Veronica Parker: [inaudible] Oh. Thank--

Neil Kelly: Thanks, Veronica.

Veronica Parker: You're welcome.

Neil Kelly: All right. So Veronica, we're going to cover the-- are we going to go straight to the governance live demo, or what's the next slide?

Veronica Parker: No, we're actually going to go into NOVA. Oh, excuse me.

Neil Kelly: OK.

Veronica Parker: You can cover this slide, and then we're going to go into NOVA, as you're going to each of the programs.

Neil Kelly: So just a reminder, with the governance document, as you know, for those of you who were around back in 2015-16 program year, we required each consortia to submit a governance document. There were about, I don't know, 15 or 16 questions you had to answer, and it was signed by all the members. It was before we had electronic signature, so you had to upload it to NOVA in the document box. And so that was all based on-- a lot of it was based on the Ed Code 84905, which covers decision making, membership, public meetings, public input, those kind of things.

And so starting this year, those governance questions will remain the same. We added a couple extra ones on carryover and bylaws, but you'll have to certify those questions every year. And so not to say that you'll have to change it every year, because your governance might stay the same, but you do have to certify-- have each member certify it, and approve it, and submit it through NOVA to the state as your governance structure, so we know how things are working in your consortia, and then if there are any changes, you would note that in the governance document.

And I don't know if anybody had any questions, but we're going to move along.

OK, so Veronica, did you just want to show people how-- just walk them through how you get to the governance document?

Veronica Parker: Yes, I can. So you'll log in using your email address and password for NOVA. I'm in the sandbox version, just to protect people's data, but you would log in to the regular NOVA site and enter your email and password. Then you will click on "Programs", CA-- oops. "Programs", "CAP", then "Consortia and Members", and my system is taking a little while to think.

OK, and then you will search for your consortium, or you can select the consortium names. I'm just going to go with Allan Hancock since they are first on our list. You would scroll down on your main consortium page, and the CFAD section is the third section on this particular page. So you'll click on this link here, and the C file will appear. So we'll go through these other pieces in a little while. Right now, we'll cover the governance section. So you just click on this section here, and we'll go over here.

Neil Kelly: All right. Thank you, Veronica. So I'm just going to quickly go through these questions, in order to give us time for if anybody has any follow up questions, or to get to the other topics and the three year plan, of course. So the first question is, have all the members that wanted to join-- I won't read them verbatim-- have been allowed to join the consortium as a member?

So for some reason, you had a member that wanted to join, and they weren't allowed to. We just want to make sure, if that was "no", then you should respond what happened-- what was the instance. I don't think that's likely. I mean, there could be-- I know we have charter schools that sometimes want to join, so that's a little sketchy as far as who's affiliated with the charter, what district is overseeing that charter. So there could be a few instances out there that you might answer "no", but for the most part, I think everyone would answer "yes" on this one.

So the next question-- have all members committed to reporting any funds available to that member for the purpose of education services? So this is part of that Program Area Report, and this is part of Ed Code where you're supposed to report-- I think that we have like five or six fund sources we list in the Ed Code, that you're supposed to share and report out to your fellow members. And so we do that through the Program Area Report. The draft is due September 1st. The final is due December 1st.

And so hopefully, all your members are sharing that, you're filling out the program area report correctly, and you would say "yes". If there were some problems, you would say "no". OK, the next question would be, how-- and then if it was "no", you would have to explain why. Thanks, Veronica.

And then the next question, question 3-- how will the available funds be reported and evaluated? Now, that's a question on the three year plan under the fund evaluation. If you didn't notice, this is also something-- a process that you go through during the CFAD, when you make allocation decisions, and you also have your assurances in the CFAD that talk about funds being reported and evaluated. So this connects a lot of loose ends that are in code and in our processes. And so you would explain that.

And the next question, question 4-- how do you assure that the member is represented by an official designated by the governing board of the member? So we had problems with this in the beginning, where people would have to go back to their district-- "oh, I'm not the decision maker".

And so in Ed Code, it states the district has to appoint someone to make that decision at the consortia meeting, and all meetings are-- all decisions at these meetings are final, meaning that doesn't have to go back to the district's governing board-- that this official representative designated by the governing board of the district makes those decisions, and so that decision is final.

And so we wanted to make sure, because this was an issue in the past-- how are you making sure you have that official designee? Sometimes people leave, and then you don't have a designee. So how are you filling that in time to have that representation? What's the process? So things like that would be covered in question number 4.

And then on to number 5, how will you assure that each member of the consortium participates in any decision-- if you could just scroll down for a second, I want to read-- made by the consortium? So sometimes in the past, we had members that weren't showing up, and so part of the assurances-- and the Ed Code-- is that that official representative has to participate in the decision making. And so if they're not showing up to meetings, then that could be grounds for an ineffective member and a reduction of funds. There might also be additional bylaws that you use to make sure members are participating.

And then-- pause a second. I think I saw a question. Is that-- let's see. OK, we had a few questions. For question 1, is the time period within the past year or any year past? Oh, that would be, I think, in the past year, because we're doing this annually. So this would be in the past year. So this is kind of like an annual update. So we don't want to go back, like, six years if you had something that happened in 2017 or something. We just want to revisit the past year, because this is an annual update.

And then Janae says, is this representation the voting member of the consortium? Yeah, the official designated member is the voting member, or however you make your decisions. If that's a voting-- and we'll get into that in the next question-- but that would be that official representative.

OK, let's go on to the question 6. This is a good one. What will be the relative voting power of each member? So I think LA Consortia did a nice little study around the state to determine how that varies. And I think for the most part, people have one member, one vote. Then, there are a few that have-- they give various votes to different districts with multiple votes, and then there are some other models-- not a lot, but for the most part, it's one member, one vote. And so we would look to-- if you did put "other", what is that voting structure or voting power of each member? You would explain that in the text box.

OK, next question. OK, how will decisions be approved? So that's how your decision making process is, and we gave a few choices there. "Other", of course, if it didn't meet one of the choices listed, you would put that in the box. OK, and then how did you arrive at the decision making model? So just explaining how you determine-- whether it was consensus or majority, or-- how did you go about and make that decision and arrive at that process-- or arrive at that decision?

And then the ninth question-- how will proposed decisions be considered in open, properly noticed public meeting? So that pertains to the Ed Code about public meetings, and so you would list your process for public meetings, and noticing, and publicizing.

And then the follow up question to that is number 10. How you provide the public with adequate notice? So these are all things that districts go through with their public meetings, so this shouldn't be any-- and no surprises here, but it is listed in the Ed Code for the Adult Education Program and the funding, and this is part of your assurances. When you sign the CFAD, you're certifying that you're doing all this. And so this gives you a chance to describe how you're meeting those assurances and meeting ED Code.

And then 11th question is, how you're going to distribute comments made by the public? And then the 12th one-- let's see. I got a pop up box here. I'll just wait. If you scroll up just a little bit-- describe the process-- oop, the other way. Sorry.

Describe the process by which consortium will solicit and consider comments and input regarding decisions from other entities-- and this was added on Ed Code. This originally wasn't there in the original governance document, and then I think the legislature added the part that's not bolded. But it listed a whole variety of education service providers that should be involved in that public comment, and so that is part of question 12.

And then going on to 13-- how will you determine approval of the distribution schedule? And so that is part of that CFAD allocation process. So how did you come to an agreement on-- although we have Ed Code that says you get no less than the prior year, but if there are some decisions made about a consortia pot, or if a member says, I don't want to do this anymore, or I can't, and you have to reallocate funds, or you have some bylaw that allows to reallocate carryover. This would-- you could put that process in here. How did you determine to come up with the approval of the distribution schedule? And you could put that in number 13.

And then going on to 14-- has the consortia and this is the fiscal agent question. So you would answer whether you have a fiscal agent, or whether you have a direct funded, and you would just choose one or the other.

And then 15 is kind of a new one we added, because we did have members leaving and joining. So you would put your process in there-- of how do you bring on new members? How do members leave? What's that process? I don't think we've had anybody dismiss a member, but that could definitely be a process as well, with the ineffective member-- if they're not following the assurances, and things like that.

And then 16 is related to the carryover. How does the consortia monitor and administer carryover funds? And then 17 would be any bylaws around the governance for that carryover situation. And so you might have bylaws in addition to the state Ed Code and the state guidance, and I think we do have several consortia that have that.

So let's go on to the next question, and this is a big one we've added. How does your consortia define effectiveness? So you might have kind of discussed this already, so we'd like to know-- how are you determining effectiveness? Is it just following the assurances that you certify, or is there something else? Are you looking at your data? Is there other factors that you use to determine that?

And then the number 19 is what bylaws does a consortia have addressing member effectiveness? So you might have put that into a bylaw, or some kind of MOU or governance document, and we'd like to know what that looks like, or what formal language that you have that addresses member effectiveness. You might not have anything, but if you do we'd like to know about it.

And then 20 is, does the consortia have a formal document detailing its work beyond the questionnaire? And that would be whether you have some kind of document, or bylaws, or MOU that you have your members sign, we'd like to know if you have that formal document beyond what the state provides as far as guidance. And so that-- I think, that's the last one, right, Veronica?

Veronica Parker: Yes, it is.

Neil Kelly: OK, so we went through there pretty quick. I'll just see if-- what was the-- OK, so we have a few questions. So Eric, that-- Veronica, Eric's question is not pertaining to the governance questions, right? That's a separate issue, right?

Veronica Parker: No, it is. So his consortium completed the CFAD, and it sounds like some members approve, some members have not as of yet. So I need to look at their CFAD, in particular, to see if they are able to enter in their data and go through the submission process again, or does the programmers have to open up their CFAD so that they're able to complete the governance section, and then go through the submission process. Once --

Neil Kelly: Oh, I see. So--

Veronica Parker: There's another consortium that's in the same boat, too.

Neil Kelly: So Eric, they went ahead and did their CFAD before we had the governance questions posted. Is that what--

Veronica Parker: Yes.

Neil Kelly: OK. All right.

Eric: We jumped the gun, Neil. Sorry.

Neil Kelly: That's OK, Did you have any problems?

Eric: No, I mean, we were just in the process. We saw it was live, so we met, and we agreed to the distribution, and we plugged in our numbers. We should have held off, and I purposely didn't approve mine until after this meeting, and now I realize I should have just had us all wait, so my apologies.

Neil Kelly: Well-- yeah, I think-- well, Veronica, if Eric hasn't approved the certification of the CFED, then it might be less of a problem if he hasn't certified, right?

Eric: No, our--

Veronica Parker: Well--

Eric: Our financial person-- she submitted, so I do believe it's at the member level now.

Neil Kelly: OK.

Veronica Parker: Yeah, some members have approved it.

Neil Kelly: So all we need is, maybe, someone to reject it. I don't know. Veronica will figure it out with the programmers.

Veronica Parker: Mm-hmm.

Neil Kelly: I don't think it's an impossible situation. OK, so Michelle had a question. If our bylaws have answers to these questions, can we refer to that document, or do we need to paste relevant sections in NOVA? So Michelle, what I would do is just paste relevant sections, and then on the questions that ask if you have additional bylaws, you could just refer to that, if it's a lengthy document.

We don't want the whole-- all the bylaws cut and pasted there, but you could reference-- saying that we have an additional document of bylaws that are available for anybody to look at. And if you want to highlight some of the things that might be interesting for us to look at, you could do that in those text boxes. But by all means, you don't have to list every single one or the whole document.

OK, and Dana has something similar. So just-- let me see if I answered Dana and Michelle's question. Did I, Michelle or Dana? Yes, OK, and hopefully Michelle. So David has-- what questionnaire is being referenced in question 20? And we see that again-- if you could scroll up, Veronica? Oh, so the governance document that we just went through, we call it a questionnaire, so that would be the document we're referring to, David. So that--

David: Got it. So, this itself.

Neil Kelly: Yeah, yeah. Sorry for the confusion. OK. Well, we thought that was going to take a lot of time, but--

Shannon: Neil, can I clarify Michele and Dana's question?

Neil Kelly: Sure.

Shannon: So we have our bylaws, and so if one of these questions-- I'm just going to pick out one. One of the questions is carryover. I can just copy and paste our carryover section of our bylaws. Is that what you're saying?

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

Shannon: OK.

Neil Kelly: So how does your consortia monitor and administer carryover funds? You could say, our consortia has developed the following bylaws around carryover, and you just cut and pasted it.

Shannon: Perfect. Thank you.

Neil Kelly: All right. OK. Well, we can always come back to this later, if you think of something. But I'll hand it back to Veronica, and we'll move on to the next agenda item. Thank you.

Veronica Parker: All right, so we'll go back to the PowerPoint, and Mayra will be covering the CFAD process, including the preliminary allocations. Mayra?

Mayra Diaz: Yes, thank you, Veronica and Neil. So I'm just going to touch on a little bit on the CFAD, and explain what that is, as you're working on that in conjunction with this governance certification. So the Consortium Fiscal Administration Declaration is based on the CAEP preliminary allocations that is released at the end of February each year, and is derived from the Governor's Budget.

The CFAD captures members' allocations for each consortium, as well as the consortium's chosen disbursement method. This CFAD consists of five main components, which is the fiscal declaration, agencies and the certifiers, member allocations, preview-- provides preview prior to submission. And the CFAD is a one time process that is due once a year on May 2nd, so I'm sure that is on the calendar. Next slide, please.

And I also just want to touch on briefly on the governor's proposed budget for '22-23 The fiscal year '22-23 budget will provide the California Adult Education Program with a COLA increase of 5.33%, of about $29.9 million, along with a proposed one-time $130 million investment to support health-care focused vocational pathways for English language learners. So I'm sure more information and details to come with that.

Amounts are subject to change based on the May revise. If we look at the numbers for '21-22, the CAEP allocation was $566 million. The new proposed for '22-23 is up to $596.3 million, a change of about $29.9 million. Next slide, please.

And as a reminder, CAEP funds are restricted funds. They were issued under AB104 legislation, and are in Article 9 in the Adult Education Program of the Education Code. CAEP funds are apportionment. They are not a grant, and at this time, are not subject to flexibility. CAEP funds are restricted to adults 18 years and older, and can only be used within the seven CAEP-approved program areas. They must have-- CAEP funds must have an approved regional consortium plan specific to K through 12 adult education and community college non-credit programs. Next slide, please.

And as a reminder, the CFAD and the governance documents for 2022 are connected to the three year plan. The CFAD and the governance documents are to be submitted and approved in NOVA by all consortium members by May 2nd, 2022, and the CFAD must be certified in order to submit and approve the three year plan by June 20, 2022, which we'll touch on that in this presentation. Next slide.

And I think this is my last slide. So '22-23 allocation process-- in February, the release of CAEP preliminary allocations was done for the '22-23. During this time-- March and April-- public meetings are taking place to decide allocations, or should be taking place to decide these allocations if not already done. May 2nd, the CFAD is going to be due in NOVA with the governance certification, which is what Neil walked us through.

In May, we are awaiting the Governor's May revise. And in June 2020, the final three year plans will be due. By July 1, the state budget is signed by the Governor, and in August the release of CAEP funds per the approved disbursement schedule. So it's a busy time of the year, as we've been mentioning. The CFAD, May 2nd, and the governance certification-- the other big item that the field is currently busy working on is that three year plan, and we'll be touching a little bit further on that in this presentation. Thank you, Next slide.

Veronica Parker: OK, so I will go back to NOVA so that we can cover the other sections of the three year plan-- excuse me, the CFAD process. So I'm going to go back to NOVA now, and I'm going to go back to the Fiscal Declaration and start there. That is the first section of the workflow for the CFAD, and so here is where consortia and members have decided upon their disbursement method for the '22-23 program year.

So for this consortium, again, I'm in the sandbox, and I'm working with the Allan Hancock College Consortium. And so currently, they are direct funded. However, the CFAP process, as you all may know, is the one opportunity that the consortium has to change their funding-- their disbursement method. So they are direct funded this year, and they could, in theory, change to a fiscal agent for the 2022-23 program year.

So they-- we're going to say here that they will continue to be direct funded, and so there's a message here. "You kept your consortium's disbursement method of Direct Funded." If this was not intentional, you have the opportunity to click here and go back to undo, because remember, this is the only time throughout the year that you're able to change your disbursement method.

And so here, the consortium will provide a narrative justifying how the plan allocations are consistent with their annual adult education plan, which is based on the three year plan. And so here, they will type in their narrative, which is a summary justifying how the allocations are aligned, and the character limit is 3,500. So 3,500 characters, including spaces, et cetera. And so since they do not have any changes, they would check this box here for "No Changes".

But if there were changes-- so let's say, they went from a direct funded consortium to a fiscal agent consortium, then they would explain here. So they would use the box below to explain the changes, and so they will provide a description of what changed and why. So for example, they would mention that they changed from direct funded to fiscal agent, and then they will provide some justification as to why they changed that disbursement method.

And here is just an example. So changes could include change in fiscal structure, change in fiscal agent-- as I just mentioned as the examplet-- change in funding amounts to each member. Those are just some examples that you have at your disposal. But again, it's whatever is real-- whatever is true for the consortium, and this section has 3,500 character limits as well. So once you have finished this section, you would click "Next" here.

And here are where your member agencies and certifiers are listed. So this consortium has two agencies-- so they have the Allan Hancock Joint Community College District, and then they also have the Lompoc Unified School District. Now here, you can add a certifier, so if there is another member representative for this particular agency, you can add the certifier here. And then here is the one time throughout the program year where you are able to designate a particular agency as "non-allocated, voting member only."

Now, this designation means that the consortium will not be allocating any funds for this particular program year to this agency. However, this agency-- because this agency is a part of the consortium-- they still will be required to approve certain CAP deliverables. So for example, they would have to sign off on the CFAD. They would have to approve the annual plan. This agency would have to approve the three year plan, and the agency would have to-- it's optional for them to submit the Program Area Report.

This particular agency would not submit a budget or work plan, as well as any of the four fiscal reports, because they do not receive any allocations. And that's only for the 2022-23 program year where that would be an option for this particular agency, if they become non-allocated, voting member only. So again, that's the one time that an agency can switch designations-- or if you're adding a new agency, but they are not currently funded, then they would be non allocated, voting member only.

So I'm going to scroll down to the bottom of the page. This is also an opportunity to add a member agency, so you are able to add any new member agencies that come on board to the consortium here. So let's say nothing changed here, so we're going to go next. Oh, before I move on-- if a member agency is no longer a part of the consortium, and everything is closed out so they no longer have any funds available to them that they are reporting on, they will not be a member of the consortium any longer moving forward.

You can delete an agency from the consortium. But if an agency-- let's say, they go from allocated one year to not allocated this year, but they still have available funds to them, do not remove them from the CFAB, because they are still a voting member, still a part of the consortium, still expending funds that they have available to them. So just keep that in mind.

So we're going to delete-- excuse me. We're going to go next here, and here are the member allocations. So here is where you divvy up the allocation for the program year. So currently, this consortium has $1,855,946 million available to the consortium, and so the total CAP funds matches the total remaining funds at this particular time.

And so you would just divide the allocation, so I'm going to give $774,807 to Allan Hancock Joint CCD-- and remember, this is all hypothetical. These are not their true allocations. So I'm going to give $1,081,139 million to Lompoc Unified. So once I've entered in both of the agency's allocations, the CAP funds, the total allocated to members, and total cap funds match one another, and total remaining is $0. In order to move forward past this, the total remaining has to be $0.

And as you can see-- in prior years, if you all remember-- we've had changes in allocations based on the Governor's signed budgets. So last year, for example, we received-- well, this consortium received an additional $43,183 as a part of the Governor's signed budget. And so that increase will remain on the screen as a positive number, and the consortium completed an allocation amendment to account for those funds last year. And just like in 2020-21, there was a reduction in funds as a part of the Governor's signed budget, and so this negative number remains, but the consortium completed an allocation amendment to account for those funds.

So if you see these numbers from last year, it's not because the consortium did not do anything or did not complete the CFAD from last year. Just remember, if there is a change in the Governor's budget come July 1 of this year, you will see the change in the CFAD. However, the funds, whether it's a reduction or an increase, is accounted for via an allocation amendment. So don't be alarmed when you see that.

Neil Kelly: Hey, Veronica, this is Neil. There's just a couple of questions in the chat. Somebody direct messaged me with-- if they have a member that's not funded, can you go back and show them how to check the "Non-allocated Voting Member" box, or is that the appropriate thing to do?

Veronica Parker: Say-- what's the question again?

Neil Kelly: So if they have a non-CAEP-funded program-- I mean, a member that's not receiving CAEP funds, but a member-- how do you check that box for a non-allocated voting member?

Veronica Parker: Check it here, and then it's going to say, "Allan Hancock cannot become a voting member only, as money has been allocated to them." So that's because I completed this section here. So let me go back, because I don't want to confuse anyone. So I'm going to-- in theory, I'm going to take the funds away from Allan Hancock Joint CCD, and I'm going to give all of the consortium funds to Lompoc Unified. And again, this is all hypothetical for demonstration purposes only.

946-- so now, we're going to go back to the agencies and certifiers. And so when I click this, it should say that we're changing their status, and it's going to ask me, am I sure I want to change Allan Hancock Joint CCD to become a-- [coughs] excuse me-- a voting member only. And I'm going to say, yes, change. [coughs] So now, they are no longer receiving CAEP funds, beginning with the 2022-23 program year. And then moving forward, they-- since they are still a member of the consortium, they still are voting members, so they vote on consortium decisions.

But when it comes to CAP deliverables-- [coughs] excuse me. [coughs] When it comes to CAP deliverables, they no longer have to complete a budget and work plan. They no longer have to complete the quarterly fiscal reports. The Program Area Report becomes optional for them.

So if they're still providing programming, and they still have hours of instruction, then they would still complete that particular report, but they would approve [coughs] the CFAD as a voting member. They will still approve the annual plan as a voting member, the three year plan as a voting member, and-- I believe those are all of those CAP deliverables that, if you're a voting member only, that you do have to still approve in NOVA even though you no longer receive an allocation. Does that answer the question?

Neil Kelly: So Veronica, Tim had another question related to that. So does NOVA alert new certifiers once they're added? Is there some process that says like, welcome to NOVA. You are a new member, or we've changed your status. How do-- is there any kind of notification like that?

Veronica Parker: That part, I'm not sure. I will have to check on that, because I'm not sure if they are-- I know you're-- an individual is notified, once they become-- once they have access to NOVA, and they're invited to create a profile. But if a new agency comes on board, will those member representatives be notified from the system? I'm not sure.

Neil Kelly: OK. All right, and then Eric had a follow up question to Tim's question. If a transition is taking place at an agency, do we enter the new admin at this time? So that would be like a change in personnel, I guess.

Veronica Parker: Yes. If you know who that person is, then yes, you can add them here as a certifier. And then, if you add them at this time, if they do not have a NOVA account already, you can invite them here by putting in their first name, last name, and their work email, and then they'll receive notification from NOVA to create their profile. If they are already a member in NOVA, then you would just look for their name here. So enter their name or their email, and it should appear, and then you'll click "Add User".

Neil Kelly: OK, and then Janae had a question. When you did the hypothetical situation with Lompoc, she said, "where did those hypothetical funds come from again?"

Veronica Parker: OK, so these are their true funds. Let me go back and change this. So these are Lompoc's true funds for the 2022-23 program year. However, the division that I did-- so by giving Lompoc Unified the $1,081,139, that's not their true allocation for the year. Neither is this Allan Hancock Joint CCD. That isn't their true allocation for the year. However, here, their total allocated to members, as well as their total CAP funds-- that's their true allocation for the 2022-23 program year. I just went-- the division of the funds is something I created. It's not for their consortium. Does that answer your question?

Neil Kelly: Janae didn't have a follow up question, so-- and I think the answer is no. So CAEP is not auto-- or maybe it's yes. So CAEP is not autopopulating the distributions?

Veronica Parker: That is correct. The consortium-- so in theory, the primary contact who-- the consortium lead who is entering this information for the CFAD, the members have come together and voted on what the allocations per member would be. And so the consortium leader-- the primary contact-- is entering in those allocations for each of the member agencies who is an allocated member.

Neil Kelly: All right and I think those are all our questions.

Veronica Parker: All right.

Neil Kelly: Now--

Veronica Parker: Mm-hmm. OK, so yes, as I was mentioning, so your total allocated to members and total CAP funds have to equal, and then the total remaining has to be $0 in order to move forward to the next section, which is our new governance section. So as Neil has gone through each of these questions, just make sure that the consortium is completing them in its entirety, each of these characters-- excuse me. Each of the spaces for the narrative are 2,500.

It has a 2,500 character limit, as of right now. If that is an issue, and individuals are going over that, send TAP an email to let us know, and we'll see what we can do about that. So each of the sections are 2,500 character limits. Make sure you complete each of these in its entirety, and this red line is cleared out. And so you completed this section-- let's say, although it's not completed, but it's just for demonstration purposes. So you've completed your-- this is CFAD summary, so you've completed the fiscal declaration. This consortium will remain direct funding for the '22-23 program year. The allocations have been divided per member agency, and there are zero funds remaining.

And in theory, each of these questions for the governance section have been completed, and now you scroll down, and the agencies are listed. So there are two agencies for this consortium, and then you get down to your certification and assurances. And so this is where each member will make sure that they have read the certifications and assurances and are very familiar with them, because again, those are utilized when we're going through the member effectiveness process, and of course, you want to make sure that you are adhering to all of the assurances within the consortium, in order for the consortium to run smoothly and effectively.

So there are assurances from member and decision making, public meetings, reporting requirements-- and so once you've reviewed all that, the consortium primary contact or lead would press "Submit" here, and-- of course, I didn't fill in all the steps, so I am unable to submit. Let me go back and just put in some fake data so that you all are able to still see the step. And I'm just going to put in fake data, just to remove the reporting requirements. So I've completed this section, this section-- I'm just going to put in some fake data here so that I can move past this.

OK. We're going to go one member, one vote, here. I'm going to say, by majority, 51% here. And then put in some more fake data here, more fake data here-- oops. I'm going to build this fake data. Some more fake data in here. We're-- one second, I'm almost done.

All right, so I put in enough data to satisfy Miller. So I'm going to go next here, and then again, this is my preview page. Everything that we have already gone through, you review the assurances, then we're going to go submit. And so here is our submission screen where, by clicking OK, you're affirming at the CFAD is ready to be reviewed by the selected member representatives. If there are any comments that you would like your member representatives to know prior to them receiving this form, then you would enter in your comments here. And if there are no comments, you would press OK.

And the submission screen will appear. Each of your member representatives will be notified that the CFAD has been submitted, and in their notification, it will ask them to accept this or not, and here you have "awaiting approval". So at this time, no member representatives have approved this.

Now, let's say you're approaching the May 2nd deadline to complete this, and your members still have not submitted or approved the CFAD. You are able to send them a reminder here, which we definitely encourage you to do, because what happens is, let's say someone forwards another email to another individual. They may log in under someone else's login information. Or access the CFAD-- excuse me-- from someone else's login information.

So just use it for each of the member representatives, and do not forward emails from NOVA to other member representatives, just to make sure that the wrong name or the wrong person is on another member representatives' or another agencies' CFAD approval. What else was I going to say?

Neil Kelly: Veronica, we did have a quick question. So once the governance document is completed and you submit your CFAD, and then you realize that you wanted to update or edit your governance document. Because it's linked to the CFAD, once you submit it, you can't go back in and change it, is that correct?

Veronica Parker: That is correct. You are not able to make changes to the CFAD once it is submitted--

Neil Kelly: And that includes the governance?

Veronica Parker: --and approved. Yes, that includes the governance.

Neil Kelly: So you'd have to wait until next year to update it or change it, right?

Veronica Parker: Correct. Mm-hmm.

Neil Kelly: OK. Thank you.

Veronica Parker: Mm-hmm. Any other questions?

Neil Kelly: Just-- Shannon was following up on Carleigh's question.

Veronica Parker: OK, and how about Janae? Was that answered?

Neil Kelly: Yeah, that was answered.

Veronica Parker: OK, great.

Neil Kelly: So if-- so Carleigh, Shannon was just saying, if they're fiscal changes you can always do an allocation amendment as a way to change the fiscal part. But governance, you'd have to wait until the following year.

Veronica Parker: Yes.

Neil Kelly: Because we don't have a governance amendment process, unfortunately.

Veronica Parker: Yes, that is correct. Yes, for fiscal, that will be an allocation amendment if you're making changes-- one time changes to the allocations and for the governance. We are not able to open up the CFAD again to make those changes.

Carleigh: OK, perfect. Thank you. That answers that.

Veronica Parker: All right, great.

Carleigh: Very helpful.

Veronica Parker: All right.

Carleigh: Particularly with the three year planning, and annual plan and whatnot. OK, great. Thank you.

Veronica Parker: You're welcome. All right if there are no additional questions regarding the CFAD, I will go ahead and stop sharing, and go back to our PowerPoint.

All right, so then we'll pass all of these slides, because we completed the live demo. And next, we'll talk about the three year plan. So Mayra, do you want to provide an update with the alignment of the three year plan and the annual plan?

Mayra Diaz: Yes. Thank you, Veronica. So I just have a brief update that I wanted to alert you all of, and you should see communication get sent out on this. We are currently working on getting the annual plan link to be made inactive, as we work on enhancements in NOVA to be able to align the three year plan with the annual plan. So as of, hopefully, by the end of the day today, the annual plan link will be inactive.

And that is to alleviate some of the work that is going to be done in NOVA. That's going to be taking place in the next month or so, and so in order to avoid any confusion as you are working on your three year plan and your annual plan, we're going to make that annual plan link inactive, and our CAEP TAP will be sending out communication on these updates as we work on getting these enhancements in Nova.

Veronica Parker: All right. Any questions about that?

Speaker 1: There'll be guidance on what the new plan will look like before it's active for us to see?

Veronica Parker: Yes, that is the goal. The goal is to provide guidance, as well as training, once the three year plan and the annual plan for the 2022-23 program year are aligned. We will be providing guidance as well as training before the anticipated submission of the annual plan.

Speaker 1: Thank you.

Veronica Parker: Mm-hmm.

Speaker 1: Is there an estimated date for that, the training and the template guidance?

Veronica Parker: So there is not at this time, because the annual plan is not available yet. But as soon as it is, then we will work around the time. So as we know more for the completion of the alignment of the three year plan and the annual plan, then we'll notify all consortia and members with updates on training, as well as when the template will be available and the submission of the Annual Plan.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Veronica Parker: All right. And I see Emma's question. Yes, we will work to get it done as soon as possible, and Neil just followed up with that. All right, so this next part of our time together will be about the three year plan, so we just wanted to provide an opportunity for you all who have joined us this afternoon to ask any questions that you may have of the three year plan, as you all are finishing up that process-- still working on-- slash-- finishing up the process.

If there are any discussion items or any questions, we wanted to provide an opportunity for that discussion. So we are a smaller group, so you could definitely raise your hand and come off mute, or you can continue to type in chat if there are any questions.

Shannon: Can we just talk about the activities and outcomes section of the three year plan, just real quickly? The activities and outcomes are related to the consortium level target. So if you picked ELL at the consortium level, and then you're looking at your activities and outcomes, you do a description of maybe something you're going to do at the consortium level to help support the ELL? Is that--

Neil Kelly: Shannon, this is Neil. I would say the metrics are just to connect. So when you're putting in your activities, you're connecting it to a metric, because all your activities should tie to a metric. But more importantly, you know, it's something that the member is going to do. So what will happen is-- and this ties into the annual plan. So in your consortia three year plan, you'll have a whole bunch of activities, and some members will do some of those activities. Other members will do other activities.

So when you're developing this, you should think about-- what are the activities my members are going to do to support the three year plan vision? You know, meeting the need, the metrics, the targets-- but it should be specific to that member level, because when they do their annual plan, they're going to be clicking on those activities that best suit-- that they're going to do for their budget and their work plan. So when they build their budget and work plan, they're going to be clicking on those activities that you put into the three year plan that translated into the annual plan, if that make sense.

Shannon: It does. So I just want to be clear, too. So if we're choosing ELL as the consortium level metric to improve on at the consortium level, but say one of our members doesn't have an ESL program, then we're not obligated to choose one of those optional metrics. But then, that member who does not have ESL is semi off the hook, putting in any activities or outcomes?

Neil Kelly: Yeah, so even in the MET, there'll be-- even though you selected for the majority of your members, it'll still get selected for that member, but they just put 0 in their targets, because they're not participating. Unfortunately, there's not a way to abstain from the optional metrics that gets loaded for everyone but, if that member doesn't have a program or is not participating in that optional metric, then they can just put 0, if that makes sense.

Shannon: Correct, so I do understand that part. So you put 0-- one of our sites doesn't have ESL, so we put 0 for that. But then when we get to the activities and outcomes section, that member will not have to put an activity nor outcome related to the ESL?

Neil Kelly: Yes, so what will happen in the annual plan-- just like we've done in previous years-- you'll have a menu of activities to select from. And then that member will say, OK, I'm not going to do the ESL one, but I'm going to do the one pertaining to professional development, and the one pertaining to marketing, and the one pertaining to high school diploma, and they'll select those activities.

So when you draft those activities, you have to make the details of that activity specific enough so that the member will know what they're doing, because that'll drive their budget and their work plan, if got make sense.