Heather Bennett & Kristi Swett
As we went through the budget process earlier this year I asked several questions that to this day remain unanswered.
One of the questions that I asked, was in reference to Title I funding; on May 1,2013 – I sent an email to Janet Robert, Business Administrator asking how many Academic Coaches was the District employing and how were they funded. On May 2, 2013- Janet Roberts sent me a document stating that the 14 Academic Math Coaches were funded out of Federal Dollars:
PDF Link: Roberts Title I Response
The information provided concerned me because these coaches were working in Title I and non-Title I schools. This would place the District in violation to the federal government’s “supplement, not supplant” requirement.
The “supplement, not supplant” requirement ensures that children participating in Title I programs receive their fair share of services from state and local funds. Section 1120A(b) of the federal statute requires that the local district use federal funds received under Title I only to supplement the amount of funds available from non-federal sources for the education of students participating in Title I.
A local district cannot use these federal funds to supplant (take the place of) funds that would, in the absence of Title I funds, have been spent on Title I students. Federal funds cannot be used to pay for services, staff, programs, or materials that would otherwise be paid with state or local funds.
On May 7, 2013 – I mentioned this issue in the school board meeting and filed a complaint with the District’s Title I Department:
PDF Link: Michael Clara Complaint Letter
On May 28, 2013, I received a response to my complaint letter about the Title I abuse of funds:
I now have conflicting documents on how Title I funding is being spent. This was one of the reasons I voted against the proposed budget.