head start/early head start update · engagement, ohs is introducing a new technical assistance...

Head Start/Early Head Start Update 1

© Wipfli LLP 1

Head Start/Early Head Start Update

Trainer: Denes L. Tobie, CPA, Partner

© Wipfli LLP

© Wipfli LLP

Agenda

• 2013 & Selected 2012 Information Memorandums

• 2012 Policy Clarifications – None

• 2013 & Selected 2012 Program Instructions

• FY 2014 Monitoring Protocol

• 2013 Poverty Guidelines

• Report to Congress on HS Monitoring - 2010

• Reform Continues

• Head Start Regulation 1307 – Policies and Procedures for Designation Renewal of HS and EHS Grantees

• NPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance

• OMB Proposed Changes – “Super Circular”

2


© Wipfli LLP

2012 Information Memorandums

Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-12-09 / 11/30/2012 / E-Rate Discount OptionsThe E-Rate program is intended to ensure that all eligible schools and libraries have affordable access to telecommunications and information services. Some Head Start and Early Head Start grantees are eligible for E-Rate program participation. Service discounts range from 20 percent to 90 percent depending upon local income and urban or rural location.

E-Rate participants (also referred to as users) have two payment options (exercisable at the participant's discretion) for their covered telecommunications and information services:

1. The user pays their telecommunications and information services bill in full and seeks reimbursement payments for the amount of the discount from the E-Rate Program Administrator via the service or equipment provider.

OR

2. The user pays only the non-discount portion of the telecommunications and information services cost to the service or equipment provider, who, in turn, seeks reimbursement from the E-Rate Program Administrator for the discounted amount.

3

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-12-09 / 11/30/2012 / E-Rate Discount Options (cont.)

Cost principles for all grantees classify discount payments as applicable credits. Applicable credits must be credited to the federal government as a cost reduction (if received during the same grant period as charges were made) or cash refund (if received after the grant period in which charges were incurred has ended). Applicable credits are not program income and may not be used as non-federal share. Further, since grantees have the option of choosing to pay only the non-discount portion of their E-Rate services (No. 2 above), the additional amount required for payment in full with a discount reimbursement payment at a later date (No. 1 above) would not be a reasonable, necessary, or allowable expense of program operations, unless one or both of the exceptions noted below apply.

4


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-12-09 / 11/30/2012 / E-Rate Discount Options (cont.)PROCESS:Grantees should note in Item 13 of Form 470 and in their accompanying request for proposal (if utilized) that bidders willing to bill for and accept payment only of the non-discount portion of services provided will receive preference in the selection of providers.

Once bids are received, preference should generally be given to provider(s) willing to accept payment of only the non-discount portion of services. In the event a grantee receives no bids from providers willing to accept payment of only the non-discount portion of services (No. 2 above) or the lowest bid received from a provider willing to accept payment option No. 2 above exceeds the cost of comparable services from a provider bidding on the basis of billing in full (No. 1 above) by 10 percent or more, the grantee may accept a bid which requires billing in full (No. 1 above).

5

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-01 / 06/04/2013 / Father EngagementHead Start has a long history of focusing on fathers and father figures as important contributors to the school readiness of children and the well-being of families. Many programs have continued to make their program environments more father-friendly and support fathers' strengths, needs, and aspirations for themselves and their children.In order to support Head Start programs in achieving effective father engagement, OHS is introducing a new technical assistance resource, Head Start Father Engagement Birth to Five Programming Guide. This resource aligns with the Parent, Family, and Community Engagement (PFCE) Framework. It offers many ideas for implementing father engagement strategies across program systems and services.

6


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-01 / 06/04/2013 / Father Engagement (cont.)The Programming Guide is designed for all Head Start staff, starting with program and parent leaders and managers who develop program policies and procedures. It is also designed for teachers, family service workers, home visitors, and health and transportation specialists. The guide provides information about working with expectant fathers and fathers of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, as well as other men who play a significant role in the lives of young children. Because children benefit from positive, strong, and cooperative relationships between their parents or caregivers, the guide also provides information to support co-parenting.

The guide is attached to the IM.

7

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-02 / 07/01/2013 / Five-Year Head Start Project PeriodsINFORMATIONThe Office of Head Start (OHS) is moving from indefinite project periods to five year project periods for all Head Start grantees. This requires changes in OHS funding practices and oversight of Head Start programs. Changes in oversight will include improved communication between federal staff and grantees, as well as ongoing analysis of data to determine the type of support needed by grantees. The main purpose of improved oversight is to demonstrate the quality of program services, the effectiveness of management systems, and the achievement of outcomes for children, families, and communities.

8


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-02 / 07/01/2013 / Five-Year Head Start Project Periods(cont.)Funding GuidanceGrantees who are eligible for a non-competitive five year grant will receive a detailed funding guidance letter issued by their Regional Office six months prior to their refunding date. Grant applications will be due to the Regional Office three months prior to the start of the new project period. Grantees will be required to describe the program approach, define anticipated outcomes, and include measures of program progress throughout the five year period. Application criteria in years two through five of the project period will focus on grantee progress toward the goals and outcomes defined in either the year one or the competitive application. Grantees will be expected to use program data to analyze and report on their progress. Grantee requests to change or update their program approach must be supported by program data. Throughout the five year project period and at the end of a five year project period, grantees will be expected to provide evidence of the program's cumulative impact on the children, families, and communities served.

9

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-02 / 07/01/2013 / Five-Year Head Start Project Periods(cont.)Additional Post-Award RequirementsThe following requirements will be conditions for all five year grants on the Notice of Award (NoA). Each grantee will complete the activities outlined below and, where required, submit the results to their Regional Office within the identified timeframes. Regional Office staff will discuss and validate these conditions/certifications during annual site visits.

Governance Grantee governing body must complete a governance and leadership capacity screening within 90 days of the start of the project period.

10


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-IM-HS-13-02 / 07/01/2013 / Five-Year Head Start Project Periods(cont.)Grantee must complete a health and safety assessment of each center and/or family child care home where services are provided within 45 calendar days of the start of the program/school year, or within 45 calendar days of the start of the five year project period when the five year project period begins during the program/school year.The grantee governing body must submit to OHS the signed certification of compliance with all applicable health and safety requirements within 15 calendar days of completion of the health and safety assessment.School Readiness Grantee must participate in individual school readiness progress meetings with the OHS Regional Office.Audit Webinar Grantee must participate in an OHS-sponsored single audit webinar within one year of the start of the project period.

11

© Wipfli LLP

New – First Year Conditions for All Five Year Awards

New tools available or soon to be availableGovernance

• Governance, Leadership, and Oversight Capacity Screener

• Governance Readiness Tool

• Governance System Builder (not issued yet)

• Governance Certification (not issued yet)

Health and Safety• Health and Safety Screener

**You don’t have to use their tools, you just have to be able to prove you complied.

12


© Wipfli LLP

New – First Year Conditions for All Five Year Awards

• These criteria apply to the first year of your five year grant, not every year

• Tri-annual reviews will now take place in year 3 of your 5 year grant.

13

© Wipfli LLP

2012 Program Instructions

Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-12-02 / 02/10/2012 / Non-Federal Share

• We understand that grantees are operating in challenging economic times.

• However, grantees should be aware that failure to meet non-Federal share requirements can result in serious financial consequences. An example of the impact of a disallowance of non-Federal share follows:

14

Funded Actual

Federal share: $800,000 Federal share expended $800,000

Required non-Federal share: 200,000 Allowable non-Federal share: 180,000

Total grant award: $1,000,000 Actual grant amount: $980,000

Recalculated maximum Federal share: $980,000 x 80% = $784,000 (80% of Actual grant amount)

Amount of disallowance: $800,000 - $784,000 = $16,000


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-12-02 / 02/10/2012 / Non-Federal Share, Match, In-Kind

• Given the potential impact of a disallowance, it is important that grantees carefully review the adequacy of their systems for documentation of contributions of non-Federal share. Federal source funds are not allowable as non-Federal share without specific statutory language allowing this use of Federal funds (45 CFR Sec. 74.23(a)(5) and Sec. 92.24(b)(1)). Grantees should re-examine the source of historic State funding to ensure that State funds have not been replaced with Federal source funds. Grantees must ensure that claims for donated and reduced-cost space in facilities involve an unrelated party and reflect the fair market rental value of the property at the time of donation as established by an independent appraiser and certified by a responsible official of the grantee. Grantees must ensure that claims of non-Federal share for use of facilities owned by a related party are limited to depreciation or use allowance. Grantees are reminded to carefully consider all elements of non-Federal share to ensure that they are adequately documented and meet the same standards of reasonable, allocable, and necessary for the accomplishment of the project objectives which apply to direct program expenditures.

15

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-12-02 / 02/10/2012 / Non-Federal Share, Match, In-Kind (cont.)

• The following circumstances are taken into account in determining whether a waiver will be granted. Grantees requesting waivers should provide sufficient detailed information in their waiver requests to allow careful consideration of the relevant circumstances:– the lack of resources available in the community that may prevent the Head

Start agency from providing all or a portion of the non-Federal contribution that may be required;

– the impact of the cost the Head Start agency may incur in initial years it carries out such program;

– the impact of an unanticipated increase in the cost the Head Start agency may incur to carry out such program;

– whether the Head Start agency is located in a community adversely affected by a major disaster; and

– the impact on the community that would result if the Head Start agency ceased to carry out such program.

16


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-13-01 / 03/01/2013 /Sequestration

• The Budget Control Act of 2011 required certain spending cuts that are anticipated to be approximately $85 billion. President Obama issued the sequestration order on March 1, 2013, which resulted in spending reductions of approximately 5% for the remainder of the federal fiscal year. OHS estimated that approximately 70,000 will lose access to Head Start.

• As a result ALL Head Start and Early HS grants will be reduced by approximately 5%. Proportional reductions across all activities are required by the HS Act.

• Agencies advised to begin planning how they will alter their programs to operate at the reduced levels.

– First priority is to maintain a high quality of service and to ensure health and safety.

– Critical to minimize disruptions to currently enrolled children in this program year.

– Expect enrollment reductions, as well as workforce reductions, particularly in the upcoming program year.

17

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-13-02 / 04/15/2013 /Hurricane Sandy Emergency Relief Funds

• This PI is intended to assist governing bodies and key management staff in determining the funding needed to ensure full restoration of facilities, program operations, and targeted support services impacted by Hurricane Sandy, referred to as Disaster Relief funds.

• Agencies in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and West Virginia may be eligible for emergency relief funds if their programs were directly impacted by Hurricane Sandy. HHS will prioritize funding programs that sustained significant damage from the Hurricane Sandy and serve a high proportion of families displaced as a result of the storm.

• May only apply for funding for costs not covered by insurance proceeds or other emergency funds. Must attest that funds requested will not be used for costs that have already been reimbursed. OHS will work closely with FEMA to ensure no duplication of federal funding occurs.

18


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-13-02 / 04/15/2013 /Hurricane Sandy Emergency Relief Funds (cont.)

• Areas to be funded:– Facilities– Materials, Supplies, and Equipment– Program Operations– Enhanced Mental Health and Social Services– Training and Technical Assistance– Award Information and Restrictions

• OHS will closely monitor all Disaster Relief grant awards. Reporting content and frequency Requirements will be established, and on-site visits may be required for certain funded activities. Quarterly financial and programmatic reporting will be required of all recipient grantees.

• Disaster Relief grant award amounts are not part of the recipient's base grant for the year of receipt or for subsequent years. Disaster Relief funds are not subject to the cost allocation requirements of the Head Start Act and applicable fiscal regulations.

• Disaster Relief funds must be expended within 24 months of the award date, unless a class waiver has been approved by OMB. Any funds not expended must be returned to HHS unless an individual waiver is submitted to OMB for review and approval. No Cost Extensions are prohibited unless a waiver has been granted by OMB. Additional guidance on the waiver process is forthcoming.

19

© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-13-02 / 04/15/2013 /Hurricane Sandy Emergency Relief Funds (cont.)Submission of Funding Applications

• All funding requests must be submitted on an SF-424 Funding Application to your Regional Office. Additional project or activity information may be required depending on the proposed use of funds. All activities and projects must include a timeline clearly indicating when significant project milestones or activities will be executed or occur and when the overall project or activity will be completed.

• Grantees engaging in facilities activities covered by 45 CFR Part 1309 and activities subject to environmental- and floodplain-related compliance requirements, will receive intensive support from OHS to support regulatory compliance. If you are requesting funds for major renovation, construction, or purchase of facilities, you must also submit a separate application fully compliant with the requirements under 45 CFR 1309.10 – 1309.11.

• OHS will work with grantees to identify facilities, the environment, and floodplain-related compliance requirements for proposed facilities projects.

20


© Wipfli LLP


Number / Date / TitleACF-PI-HS-13-03 / 04/26/2013 /Final FY 2013 Funding Level, SequestrationThe final fiscal year (FY) 2013 funding level for Head Start is $7,573,194,006. All Head Start, Early Head Start, American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start, and Migrant and Seasonal Head Start grants will be reduced by 5.27 percent. The new FY 2013 funding levels are available in the Head Start Enterprise System, directly on each grantee's homepage. These funding levels should be considered grantees' final funding levels until Congress takes action on a FY 2014 budget.

The Office of Head Start is committed to working with programs to ensure the provision of high quality services continues during this challenging time. We encourage programs to work closely with their Regional Office as they develop strategies and plans to move forward.

21

© Wipfli LLP

FY 2014 OHS Monitoring Protocol

As of date of creating these materials the new Protocol has not been issued.

22


© Wipfli LLP

Poverty Guideline Comparison Chart

23

2003 – 2013 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia

Size of Family Unit

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1 $8,980 $9,310 $9,570 $9,800 $10,210 $10,400 $10,830 $10,830 $10,890 $11,170 $11,490

2 12,120 12,490 12,830 13,200 13,690 14,000 14,570 14,570 14,710 15,130 15,510

3 15,260 15,670 16,090 16,600 17,170 17,600 18,310 18,310 18,530 19,090 19,530

4 18,400 18,850 19,350 20,000 20,650 21,200 22,050 22,050 22,350 23,050 23,550

5 21,540 22,030 22,610 23,400 24,130 24,800 25,790 25,790 26,170 27,010 27,570

6 24,680 25,210 25,870 26,800 27,610 28,400 29,530 29,530 29,990 30,970 31,590

7 27,820 28,390 29,130 30,200 31,090 32,000 33,270 33,270 33,810 34,930 35,610

8 30,960 31,570 32,390 33,600 34,570 35,600 37,010 37,010 37,630 38,890 39,630

For each additional Person, add

3,140 3,180 3,260 3,400 $3,480 3,600 3,740 3,740 3,820 3,960 4,020

© Wipfli LLP

Poverty Guidelines

Persons in Family Unit Poverty Guideline

1 $11,490

2 15,510

3 19,530

4 23,550

5 27,570

6 31,590

7 35,610

8 39,630

24

For each additional person add $4,020

2013 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia


© Wipfli LLP

Miscellaneous

• Effective for 2013 the new IRS mileage rate is 56.5 cents per mile

• Executive Level II compensation limit frozen at 2010 rate of 179,700.

• Per diem rates did not change for 2014, however some of the hotel allowance have changed.

25

© Wipfli LLP

Report to Congress on HS Monitoring – 2010

• The Head Start Act of 2007 Section 641A(f) requires a summary report be published at the end of each Federal fiscal year on the finding of monitoring reviews and outcomes of Quality Improvement Plans.

• There are three filed as reported on the OHS/ACF/ECKLC website, for the Federal Fiscal Years Ended 9/30/2008, 9/30/2009, and 9/30/2010.

• Findings corrected on site not included in prior years reports but are in 2009.

26


© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 Report• Began doing unannounced visits – to ensure agencies

were operating at “review ready” Approximately ten percent of all Triennial and First-Year reviews will be unannounced beginning in FY 2011.

• 80 grantees were selected to recompete as a result of monitoring (rest could be other reasons i.e. self reporting)

• 946 monitoring visits

– 476 Triennial– 9 First Year– 29 Other– 432 Follow up

27

© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 ReportOutcomes of FY 2010 Monitoring Reviews

• Monitoring reviews have three possible outcomes: compliant, having one or more noncompliances, or having one or more deficiencies. Grantees with one or more deficiencies also may have noncompliant findings.

• Of the 485 grantees that underwent either a Triennial or a First‐Year review in FY 2010, 19% were found to compliant, 69.7% were found to have one or more noncompliances and an additional 11.3% were found to have one or more deficiencies.

• Nearly 95% of all grantees found to have one more noncompliancesor one or more deficiencies in FY 2010 corrected all of their findings by the time of their first Follow-up review.

• grantees receiving First-Year reviews have more findings than grantees receiving Triennial reviews,

• larger grantees had more findings than smaller grantees, and • grantees that provide only Head Start services had more findings

than grantees that provide only Early Head Start services or both Head Start and Early Head Start services.

28


© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 ReportOutcomes of FY 2010 Monitoring Reviews

• Head Start program CLASS scores compared favorably to scores calculated from preschool programs over 11 states by NCEDL (National Center for Early Development and Learning) studies.

• Head Start programs scored higher overall in all domains—Emotional Support, Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support.

• However, Head Start CLASS scores and NCEDL scores may not be fully comparable due to differences in populations, sample size, and geographic diversity.

29

© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 ReportNumber and Types of Findings Identified in FY 2010

• 1,967 findings were identified on 485 First Year and Triennial monitoring reviews in FY 2010, similar to FY 2009.

• 393 (81%) had one or more findings • 93.5% (1840) were areas of noncompliance; • 6.5% were deficiencies (127). • Of the 393,

– 338 grantees had one or more noncompliances identified, excluding deficiencies. – 55 grantees had one or more deficiencies identified. – 34.1% had one to two findings and 36.1% had three to five findings. 10.4% had 11 or more

findings.

• Grantees with one or more areas of noncompliance, excluding deficiencies, averaged 4.0 findings per grantee; this is lower than the average in FY 2009 of 4.7 findings per grantee.

• Grantees with one or more deficiency averaged 10.9 findings (noncompliances and deficiencies), 6.9 more than grantees with one or more noncompliances.

• This is higher than FY 2009, when grantees with one or more deficiency averaged 9.5 total findings per review.

30


© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 Report

Most Common Findings Identified in FY 2010

Highest• Program Design and Management (67.9%) • Fiscal Management (50.6%) • Safe Environments (44.0%)• Lowest• Disabilities Services (6.1% of grantees) • Mental Health Services (5.3% of grantees)• Family and Community Services (5.1% of grantees) • (36.4%) of the 55 grantees found to have one or more deficiencies

were cited for at least one deficiency in health and safety. • (29.1%) of these grantees were cited for at least one “failure to

perform substantially” deficiency, a higher percentage than in FY 2009 (22.7%)

31

© Wipfli LLP


Statics from the 2010 ReportMost Common Findings Identified in FY 2010 The most frequently cited issue in FY 2010 was failure to ensure “Physical Arrangements Consistent with the Health, Safety and Developmental Needs of Children”. Over one-quarter (109 of 393 grantees, 27.7%) of all grantees having noncompliant or deficient findings were cited for this issue. Other issues frequently cited for grantees on included

• Annual Report to the Public• Maintenance, Repair, Safety, and Security of all Facilities,

Materials, and Equipment• Reporting to the Governing Body and Policy Council• Ongoing Monitoring of Grantee Operations and Delegates

32


© Wipfli LLP


33

© Wipfli LLP


34


© Wipfli LLP


35

© Wipfli LLP


36


© Wipfli LLP


37

© Wipfli LLP


38


© Wipfli LLP


39

© Wipfli LLP

Reform Continues

• On December of 2012, another list of agencies required to compete was published. This seems like it will be the timing every year. The competition for these grants posted to www.grants.gov on July 23 and 24th. There are 123 grants available.

• On April 3, 2013, OHS posted the list of agencies that they were beginning negotiations with, from the initial grants that were open for competition. 160 grantees were announced as potential winners of the grants.

• Of the 125 agencies, 80 received their award back, 25 were replaced, 14 will be split between new and existing agencies. The remaining 6 had no qualified applications and HS services will continue while a new competition begins in the spring to find a new provider.

40


© Wipfli LLP

Reform Continues

• Majority of grants were won either by the current grantee or delegate agencies, there were not very many new providers.

• Agencies that had health and safety issues are subject to annual unannounced monitoring visits to ensure they are living up to the standards they laid out in their applications. Failure to do so or not complying with other standards could result in termination of their grant.

• Final grantees were announced in July after the negotiations, some of the initial agencies ultimately did not get the final award.

41

© Wipfli LLP

1307 – Policies and Procedures for Designation Renewal of HS and EHS Grantees

Responses To Comments

1. Concerns over Competition– 2007 Reauthorization of the HS Act required the establishment of 5

year grants and a Designation Renewal System where grantees would compete for renewed funding if not providing high quality services.

– Important to note (per them) competing is not the same as taking a grant away or defunding a grantee, but agencies must compete to demonstrate that it is the most capable entity to provide services.

2. Retroactive Data– The Act stated that designation renewal could not apply for 18

months, the Act was issued 12-12-07, therefore the date of 6-12-09 for the retroactive date.

– This date applies to 5 of 7 of the triggers (CLASS and School Readiness are not retroactive).

– The Licensing trigger applies to 1306.30(c) and the CACFP applies to 1304.23(b)(i).

42


© Wipfli LLP


2. Retroactive Data (cont.)– Audit relates to 1301.12

– The one deficiency relates to 641A(e) and 1304.60 and deficiency was defined in 637 and revised in 641A, therefore agencies should have seen its significance.

– Suspension and debarment relate to 637(2) and 1303.10(a) and A-110 “Federal agencies shall not award assistance to applicants that are debarred or suspended…”

– Felt that the Act gave warning about the 6-12-09 date and the importance.

3. Designation Renewal Final Decision– Congress did not require in the Act that agencies be given the

opportunity to appeal.

– As long as not terminated in the last 5 years encouraged to compete.

– Provides a mechanism for grantees to demonstrate its capacity to provide a high quality program.

43

© Wipfli LLP


4. Large Grantees and Delegate Agencies– 1304.51(i)(2) requires grantees to establish and

implement procedures for the on-going monitoring of their programs regardless of size or structure.

– A deficiency is defined to be “systemic or substantial material failure”, therefore, differences in the size of grantees should come into consideration when determining deficiencies.

5. Migrant and Seasonal HS Programs– No exclusions for Migrant or Seasonal programs.

44


© Wipfli LLP


6. Alternatives to the Proposed DRS• Alternatives suggested didn’t seem fair, consistent and reliable.

• The 25% was removed (however, they now anticipate 1/3 of all agencies will have to recompete).

• The CLASS Pre-K condition replaced it.

• There is an annual report of all deficiencies

– www.eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/

• Considers information for triennial reviews, follow up reviews and other reviews but NOT first year reviews (think new EHS ARRA grantees).

• School Readiness goals are effective with the implementation date of the rule (12-9-11).

• Class rule is implemented in the second year of the transition period using data from observations conducted after the effective date of the rule.

45

© Wipfli LLP


• CLASS is not used for EHS or home-based programs

• It is the revocation of a license, not suspension

• Anything less than an Unqualified Audit Opinion on the Head Start Program will be considered a “red flag” and will trigger additional fiscal oversight i.e. ongoing monitoring and additional targeted review including unannounced on-site, make a determination as to whether the issue identified raises to the level a deficiency as defined in the Act .

• If a fiscal issue identified does lead to a deficiency in HS monitoring that “deficiency finding” would lead to recompetition.

• Going concern still an automatic

• Non compliance findings that have been corrected in the stated time period will not be considered as they would not be considered a deficiency, however uncorrected noncompliance that become deficiency would trigger DRS.

• An agency that has had a denial of refunding is excluded from competing for the next 5 years.

46


© Wipfli LLP


• A determination that a grantee will not be awarded funding noncompetitively is not a denial of refunding and does not limit applying for funding.

• DRS reviews under Part 1307 consist of an ACF review of data to determine if one or more of the conditions under 1307.3 have been met by the agency.

47

© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.1 Purpose and Scope – terminated either voluntarily or involuntarily not subject to 1307 but is subject to 1302.

• 1307.2 Definitions– Transition Period – means the three year time period

after December 9, 2011, on the Designation Renewal System during which ACF will convert all of the current continuous Head Start and Early Head Start grants into five-year grants after reviewing each grantee to determine if it meets any of the conditions under section 1307.3 that require recompetition or if the grantee will receive its first five-year grant noncompetitively

48


© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.3 Basis for determining whether a HS agency will be subject to an open competition.

a) One or more deficiencies in a review, either triennial, unannounced, or follow up.

b) Agency determined not to have1. After 12-9-2011 established program goals for improving school

readiness of children in its program in accordance with the Act

2. After 12-9-2011, taken steps to achieve the school readiness goals described

c) An agency has been determined during its review 1. After 12-9-2011 to have an average score across all classrooms

observed below the following minimum thresholds on any of the three CLASS Pre-K domains from the most recent CLASS: Pre-K observation

i. Emotional Support the minimum is 4ii. Classroom Organization the minimum is 3iii. Instruction Support the minimum is 2

49

© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.3 Basis for determining whether a HS agency will be subject to an open competition.c) An agency has been determined during its review (cont.)

2. After 12-9-2011 to have an average score across all classrooms observed that is in the lowest 10 percent on any of the three CLASS: Pre-K domains from the most recent CLASS: Pre-K observation among those currently be reviewed unless the average score across all classrooms observed for that CLASS: Pre-K domain is equal to or above the standard of excellence that demonstrates that the classroom interactions are above an exception level of quality. For all three domains the “standard of excellence” is 6.

d) License revoked by federal or state agency and the revocation has not been overturned or withdrawn before a competition for funding for the next 5 year period is announced.

e) An agency has been suspended from the HS or EHS program and the suspension has not been overturned or withdrawn. Grants suspended by DHHS.

50


© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.3 Basis for determining whether a HS agency will be subject to an open competition. (cont.)f) An agency has been debarred from receiving federal or state funds from a

Federal or State department or the agency has been disqualified from the CACFP program.

g) An agency has been determined within the 12 months preceding the review to be at risk of failing to continue functioning as a going concern.

• 1307.4 Grantee reporting requirementsa. Agencies must report in writing to the responsible HHS official within 30

working days of 12-9-2011 if the agency has had a revocation of a license during the period between 6-12-2009 and 12-9-2011. (There is not a database of information on this so agencies must self-report).

b. Agencies must report in writing to the responsible HHS official within 10 working days of occurrence of any of the following events following 12-9-20111. Revocation of a license 2. Agency has filed for bankruptcy or agreed to reorganization as a part of a bankruptcy

plan3. Agency has been debarred from receiving funds by a Federal or State Agency or

disqualified from the CACFP Program4. Agency has received an audit, audit review, investigation or inspection report

determining that the agency is at risk for ceasing to be a going concern.

51

© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.5 Requirements to be considered for designation for a 5 year period when the existing grantee in a community is determined not be delivering a high quality and comprehensive Head Start program and is not automatically renewed.– Agency must submit an application that demonstrates that it is the

most qualified entity to deliver a high-quality program.

– Application must address the criteria for selection as listed in 641(d)(2)

– An agency that has had its grant terminated for cause in the preceding 5 years is excluded from competing for the next 5 years.

– An agency that has had a denial of refunding in the preceding 5 years is also excluded from competing• Denial of Refunding means the refusal of a funding agency to fund an

application for a continuation of a Head Start program for a subsequent program year when the decision is based on a determination that the grantee has improperly conducted its program, or is incapable of doing so properly in the future, or otherwise is in violation of applicable law, regulations, or other policies. 52


© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.6 Tribal government consultation under the DRS for when an Indian HS grant is considered for competition.a. In the case of an Indian HS or EHS agency determined not to

be delivering a high quality program the responsible HHS official and Tribal government will establish a plan to improve the quality1. The plan will be established and implemented within 6 months after the

determination.2. Not more than 6 months after implementation the responsible HHS official

will reevaluate the performance.3. If the agency is still not delivering a high quality program the responsible

HHS official will conduct an open competition to select a grantee.

b. A non-Indian HS or EHS agency will not be eligible for grant unless there is no Indian HS or EHS agency available for designation.

c. A non-Indian HS or EHS agency may receive a grant to carry out an Indian HS program only until an Indian HS agency becomes available and is designated. 53

© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.7 Designation request, review and notification process.a. Grantees must apply to be considered for Designation Renewal

1. For the transition period, each HS and EHS wishing to have their designation renewed without competition shall request that status from ACF within 6 months of 12-9-11.

2. After the transition period, agencies wishing to be considered to have their designation renewed for another 5 year period without competition shall request that status from ACF at least 12 months before the end of their 5 year grant period or by such time required by the Secretary.

b. ACF will review the data to determine if any conditions under 1307.3 were met by the agency’s program:1. During the 1st year of the transition period ACF considers a,d,e,f and g

since 6-12-09.2. During the remainder of the transition period, ACF reviews data from

agencies still under grants with indefinite project periods for conditions a,d,e,f, and g since 6-12-09 and b and c since 12-9-2011.

3. Following the transition period ACF will review data on agencies in the 4th year of the grant to determine if any of the 1307.3 conditions are present.

54


© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.7 Designation request, review and notification process. (cont.)c. ACF will give notice to grantees on DRS status

1. During the 1st year by certified mail, stating that the agency will be required to compete for funding for an additional 5 year; will identify the conditions, and summarize the basis for the finding.

All grantees that do not meet any of the conditions will remain under the indefinite project periods until the time as described in 1307.7(b)(2).

2. During the remainder of the transition period, ACF will give written notice to all grantees still under indefinite periods and with one of the conditions stating:i. The Agency will be required to recompete because of a condition

met.ii. That the agency has been determined on a preliminary basis to be

eligible for renewed funding for 5 years without competition because no conditions were found during the relevant time period. If prior to the award ACF determines one of the conditions were found, this determination will change and the grantee will receive notification that it will be required to recompete.

55

© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.7 Designation request, review and notification process.c. ACF will give notice to grantees on DRS status

(cont.)

3. Following the transition period, ACF shall give written notice to all grantees at least 12 months before the expiration date of the agencies grant stating:

i. That the agency will need to recompete because one or more of the conditions have been found.

ii. That the agency has been preliminarily eligible to receive renewed funding, again if prior to the award one of the conditions are met the agency will have to recompete.

56


© Wipfli LLP


• 1307.8 Use of CLASS: Pre-K Instrument in DRS– Except when all children are served in a single

classroom, ACF will conduct observations on multiple classrooms based on a random sample of all classes and rate the conduct of the classes observed using the CLASS Pre-K instrument.

– Where all children are served in one class, that class will be observed and rated using the instrument.

– ACF will report to the grantee the domain scores for the classes observed.

– ACF will average the scores in each domain for the classes observed to determine the agency’s score in each domain.

57

© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRM

NPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance

• (e) Income verification– child's parent, guardian or other person(s) seeking services for

the child must submit information concerning the family's income

– examination of documents – income compared to the poverty guidelines– program staff must document low-income family– if no documentation regarding the income eligibility (or when it

is either more efficient or reliable) may seek information from third parties who have first-hand knowledge and document the names, titles, and relationship to the applicant

– may seek third party information in cases where documents are not submitted to prove a claim that a pregnant woman or family has no income

– third party verification58


© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRMNPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance (cont.)

• (f) Verification of categorical eligibility. (1) child's parent, guardian, or other person(s) seeking services for the

child must submit information concerning family's categorical eligibility• (i) copy of official documents demonstrating eligibility, or in the

absence of child care, would potentially be eligible for public assistance

• (ii) copy of court order or legal or government-issued document or statement of a government child welfare official demonstrating child is in foster care or

• (iii) copy of any other source document that establishes categorical eligibility

(2) substitute a written statement of a program staff member certifying that the staff member has made reasonable efforts to confirm a child is homeless

(3) third party verification when no documentation regarding categorical eligibility (or when it is more efficient or reliable) may seek information from third parties who have first-hand knowledge

59

© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRM

NPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance (cont.)

• (g) Records and Certification-must keep an eligibility determination record for each participant, to include:

(1) copies of all documents submitted and any staff member's notes recording any other information received from any source

(2) copy of the statements and documents required under income and categorical eligibility verification

(3) signed and dated statement by the person seeking services certifying that the documents and information provided are accurate to the best of the person's knowledge

(4) documentation establishing that a staff member has sought to verify the accuracy of the information provided to the agency

(5) a record of the eligibility criterion under which the pregnant woman or child was determined eligible 60


© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRM

NPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance

• (g) Records and Certification-must keep an eligibility determination record for each participant, to include: (cont.)

(6) signed and dated statement by the program staff person who made the eligibility determination certifying that the information is accurate to the best of the person's knowledge, and based on that information, the person has determined the pregnant woman or child to be eligible for services.

(7) retention and access practices for the eligibility determination record consistent with section 647 of the Head Start Act and 45 CFR 74.53 or 45 CFR 92.42.

61

© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRM

NPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance (cont.)

• (h) Establishment of agency policies regarding violation of eligibility determination regulations, policies and procedures – must establish policies and procedures describing the actions to be taken against staff who commit intentional violations of agency eligibility determination regulations, policies and procedures, including enrolling pregnant women and children who staff have not been documented as eligible to participate in the program.

62


© Wipfli LLP

Eligibility NPRMNPRM 45 CFR 1305 Eligibility, Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment and Attendance (cont.)

• (i) Training:– must train all governing body, policy council, management and

those staff members who have the responsibility to make participant eligibility determinations within 30 days following the effective date of this rule, and within 30 days of hiring or beginning of tenure of new governing body, policy council, management and those staff members who have the responsibility to make eligibility determinations

– must develop policies regarding how often training will be provided after the initial training

– shall maintain ongoing records of training– training must include:

• explanation of the legal consequences for individuals and agencies that commit fraud

• information on methods and strategies for complete and accurate eligibility determinations

• methods and strategies must address treating families with dignity and respect and give due regard for possible issues of domestic violence, stigma, and privacy 63

© Wipfli LLP

OMB Proposed Changes – “Super Circular”

• Convergence of 8 different OMB circulars

• Clarification of and addition to many definitions

• Significant changes to single audit requirements:– Increased single audit threshold from $500,000 to $750,000– Decreased number of applicable compliance requirements

from 14 to 7– Change in Type A major program threshold from $300,000 to

$500,000– Increase in Type B major program threshold from $100,000 to

a flat 25% of the Type A threshold– Decrease in required % of federal expenditures to be tested

from 25% (low-risk auditee) and 50% (not low risk auditee) to 20% (low risk auditee) and 40% (low risk auditee)

– Many other proposed changes in the Administration Regulations and Cost Principles.

•64


© Wipfli LLP

Materials/Disclaimer

• Head Start/Early Head Start Update presentation*

• Additional Material– Consideration for Designation

– School of Readiness Action Steps

• Technical Information

* Please note that these materials are incomplete without the accompanying oral comments by Denes L. Tobie of Wipfli LLP. These materials are informational and educational in nature and represent the

speaker’s own views.

65

© Wipfli LLP

Thank You!

Thank you for your participation. We hope today’s webinar met your expectations.

If you would like to receive CPE credit, you must complete the CPE Request Form.

Following the webinar, you will receive a survey via e-mail.

We appreciate your time completing and returning the survey.

For further assistance, please contact us at 888.876.4992 or e-mail us at [email protected].

66

head start/early head start update · engagement, ohs is introducing a new technical assistance...

Documents