florida Louisiana Georgia Mississippi Alabama Kentucky Ohio Minnesota Wisconsin Indiana Tennessee Illinois Missouri Iowa Arkansas Texas Oklahoma Kansas Nebraska South Dakota Montana Wyoming Colorado New Mexico Utah Arizona California Idaho Oregon Washington North Dakota Nevada


Monitoring Reports by Cycle


Reports may include monitoring results of the following programs authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): Title I, Part A; Title I, Part B, Subpart 3; Title I, Part D; Title X, Part C, Subtitle B, of the ESEA (also known as the McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2001)and Title III.


Monitoring Indicators


New 2013 – 2014

Monitoring Plan for Formula Grant Programs October 1, 2014 to September 30, 2014

2011 – 2012

Monitoring Plan for Formula Grant Programs October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012


Monitoring Plan for School Improvement Grants (SIG) October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012.



Monitoring Cycle Report






OSS monitoring assesses the extent to which States provide leadership and guidance for local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools in implementing policies and procedures that comply with the provisions of the Title I, Part A, Even Start, NorD, Homeless statutes and regulations, and Title III as authorized under the Education Department of General Administrative Regulations at 34 CFR 80.40.

Monitoring formalizes the integral relationship between ED and the States. It emphasizes, first and foremost, accountability for using resources wisely in the critical venture of educating and preparing our nation’s students. Using monitoring indicators clarifies for States, and for ED monitors, the critical components of this accountability and provides a performance standard against which State policies and procedures can be measured. As a result of monitoring, ED is able to gather accurate data about State and local needs and use that data to design technical assistance initiatives and national leadership activities.


The content of SASA’s monitoring is based on States’ obligation to provide guidance and support to local educational agencies (LEAs), based on the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Those requirements, found in the statute and the regulations, are framed by the four keystone principles of NCLB: accountability, choice, parental involvement, and the use of scientifically based research or “what works.” Monitoring States’ implementation of SASA programs means taking a close look at how States have instituted policies, systems, and procedures in order to ensure LEA and school compliance with the statute and regulations. The requirements and principles are embedded in the three monitoring areas of standards, assessment and accountability; instructional support; and, fiduciary responsibilities. The standards for each of these areas are described for each program.

  1. Monitoring Indicators ED uses clear and consistent criteria to determine the degree of implementation of SEA programs and activities. Staff has developed indicators for each of the four programs monitored under this plan, in each of the three monitoring areas. The use of such criteria ensures a consistent application of these standards across monitoring teams and across States. The published indicators provide guidance for all States regarding the purpose and intended outcomes of monitoring by describing what is being monitored (the “critical element”) and providing the criteria for judging the quality of implementation (acceptable evidence).
  2. Monitoring Title I, Part A: Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies. “The purpose of this title is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments,” (Title I, Sec.1001). SASA teams look at each State’s implementation of the Title I, Part A provisions of the law, organized into the three areas of standards, assessment and accountability; instructional support; and, fiduciary responsibilities. SEAs have significant and far-reaching responsibilities to LEAs that have the intent of supporting the purpose of this title. Some of those major responsibilities include the assurance that assessments, accountability systems, curriculum, and instructional materials are aligned with each State’s academic standards; meeting the educational needs of low-achieving children, focusing on closing the achievement gap and targeting resources to those LEAs and schools with the greatest needs; providing parents with opportunities to be involved in meaningful ways in the education of their children; and, holding schools and LEAs accountable for improving the academic achievement of all students.
  3. Monitoring Title I, Part B, Subpart 3: William F. Goodling Even Start Family Literacy Programs Even Start offers promise for helping to break the intergenerational cycle of poverty and low literacy in the Nation. The program integrates early childhood education, adult literacy (adult basic and secondary-level education and/or instruction for English language learners), parenting education, and interactive parent and child literacy activities into a single, unified family literacy program. At a minimum, a successful Even Start project should: build on high-quality, community resources; employ qualified staff; carry out instructional activities grounded in scientifically based reading research; be able to document significant literacy achievement results (for adults and children) for the families served; and make sufficient program progress as defined by the State.
  4. Monitoring Title I, Part D: Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk. “It is the purpose of this part to improve educational services for children and youth in local and State institutions for neglected or delinquent children and youth so that such children and youth have the opportunity to meet the same challenging State academic content standards and challenging State student academic achievement standards that all children in the State are expected to meet;” (Title I, Part D, Sec. 1401).
  5. Monitoring Title X, Part C: McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Act of 2001. “Each State educational agency shall ensure that each child of a homeless individual and each homeless youth has equal access to the same free, appropriate public education, including a public preschool education, as provided to other children and youths.” (Title X, Part C, Sec. 721(1)). The McKinney-Vento program is designed to address the problems that homeless children and youth face in enrolling, attending, and succeeding in school. Homeless children and youth should have access to the educational and other services that they need to enable them to meet the same challenging State student academic achievement standards to which all students are held. In addition, they may not be separated from the mainstream school environment. States and districts are required to review and undertake steps to revise laws, regulations, practices, or policies that may act as barriers to the enrollment, attendance, or success in school of homeless children and youth.



Program Monitoring


For consolidated monitoring reports for the Title I, Part D/EHCY program from FY 2004 through FY 2013, please visit this webpage and click on the State.



The Monitoring ProcessT he desk monitoring and document review along with SASA’s on-site monitoring visits to States are the components of a continuous process of tracking State progress in implementing the statutes and regulations for SASA’s programs.

The State contact conducts an ongoing desk monitoring of each state, routinely gathering and analyzing data and information relevant to each of the three monitoring areas within the four programs. This information is collected primarily through Web-based searches and document analysis.

Prior to the monitoring visit, SASA staff will request that the SEA submit specific documentation about four weeks prior to the scheduled on-site review. This information will assist SASA team members by providing background and context. A thorough analysis of relveant documents is crucial to conducting an effective and efficient monitoring review, document analysis helps team members identify important issues and questions before the visit, ensuring focused and productive interviews during the visit.

  1. Monitoring schedule
    • States are monitored on-site on a regular cycle, each cycle begins on October 1st and concludes September 30th with onsite visits occurring during all months except for July and August.
    • Monitoring outside of the scheduled cycle may be arranged as needed if a State evidences serious or chronic compliance problems.
  2. Monitoring team
    • Typically five to six SASA staff members participate in the monitoring site visit. One of the team members is designated as the team leader. Team members work together throughout the monitoring process, including planning, research, onsite review, debriefing, and report writing.
  3. Conducting the site visit
    • On-site monitoring typically lasts 4 to 5 days. During the site visit SASA staff review documentation that was not available prior to the trip and interview SEA and LEA staff, principals, teachers, parents, and other stakeholders. This multi-level interview strategy allows monitors to gather information from a variety of perspectives and better evaluate the impact of the State’s administration on the implementation of the four programs at the LEA and school level.



An Overview of the Federal Monitoring Process for Title I, Part A Webcast


Federal Monitoring Process for Title I, Part A Webcast