« PreviousContinue »
made available by the migrant student record transfer system or such other system as he may determine most accurately and fully reflects the actual number of migrant students.
SECTION 843 (d) OF PUB. L. 93-380
be served in such other States. The total grant which shall be made available for use in Puerto Rico shall be arrived at by multiplying the number of chudren in Puerto Rico counted as provided in the preceding sentence by 40 per centum of (1) the average per pupil expenditure in Puerto Rico or (2) in the case where such average per pupil expenditure is more than 120 per centum of the average per pupil expenditure in the United States, 120 per centum of the average per pupil expenditure in the United States. In determining the number of migrant children for the purposes of this section the Commissioner shall use statistics
Notwithstanding any provision of part A of title I of the Elementary and secondary Education Act of 1965 (section 241c et seq. of this title), the amount which the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is eligible to recelve under subpart 1 of such part A (this section) or under sections 121, 122, or 123. (sections 241c-1, 2410-2, or 2410-3 of this title) for
the Ascal year ending June 30, 1975, shall aot exceed 50 per centum of the full amount the Commonwealth Puerto Rico would recolve (after required ratable reductions) under such subpart (this section) or section (section 2410-1, 2410-2, or 2410-3 of this title) but for this subsection, and for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1976, September 30, 1977, and September 30, 1978, such amount shall not exceed 75 per centum of the full amount the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico would receivo (after required ratable reductions) under such subpart or section but for this subsection.
[FR Doc. 77-19384 Flled 7-12-77:8:45 am)
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 134--WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 1977
The Migrant education program under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (Public Law 89-10), as amended, is one of the three Part A programs referred to as State operated programs. Funding allocations for the program in FY 1978 are $145.8 million as compared with $9.7 million in FY 1967.
As one of the State operated programs, funds for the program are subtracted from the total appropriations before computations are made to determine the allocations for each State and subsequently for. each local educational agency (LEA). This funding of the program "off the top" results in the State operated programs being fully funded while the LEA portion of Part A of Title I may be prorated because of a total Part A appropriation that was less than the authorization or because of an unanticipated growth in the number of pupils in the State programs .
Each State's allocation is based on the number of pupils enrolled during the second prior year. In contrast to the operation of the portion of Part A that is allocated to LEAS, there is no local district entitlement under this program. The allocation is to the State and the State program allocation must be submitted and approved before funds are actually distributed.
For FY 1977 the pupil count for the various projects was estimated by United States Office of Education (USOE) at 675,000, but this number represents a duplicated count since pupils may participate in more than one project. The allocation to the States for FY 1977 was based on on 267,791 full time equivalent pupils, for FY 1978 the allocation figure is 296,430 pupils. The FY 1978 allocations have been based on programs projected for 46 States plus Puerto Rico.
The findings and observations of this study are based on a review and analysis of documents in the USOE and interviews with various persons who have been associated with the program at the national level. As a result of these activities, the following general observations seem pertinent:
The funding requirements of the program will in all
The addition of the "children who have been migratory
The MSRTS data appear to represent a considerable
The "hold harmless" provision may merit reconsideration
Operational problems with the MSRTS appear to be more
Current efforts to develop a criterion referenced
Current procedures for determining the number of full-
When the recently published "interim final regulations"
many of the operational problems historically
Even though comments in the proposed regulations attempt
The quality of the Migrant program reviews conducted by
Current Migrant program evaluations from the States do not provide information of value in comparing programs on an interstate basis nor do they provide sufficient information to guide efforts for program improvement. Proposed changes appear to focus more on evaluations of student academic achievement progress than on program management oriented evaluations that might be used to improve the operational aspects of the program.
Identification, recruitment, enrollment, and eligibility
A comprehensive audit schedule for State Migrant programs
Evidence of positive action through interstate cooperative endeavors can be found, but much improvement can still be made in such areas as interstate cooperation, program planning, and program monitoring.
The position of the administration of the Migrant program
16. Operationally, the Migrant education program is different
from other allocation programs. First, the program serves
With the adoption of the proposed regulations, some additional guidance should be available for States to reduce the problems associated with ineligible pupils in the program and inappropriate uses of program funds.
98-491 O - 78 - 13