Veronica Parker: You seen the agenda. So today-- [coughs] excuse me. Today, we'll be covering, like I said, a number of topics, all of which we think will help inform you in your new role. So our first session will be with the CAEP office. We have Dr. Carolyn Zachry, Gary Adams, and Neil Kelly.

And they will be presenting on CAEP welcome, as well as program guidance. So providing a brief overview of the purpose of adult education and update on our funding, a walk through procedures, guidance timelines, and reporting requirements, and answer any questions related to CAEP.

And then next, we'll be moving into a CAEP technical assistance project Overview, as well as doing a high level overview of the Nova financial reporting system. And that will be by way of a live demonstration. And then later on this morning, we will be-- WestEd will join us and they will go over a CAEP data reporting for launch board session.

So they'll be talking about launch board as well as community college MIS reporting and how MIS and TOPSpro fees, the LaunchBoard, as well as other topics. And then we'll do a little lunchtime networking. And then we'll have our last session of the afternoon, and that will be CAEP data reporting and TOPSpro Enterprise. And so that will be provided by classes. And that will be our day of work training.

Again, this is an opportunity for you all to be informed about the CAEP as the CAEP deliverables and how the different systems work together to provide the California Adult Education Program. So I will stop sharing my screen in terms of the agenda. And I will add it into the chat so that you all have an opportunity to have it for yourself.

We'll also be posting in the chat a Google folder which will serve as a repository of all of the materials that will be shared today. Some of which are available to be share today, but because of fiber way compliance, they are not all available to be shared today. However, as we receive materials, we will upload them to that particular folder and inform you all about when things have been uploaded.

And that will be something that you can take away as a tool and use for future reference. And it also has a couple of things that we'll use during the lunchtime networking-- the lunchtime networking session. So before I pass it over to the CAEP office, a couple of other housekeeping items. So everyone has entered the Zoom room and-- [coughs] excuse me, hopefully, everyone's able to hear me.

And if you have any questions throughout any of the sessions today, please be sure to post them in the chat. The presenters will be monitoring the chat as well as myself and my colleague Mandilee Comstock. We'll be monitoring the chat. And any questions that come up, we will alert the presenters whenever there's a natural pause. [coughs] Excuse me.

And if there is an opportunity for you to come off mute, the presenter will let you know and so you'll be able to engage in actual dialogue with them. And this session is being recorded. Again, there are multiple sessions that will be going on today. So for any reason you need to step away or you have to end your day with us, the recording will be made available. We will be remediating it and we'll make it available to you all.

However, remediation does take about three weeks, so it will not be as fast as we would like. But you will still have the recording for future reference. And we are taking attendance, this is a smaller group. And so I think we will be able to capture everyone.

However, if there's any reason why we need to private message you to capture your attendance, we will do so. So now I will start sharing again and pass it over-- [coughs] excuse me, to the CAEP office who will get us started Dr. Zachary, I think you're going first.

DR. CAROLYN ZACHRY: Yes, all right. Well, good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here. I really appreciate you taking the time out of your very busy schedules to onboard yourself with CAEP. So Veronica, if you're done coughing, you've got to go to the next slide. Thank you.

When we think about CAEP, CAEP is really this joint venture between the community college, Chancellor's Office, and the CDE. And it's really important that when we learn how to work together-- I just love this quote, versus against each other, things might start getting better. And when we think about the adults in California and the goals that they have, it really is important that we're working together and that you're working together within your consortium. Next slide.

And the other piece I think that's really important to as a new lead when you're looking at adult education is it's really all about equity. And we've talked a lot about the importance of equity over this last year. It's a focus of the Adult Education Office, a focus of the superintendent, a focus of the Chancellor, and I know a focus of Gary's as well.

And when we think about how adult education can help break down barriers for students, that's an important piece that you are all contributing to in the work that you're doing within your consortium and leading your consortium. Next slide, and back to thinking about equity, adult education started in California-- I always like-- I always thought that California was the first state. No, we were the second.

Massachusetts beat us out by a couple of years by starting-- with starting adult education. But in 1856 in California, adult classes were started in San Francisco. And they were for adults to learn English and vocational skills at that time. And now, between WIOA Title II funded programs and CAEP, we have well, well, over 400 agencies providing services for adults to better their education, to receive career training, and the opportunity to learn English.

And just so if anyone out there is working on a doctoral dissertation, all of the history of California Adult Education is housed at Stanford University. And I'm also happy to say that we are working through OTAN, the CDE we've added on to a contract with OTAN, to take the orange history book and add on to that. And to bring in the next pieces of history, which really include everything related to CAEP. So next slide, please.

Henry Ford said, "Coming together is a beginning, keeping together is progress, and working together is success." Again, this is what CAEP is all about. We came together under-- the next slide, please. Skip that one. Oh, wait, is that yours, Neil?

Neil Kelly: That's OK.

DR. CAROLYN ZACHRY: OK. Go to the next slide. Next slide. I'm not sure these are different. I haven't seen the order now. OK, go back, I guess. So the idea of coming together was related to AB86. And we had-- AB86 started and the idea of coming together in a consortium model really added our adult education K-12 programs and our community college partners together looking at their region to help move adult education forward.

And then when AEBD came into being and then renamed to the California Adult Education Program, the idea of keeping together was critical. And that working together is where you will all find that success for your programs and for the students in your programs.

Next slide, I think. And then we'll skip that one. I think that's what Neil will cover. And the other piece that I think is really important, this one-- this session for me was just full of some quotes because I want to inspire all of you as you are embarking on your new leadership role.

But Mother Teresa said, "You cannot do what I can-- you can do what I cannot do. I can do what you cannot do. Together, we can do great things." And again, that's the important piece about CAEP. Is how are you ensuring that the adults in your region that you're meeting your programs are meeting the needs?

If one agency has a wait list for an ESL class, is there another agency nearby that can add an ESL class at the same time or a similar time frame so that those students can get the programming and the education that they desire so that they can move forward for their future rather than sitting on a waiting list and perhaps being discouraged, and then not enrolling once their name is called on that waiting list? Next slide. Are these next slide slides yours, Neil?

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

DR. CAROLYN ZACHRY: All right. So go ahead, Neil.

Neil Kelly: But I will go into, like you said, the history of the adult education the California Adult Education Program from AB86 and how that foundation we built is what the program looks like today. So they're a little bit farther down on the slide.

DR. CAROLYN ZACHRY: Yeah, right, OK. And so before I turn it over to you, Neil, I'd like to turn this over to Gary Adams for any words that he may have.

Gary Adams: Thank you, Carolyn. I would just like to thank all the directors for joining us this morning in this effort and for all you do in your daily jobs as you face out into the next fiscal year and beyond. I strongly want to underscore what Carolyn has said, the importance of community colleges joining hands with our K-12 partners and addressing the needs of adults in our regions and in our communities.

And the Chancellor's Office is committed to its strong partnership with the California Department of Education. And we hope that that is reflected in each of your regions and each of the work that you individually will do as leaders for your consortia. Thank you, Carolyn. And I will turn it to Neil.

Neil Kelly: Thanks, Gary. So Veronica, if you-- or Mandilee, if you could back up to the agenda. There we go. So I'll talk a little bit more about the history and background of CAEP, then we'll dive into the nitty gritty of the funding, we'll talk about the CAEP structure and the systems in governance at a high level, and then we'll talk about the deliverables as far as receipt of the state funds, what you're required.

And then member effectiveness, how that impacts if you don't submit your deliverables. And then we'll leave a lot of time for questions. So you can ask any kind of questions that you have, and we can respond to that and hopefully satisfy all those questions you've had as new leaders or if you've been in this for a little bit of time, maybe something that you've been always wanting to ask the state, you can feel free to ask in this session, so. Next slide, please.

Here we go. So the purpose of the adult education program, the state funding-- and I just wanted to reiterate. So when we designed the state funding, we also had in mind the federal program as well, that WIOA Title II program. So our metrics are really aligned with the WIOA Title II program, the pre and post testing, the transition of students. So we're really aligned with WIOA II. And so that's the framework that we use to build the state funding around, but we added things in the state funding that the federal program doesn't do.

So it's a real nice collaboration there between the two federal and state funding. But for the state funding, when the legislature put this forward, they wanted to rethink and redesign the educational system, they wanted to establish those linkages for students across the adult education systems, like Gary said, between the K-12 adult and the community colleges, and provide adults with academic and career skills, develop plans for expanding and improving Adult Ed services by creating linkages between the two systems, and providing that capacity or seamless transition for students. So next slide, please.

So really, as Caroline was talking about the history of the state funding from AB86 to AB104 and in the CAEP universe, because there was state funding before CAEP came along. But if you look at the history of adult education, there was flexibility around 2008, 2009.

And for about five years or so, Adult Ed didn't have that. We went from like 738 million, maybe even more than that, down maybe 60% of that during the flexibility era. So with that, AB86 came along with a $25 million planning grant. And it was a two year planning and implementation grant started in 2013, went into 2014.

The planning grant outlined the expectations for consortia development, expanded and improved upon that consortium via a regional model, and then prepared the consortia for planning and implementation that started as part of the E104, which is when the $500 million block grant came along in 2015 and 16. Next slide, please.

So as part of that 25 million from AB86-- I think we already covered this. Next slide, please. What AB86 did and you see from eight years ago, we still have this foundation that we built as part of AB86. We established the AB86 cabinet, which included key members at the highest level from the Chancellor's Office as well as Department of Education.

We developed a comprehensive certification of eligibility, which I'll go into a little bit more. We consulted with expert panels relevant to each issue and various organizations, had a stakeholder sounding board, used a transparent process to listen and inform the field through the development of-- let me say it again, of the certification of eligibility. Let's talk about that certification of eligibility in the next slide, please.

So there was a cover sheet that the consortia had to sign as far as each one had to have a fiscal agent. And then each member had to sign a form saying they were going to participate in the consortia. And then they also had to come up with the project management plan that included a governance structure, which some of you are still using today, talk about membership and partnerships, shared leadership strategies, a communication plan and a budget, and then overall, a regional comprehensive plan.

And so next slide, we'll talk a little bit about what that regional comprehensive plan looks like. So next slide, please. So the comprehensive plan included an evaluation of your current levels and types of services in the region, and that's still part of the planning process that we go through even to this day. If you're working on your three year plan for next year, you'll have to do an evaluation of current levels and types of services.

We also did an evaluation of current needs in the region way back then, which you still are doing as part of the planning process. And then in this comprehensive plan, there were plans to integrate existing programs and create seamless transitions into post-secondary education or workforce. So that's still true today as transition has become a real strong suit for the California Adult Education Program.

There's also, in this plan to address gaps in services, which you continue to do, how to accelerate student progress, how to leverage existing regional structures through your partners, and then collaborate with shared on professional development opportunities. So all this stuff is still-- even though it started back in 2013, it's still woven into the fabric and foundation of the adult education program that you're working on to this day. So next slide, please.

So we're going to get into a little bit of the nuts and bolts of the funding. So if you're not familiar with how the funding is allocated, what happens every year in January around the first week-- towards the end of the first week of January, the governor announces the proposed budget for the coming year.

So what we do with that information. We take it, we have a formula that we develop that will go into a little bit. We use that formula to determine an allocation. Because it's a proposed budget, we release by statute. We're required, by the end of February, to release preliminary allocations for each consortia. We also release that into NOVA.

And so that allows the consortia, over the next two months, to figure out how much funding each member in their district-- in their consortia will receive. And so they use the months of March and April to have public meetings, get input, have decision making, and then by May 2nd, they are required to certify how much each member district will be receiving for the upcoming year.

And then absent of any changes, like trailer bill additions subtractions or budget bill additions subtractions, then the CAEP money begins flowing from the state to the local district or fiscal agent by August in 11 monthly installments. And, of course, like I said, CAEP funding is based on a needs based formula. So if we can go to the next slide, please. I'll talk about that needs based formula.

So education code 84911 listed out the factors that we're supposed to use in determining funding. And so these are the six factors we used in determining the CAEP allocation for the consortia. So no high school diploma-- this is all based on census or American Community Survey information.

So no high school diploma, unemployed adults, adult population, which would be 18 years and older, household poverty, adult literacy at the seventh grade education level, and the ability to speak English. So all those were weighted and calculated to come up with a regional share ratio, and that's how the consortia got their funding for the consortia.

So back in 2015 when we rolled out the funding, it was a twofold approach. We had the regional consortia funding, and then we also had a lion's share of funding going to the K-12s as what they call maintenance of effort, which gets confused because a lot of people use the term maintenance of effort. But about $337 million was earmarked for the K-12s based on a certification process using 2012, 2013 as a benchmark year.

So what the legislature had the K-12 districts do is certify how much expenses they reported in 2012, 2013, they certified it, and then we were able to provide an allocation on that amount. And so together with the maintenance of effort plus the regional consortia formula, we got back to that $500 million mark. And that's what we've rolled forward to this day.

Everyone gets set same amount as they did in the prior year, so it all goes back to this 2015 maintenance of effort and Regional Consortium formula and there are ways that members can be reduced, and we'll talk about that in a little bit. But there is education code that says you get no less than the prior year, so there is some stability there. Next slide, please.

And so here is the funding. If you look at what goes out on the street, to either a K-12 County OFS entity versus a community college entity, the split's usually about 88% to the K-12 and 12% to the community college. And that's remained constant throughout the last five years. As you can see our increases in the funding, we've gone from 500 million starting in 1516, then we had three straight years of $500 million, and then in 1819, we got a bump.

And then 1920, another bump. 2021, we had a bump but it was taken away, and so we stayed flat or even. And then this year, we got a sizable increase up to the current amount of $560,376,000. So let me pause there. I think we had a couple-- Veronica, do we have any questions in the chat or did anybody take care of that?

Veronica Parker: So one, Victoria took care of. Beth wanted to know the err code for A4911. And then Janet wants to know, will CAEP allocations be affected/adjusted by the new census results?

Neil Kelly: So we're not-- we haven't had that discussion as far as the new census results. And that's up between the Chancellor's Office and CDE. But as of today, there have been no discussions about re-benching or incorporating the new census data.

I know there are some discussions in the legislature about looking at different models, but nothing firm that has come out. But there is a lot of dialogue going on, so I won't deny that. But at this point there hasn't been any discussion between the two state agencies of incorporating that census data just yet.

All right, appreciate the question. OK, so next slide. OK, this one got a little messed up. But this shows you-- so the last slide showed you what it is when it gets down to the street. But as you know, consortia have fiscal agents, some consortiums are direct funded.

So when you look at how that is allocated based on the governance and fiscal structure of the consortia, it actually goes from an 8812 split down to a 7723 split. So if you look at all the K-12 fiscal agents and direct funded members, it's really $432 million or 77%. And the community college fiscal agents or direct funded members goes up to the $128 million or 23%.

And what I mean by direct funded members. So if you're not familiar with this, when you-- as a consortia, you decide whether you have a fiscal agent that receives the funds from the state or you can opt out of a fiscal agent and have that money sent directly to your district. But you have to make that decision when you certify your allocations on May 2nd.

And that's the certification-- the CFAD, which is, I think, it's Certification of Fiscal Administrative Declaration or no, it's Consortia Fiscal Administrative Declaration. That's it, CFAD. So you have to make that choice of what funding channel your consortia is going to use before the year starts. And you do that as part of the May 2nd certification process.

And so I just wanted to show the difference between what actually gets to the street versus what goes through our fiscal structures that are built in around the state. So next slide, please.

Veronica Parker: OK. And now before we move forward, there was a question. What are the pros/cons for the two funding channels?

Neil Kelly: OK. If you could just move to the next slide and then I'll answer that. Because this provides a little more information. So in that question, as far as pros and cons, so you can see from the fiscal agent standpoint, when we look at consortia with direct funded members, it's been steadily going up a little bit each year.

And so if you look at K-12 County office fiscal agents, it's gone down a little bit, gone up, gone down. So it's holding steady. And then community colleges as a fiscal agent, that's gone down from 37 from five years ago to 28. And so that's where the change has really been. Is a lot of consortia started out with the community college fiscal agent and moved over to direct funded members.

So the pros and cons. What I would say is depends on your fiscal agent. When we started this, a lot of fiscal agents wanted to see every single they treated it like a grant. Because in the beginning, it was a block grant. And so they wanted to see-- and they treated it like a reimbursable contract.

So members of the consortium weren't able to spend funding until they provided justification and documentation. And so that caused a lot of slowdown in spending. And so that resulted in us changing from a block grant to apportionment, and changing the name from the Adult Ed education block grant to the California Adult Education program.

And so it took a couple of years for the districts and the consortium fiscal agents to realize-- and we put other education code things in, like you have to get the money out within 45 days just because fiscal agents were holding on to the money. So that was a con when you had a fiscal agent.

But once we resolved that, then it became the issue of getting the money to the local district. And so there was a problem at the state level of moving the money, it came to the Chancellor's Office, and then the State General Services required that we did a contract with the Department of Education-- California Department of Education to move that-- like you said, the 400-- you saw that 400 and-- what did they say?

$27 million or so or whatever that amount was, that 77% had to be moved over to CDE to be dispersed to the K-12 County offices, which included some fiscal agents that had community colleges under that fiscal agent. And that process took like six months because it was a contract. But because it was such a large amount of money, it took forever to get through the state processes.

And so that included getting the contract approved, getting it put into the state fiscal system. It just wasn't used to having such a large sum of money. And so that was a big con to being a direct funded K-12 district at that time because it took forever. Some people weren't getting their money until December or January.

And it got to the point where districts were borrowing money from-- the adult school was borrowing money from the district and having to pay interest, and teachers were getting paid, so it was all kinds of bad things. And so this year, we have hopefully resolved that where we don't have to go through the contractual process to move those fundings over to CDE.

And we're hoping that we've streamlined that process. And I think this week or next, that funding should be deposited in your local districts accounts if you're direct funded, or if you're a fiscal agent it should be deposited in their account. So remove that con.

And so really, with all those barriers removed now, I guess the remaining pros and cons would be what do you-- what bang for the buck do you get from your fiscal agent? If you're getting the money timely, if the fiscal agent is not being punitive with asking for too much information.

Some people like to use the fiscal agent to hold consortia funds. Some people like to use the fiscal agent to pay their regional director or their consortium lead. And so as you can see, there are still 38 fiscal agents versus 33 without a fiscal agent.

And so I think we have posted on the website, and I don't know if Veronica or Mandilee can find it, but LA consortia did a survey of all the consortia in the state to look at their governance that they use, and that ties into their fiscal agent as well.

And so there are a variety of governance structures, as well as fiscal structures that tie-in to that governance, and so it varies. And so to answer your question about pros and cons. I think it really depends on your structure and your governance of how your consortia is set up, and if you want to use the fiscal agent to hold money for regional projects.

So there are some pluses and minuses with some other things. So what I would do is, before you have this discussion about what funding channel you want to go, I would find out how much is the fiscal agent charging you? You can only charge up to 5% administration on your consortia funds. So are they charging you the 5%? Are you getting what you think you bang for the buck for that 5%?

I know some fiscal agents charge a lot less. Some charge like 1% or 2%, not a lot for their other services. So some people think it brings it together, some people like to get that money right away without going through a fiscal agent. So a lot of variation there. I think if they could find that report, it might be worthwhile looking at it. Although it's still-- it's probably about a year and a half old. It's still relevant to this discussion.

So sorry I didn't give you a pointer on how to make that decision, but at least you know that there is some variation out there depending on the region and depending on the relationship with their fiscal agent. So let me just check the chat because I see a couple of other posts in there.

Is there a current document that you can share with our consortia board with current pros and cons? Well, we'll share that report. It doesn't really have pros and cons on the fiscal agent situation. But what you could do is you could look at our program guidance and our fiscal guidance.

And we lay out what is the consortium level administration supposed to do? What is indirect? What is a fiscal agents supposed to do? Those kind of things. It doesn't really give you the pros and cons, but it lays out the requirements. And I think those pros and cons are going to vary from each consortia depending on who's leading and who's following.

Some consortia are K-12 strong, some are community college strong, some don't have a fiscal agent, some do. So I'm sorry I wasn't able to give you too strong of an answer there. And then I think there was one other question there. You just spoke of a director sometimes being paid by the fiscal agent. But is my case from a legal standpoint and my employee of my consortia and my employee of the college? I've asked because I feel like I have two masters. Yeah.

So unless you're JPA-- Joint Powers Authority, which we only have one in the state in West Kern, there is no legal entity called a consortia. So the fiscal agent would be that district. So if your fiscal agent is a community college district, then you would-- and you're the consortia director or lead and you are being paid out of the fiscal agent pot, then technically, you are an employee of that district because that's who's paying you.

And so you have to wear the two hats. And maybe that's where the governance could be strengthened. The role of the consortia director could be laid out in that governance or by law or charter, whatever you want to call it, however the consortium wants to put it forward.

And it could lay out, in your case, the responsibilities of the consortium director so you would have some kind of document that you could go back to, the bylaws, which are how you govern your consortia. So if the fiscal agent district starts pushing you, you could go back to those bylaws and say, hey, I am required per my position with the consortia to do these things. So maybe that could help.

But you are technically an employee of who's paying you. So I'm not sure if that helped, but that's what I would do. OK. So you got a little-- we dive down a little more rabbit hole, but it was a good rabbit hole. There were a lot of carrots at the bottom. So let's go on to the next slide.

OK. So here's the CAEP structure. If you weren't familiar, Carolyn alluded to [inaudible]. And so that 400 breaks down. We have 71 consortia, but we have 72 college district. So back in 1516, we had two community college districts combined. And that's down in San Jose. So I think it was West Valley, Evergreen and Mission and I forgot the other one. They all combined to form-- I'm sorry, San Jose City, that's it. Thank you.

Veronica Parker: Neil?

Neil Kelly: Yes.

Veronica Parker: Your audio is breaking up. It's going in and out.

Neil Kelly: Oh, I'm sorry.

Veronica Parker: OK, when you move closer to the computer, it gets better.

All right. So I'll lean forward a little bit. Sorry if I'm scaring you with a bigger image of me in the screen, but So those four community college districts combined into-- or the two community college districts combined into one. So instead of having 72 regional consortia, we have 71.

And as you know or if you didn't know, the Chancellor and the superintendent of instruction decided to use the commutative college district boundaries to form the regions in the state. So there were 72 regions. And then with the combination or consolidation in the San Jose area, now we have 71.

So of that 71, there's 312 K-12 districts, and 72 community college districts, 52 county offices of education. And then JPAs of which we have one consortium, but we have 10 other JPAs in the form of regional occupational programs around the state that make up our CAEP structure. Next slide, please.

And then you're going to be going through this today, but our key systems in the CAEP universe. We have Nova that we use for planning and fiscal systems, you'll be getting a demo of that. We also have TOPSpro, which collects all our K-12 and county office student data, and you'll be getting a deep dive on that this afternoon.

And then we have the Chancellor's Office MIS called COMIS, which includes all the non-credit community college system data. And you'll be getting-- WestEd be covering that. And then those systems, TOPSpro and COMIS, are displayed on the LaunchBoard, which is the adult education dashboard. And I think WestEd is going to be covering that as well.

And then our technical assistance provider is CAEP-- CAEP TAP, which is under the auspices of Sacramento County, Office of Education. And then JPA would be the Joint Powers Authority. And I think someone answered that, so you'll be getting a little deeper dive on all these systems today. So next slide, please.

And so here's-- I'm just going to go through, at a high level, some key education code that is for the California Adult Education Program. So education code 84906 covers the planning requirements. And so it says, consortia shall have a consortium-approved three-year adult education plan that addresses a three year fiscal planning cycle.

The plan shall be updated at least once each year based on available data. So what that means is, that's the three year plan, and the annual plan, and your member work plans. So if you're working on your three year plan, or you just approved your annual plan, or you're starting to submit-- or yeah, it's due, I think, next week, you remember work plan or budget, it all comes out of this education code 84906. So next slide, please.

And then here are some other key education code. If you're looking for local governance like member requirements or decision making public meetings, that's all part of 84905. And then if you're looking for the seven program areas that are required for-- or restrict the CAEP funding to the seven program areas, those program areas are listed under 84913.

And then if you also want to look at the funding guarantee of you get no less than the prior year or how you can reduce a member's funding, that's part of 84914. And then if you look at how we leverage funds, there are six funding sources that the legislature requires us to track and also allows members to join a consortium to get these funding sources and so that's listed in 84916.

And then of course, all the data reporting and outcome metrics are all listed as part of 84920 so we won't do a deep dive but I think we did a prerecorded webinar. And I think it's part of the onboarding tools that we have on the website. So I don't know if Veronica or Mandilee want to post that pre-recorded webinar if it's still available.

But I went through all the Ed code in that webinar. So if you really want to take a deep dive on the Ed code, you could listen to that pre-recorded webinar. Oh, Joint Powers Authority, sorry about that. OK. And do we have these local governance key education code in one place?

Yeah, on the website under Administration, under Governance, under Legislation, and I think we'll put it in the chat. We have a link to all the CAEP related education code. And there it is. So I don't know, if-- Veronica, I'll pause there. Did we get any other questions in the chat that we haven't answered?

Veronica Parker: No, it looks like you covered everything.

Neil Kelly: OK.

Veronica Parker: The other question was about the presentation slides. So they will be available, Marina, once they are 508 compliant. So they are to come.

Neil Kelly: And Veronica, is that education code legislation webinar that we pre-recorded a while ago, is that still available on the website?

Veronica Parker: That is still available on the website. We're actually pulling that one as well as the larrick report. But since I can't-- I'm sharing my screen, so I can't access the website. It's going to take us just a little bit longer to pull those links, but we'll--

Neil Kelly: OK.

Veronica Parker: --have them to you after.

Neil Kelly: Great, thank you. Next slide, please. OK. So we're going to get into the deliverables. And we have-- let's see. We have plenty of time. I think we're going to be able to answer questions as well. So for student data reporting, if you're a K-12 County office, your student data report or student data is due through courses through their TOPSpro system in October, January, April and August.

And so I think it's usually at the end of the month, except for August, it's at the beginning of the month. And then if you're a community college, your data is automatically reported each semester through COMIS. And some people ask, well, why does we have to get reminded for courses reporting? Why isn't it automatically done?

So if you were in the Cal pad system, like the K-12 districts, that's the state system for K-12 and that automatically gets uploaded. So the Cal pads are similar to COMIS. And so because adult education is not in Cal pads, we have courses to serve as the adult education Cal pads for the K-12 adult education system.

Unfortunately, it doesn't automatically happen, so you have to report every quarter. And there are some districts that have to be reminded and steps to follow. And so that's why there's a difference in the level of effort, I would say. So if you're a community college, you've got it made because you're part of the state reporting system.

If you're a K-12 County office, you have to do a little bit more of a heavy lift to working through costs. It's not a bad thing because we get a lot of good data out of the TOPSpro system. But it does require a little level of expertise and that's why you'll see a lot of good TOPSpro coordinators around the state that are vital to getting that data into the system. So any questions on that? I'll pause there.

You're going to learn a lot more about this today, but I just wanted to share that these are the student data deliverables for CAEP. So next slide, please. And then for planning, your planning deliverables, like I alluded to in the education code. So CAEP annual plans are due in August. And then member work plans and budgets are due in September.

And then those work plans and budgets are certified by the consortia at the end of October. So you see this logical process. Every three years, we have a three-year-plan, which some of you are working on right now, it'll be due in June of 2022. And then each year, you update that three-year-plan through an annual plan that's due in August 15.

And then once you have your annual plan certified by August 15 by the consortia, then each member works through, in Nova, to develop their member work plan and their budget based on that annual plan, which is based on the three year plan. And then the consortia approves that by the end of October.

And all this is done through Nova as part of the planning process. You can see this logical progression that we do on the planning cycle. Goes from big picture three-yearr-plan down to the nitty gritty district level work plan and budget. So with-- oh, thank you for posting that. So next slide, please.

And then the allocation certification which we already talked about, but as it relates to in the NOVA system, the CAEP allocations are certified by May, that's May 2. If there is a late adjustment, like I said, like trailer bill or budget bill like we have this year, another certification would be due in September.

And so that was due September 1 to certify that additional amount that you got when we got the budget bill at the end of June surprisingly, but it was welcome because it was a lot more money. So you have to do an additional, what we call allocation Amendment and certification by September 1st.

And usually funds are, like I said when we ironed out that allocation disbursement issue between the Chancellor's Office and CDE, by statute funds are supposed to be disbursed in August on a monthly basis through June. And so we're hoping that we've streamlined that process so that no later than, I think, this year, it'll be sometime this month.

I mean, it got disbursed in August, but then it goes to the controllers and then to County offices, and then County offices to either a fiscal agent or the local district, and so all those steps take a little more time. So we're hoping that CAEP/12 districts and community college districts and County offices will see that money in their district accounts sometime this week or no later than next week.

Next slide, please. And then expenditure reporting once you have your allocations certified and your plans certified, you can start reporting your expenses based on those plans. And this is also through NOVA. So expenditures are due the first of the month at the district level.

So districts report into NOVA in December, March, June, and September by the 1st, and then the consortia have 30 days to certify those expenditures. And then just a caveat, once the Q4 is certified, no revisions are allowed. So we're coming up on that September 30 date for the Q4 certification.

So that's a critical certification date because once you certify that, no more changes. If you haven't certified Q4 yet, and Veronica and her team will go over this in the next presentation, but there is a way that you can unpack your previous quarters if you noticed an error in the previous three quarters, and you can go in and correct that before you certify Q4.

But when do you certify Q4, no going back, and you have to fix that in the next year. So Veronica are you going to be covering kind of Q4 certification and how to go back and fix things before you certify Q4 in the next presentation?

Veronica Parker: Yes.

Neil Kelly: OK, great. So next slide, please. So now that we've covered all your state level or state-required deliverables, we sent out a memo or a guidance memo, I think it was maybe end of June, but it went into effect July 1, stating that if a member fails to submit their CAEP deliverables, which we just went over timely, you'll be subject to a reallocation of funds by the consortia.

And so what that means is the process is we have due dates that we just went over, and if you miss that due date, you'll get a reminder from CAEP tab, Veronica, Mandilee, Holly, and their team will remind you like, hey, you miss this.

Or if it's student data and you're a CAEP/12 or County office, you will get a reminder from Costas and their team, and they'll say, Oh, you forgot to submit your deliverable. Do you need any help?

And then you'll get a couple of those reminders, and then if you still haven't submitted your deliverable, the consortia director will be contacted and hopefully, they can work with the district to have those deliverables submitted.

There will be offers to the consortia director and the district itself of professional development or technical assistance. If all that fails, the reminders, the technical assistance, the connection with the consortia director, and you still haven't submitted your deliverable, or we haven't identified a problem that prevents you from submitting your deliverable, then that will get elevated to the state.

And then the state will determine if you're an ineffective member, and then they'll notify the consortia. If that district is ineffective, that it's up to the consortia to reallocate funds. So they have the ability to reallocate that funds per Ed Code of that member.

It's still the state calls them out it's ineffective, but it's still the consortia's decision how much, and whether to reallocate funds for that member. And so that's the critical piece. Now let's say the consortia says, no, I'm not going to do it even though the state finds them ineffective.

Let's say you have several members, or you have consistently members not submitting their deliverables, then the state will look at that consortia, and the state has recourse. They can maybe combine you with another consortia if they feel that you're not running your consortia effective, or they could talk to the district or offer more technical assistance.

But there are some recourse if the consortia doesn't take care of their members or reallocate funds to send that message of, you've got to take care of these deliverables. So there I think I saw a couple of questions, and we're kind of at the end here. So I'll open it up to general questions. I don't know the next slide is-- I think it's just a wrap up in questions. So let me look at the chat.

Please pause for CAEP. [chuckle] We'd love to review it again, and also help ensure that our steering committee would request that every new member-- Oh, thank you. Well, I'm going to open it up. Feel free to ask any kind of questions, make a comment. I love talking about this stuff. We have 10 or 15 minutes, and so you can go off mic. You don't have to put it in the chat.