UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
December 13, 2017
The Honorable Ed Richardson
Superintendent of Education
Alabama Department of Education
50 North Ripley Street
Montgomery, AL 36104
Dear Superintendent Ed Richardson:
Thank you for submitting Alabamas consolidated State plan to implement requirements of
covered programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as
amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), and of the amended McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (McKinney-Vento Act).
I am writing to provide initial feedback based on the U.S. Department of Educations (the
Departments) review of your consolidated State plan. As you know, the Department also
conducted, as required by the statute, a peer review of the portions of your State plan related to
ESEA Title I, Part A, ESEA Title III, Part A, and the McKinney-Vento Act using the
Departments State Plan Peer Review Criteria released on March 28, 2017. Peer reviewers
examined these sections of the consolidated State plan in their totality, while respecting State and
local judgments. The goal of the peer review was to support State- and local-led innovation by
providing objective feedback on the technical, educational, and overall quality of the State plan
and to advise the Department on the ultimate approval of the plan. I am enclosing a copy of the
peer review notes for your consideration.
Based on the Departments review of all programs submitted under Alabamas consolidated
State plan, including those programs subject to peer review, the Department is requesting
clarifying or additional information to ensure the States plan has met all statutory and regulatory
requirements, as detailed in the enclosed table. Each State has flexibility in how it meets the
statutory and regulatory requirements. Please note that the Departments feedback may differ
from the peer review notes. I encourage you to read the full peer notes for additional suggestions
and recommendations for improving your consolidated State plan.
ESEA section 8451 requires the Department to issue a written determination within 120 days of
a States submission of its consolidated State plan. Given this statutory requirement, I ask that
you revise Alabamas consolidated State plan and resubmit it through OMB Max by December
28, 2017. We encourage you to continue to engage in consultation with stakeholders, including
representatives from the Governors office, as you develop and implement your State plan. If
you would like to take more time to resubmit your consolidated State plan, please contact your
Office of State Support Program Officer in writing and indicate your new submission date.
400 MARYLAND AVE., SW, WASHINGTON, DC 20202
www.ed.gov
The Department of Educations mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by
fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
Page 2 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
Please recognize that if we accommodate your request for additional time, a determination on the
ESEA consolidated State plan may be rendered after the 120-day period.
Department staff will contact you to support Alabama in addressing the items enclosed with this
letter. If you have any immediate questions or need additional information, I encourage you to
contact your Program Officer for the specific Department program.
Please note that the Department only reviewed information provided in Alabamas consolidated
State plan that was responsive to the Revised Template for the Consolidated State Plan that was
issued on March 13, 2017. Each State is responsible for administering all programs included in
its consolidated State plan consistent with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.
Additionally, the Department can only review and approve complete information. If Alabama
indicated that any aspect of its plan may change or is still under development, Alabama may
include updated or additional information in its resubmission. Alabama may also propose an
amendment to its approved plan when additional data or information are available consistent
with ESEA section 1111(a)(6)(B). The Department cannot approve incomplete details within the
State plan until the State provides sufficient information.
Thank you for the important work that you and your staff are doing to support the transition to
the ESSA. The Department looks forward to working with you to ensure that all children have
the opportunity to reach their full potential.
Sincerely,
/s/
Jason Botel
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Delegated the authority to perform the
functions and duties of the position of
Assistant Secretary, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education
Enclosures
cc: Governor
State Title I Director
State Title II Director
State Title III Director
State Title IV Director
State Title V Director
State 21st Century Community Learning Center Director
State Director for McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act: Education for Homeless
Children and Youths Program
Page 3 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
Items That Require Additional Information or Revision in Alabamas Consolidated State Plan
Title I, Part A: Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies (LEAs)
A.4.iii.b.2: If Applicable, Long- Although the Alabama State Department of Education (ALSDE) indicates that its long term goal
term Goals for each Extended- is to increase the States five-year adjusted cohort graduation rate to 95 percent by school year
year Adjusted Cohort Graduation 2030 and provides baseline data and measurements of interim progress, it is not clear whether this
Rate is for all students and/or each subgroup of students and whether this is more rigorous than the
four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate. As such, it is unclear whether the long-term goal and
measurements of interim progress take into account the improvement necessary for subgroups of
students who are behind in reaching those goals to make significant progress in closing statewide
graduation rate gaps, such that the States long-term goals require greater rates of improvement
for subgroups of students that graduate from high school at lower rates. Although establishing
long-term goals for an extended-year rate is optional, if a State chooses to do so, the ESEA
requires that a State identify and describe the long-term goals and measurements of interim
progress, including baseline data, for the extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate for all
students and each subgroup of students, which the statute requires be more rigorous than the long-
term goals set for the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate.
A.4.iv.a: Academic Achievement ALSDE indicates that in addition to proficiency on statewide reading/language arts and
Indicator mathematic assessments for high schools, the State will include high school growth in the
Academic Achievement indicator. However, ALSDE does not provide a description of the
growth measure or how the State will calculate the Academic Achievement indicator for high
schools. The ESEA requires a State to describe how the Academic Achievement indicator is
calculated and if, at the high school level, the indicator includes a measure of student growth,
a description of the growth measure.
In its State plan, ALSDE indicates that schools not meeting the 95 percent participation rate
will be required to complete a plan after one year and after two years the school
accountability rating will be reduced by 2 percent, which is permissible. However, the ESEA
requires a State to calculate the proficiency rate for the Academic Achievement indicator with
a denominator of the greater of 95 percent of all students (or 95 percent of each subgroup of
students) or the number of students participating in the assessments. It is not clear that
ALSDE is meeting the statutory requirement for calculating the Academic Achievement
indicator.
A.4.iv.b: Other Academic Although ALSDE indicates that it will use growth as its Other Academic Achievement indicator
Page 4 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
Indicator for Elementary and for K-8 schools and secondary schools that are not high schools by determining the percent of
Secondary Schools that are Not students who demonstrated annual growth, it is not clear how this indicator will be calculated; for
High Schools example, ALSDE could include a description of the growth model and what constitutes a years
worth of growth. In addition, as ALSDE has previously noted that it has changed assessments, it
is not clear how the State will calculate this indicator for the 2017-2018 school year. The ESEA
requires that a State describe how it calculates the Other Academic indicator for all elementary
and secondary schools that are not high schools.
A.4.iv.d: Progress in Achieving Although ALSDE indicates that it will calculate the percentage of growth that English learner
English Language Proficiency students have made on the State English language proficiency assessment, it is not clear how this
Indicator growth measure will be calculated or how student-level progress will translate into a school-level
indicator. The ESEA requires a State to establish and describe in its State plan a Progress in
Achieving English Language Proficiency indicator that is the same indicator across all schools
and LEAs in the State, based on the States definition of English language proficiency, and
measured by the States English language proficiency assessment.
A.4.iv.e: School Quality or The ESEA requires that a State describe a School Quality or Student Success indicator that can be
Student Success Indicator(s) measured statewide, is comparable for the grade spans to which the indicator applies, and will
allow for meaningful differentiation in school performance. Although ALSDE provides
information on what will comprise its College and Career Ready indicator, it does not provide
information regarding how the indicator is calculated. Specifically, it is not clear if the calculation
for high schools will include all twelfth grade students in the denominator or only students who
graduate. Therefore, it is not clear that the State meets this requirement.
A.4.v.b: Weighting of Indicators Although ALSDE describes the weighting of each indicator, the State does not describe how the
weighting is adjusted for schools for which an indicator cannot be calculated due to not having
the minimum number of students. The ESEA requires that a State describe how the weighting is
adjusted for schools for which an indicator cannot be calculated due to not having the minimum
number of students.
A.4.vi.a Comprehensive Support Although ALSDE indicates that it will identify schools for comprehensive support and
and Improvement Schools improvement beginning in 2018-2019, it is not clear that the SEA will identify schools in the
Lowest Performing beginning of the 2018-2019 school year (based on data from the 2017-2018 school year for all
indicators in the ALSDE accountability system). The ESEA requires that a State include the year
in which it will first identify schools for comprehensive support and improvement, consistent
with the Secretarys April 2017 Dear Colleague letter that included additional flexibility for a
State to identify schools for comprehensive support and improvement by the beginning of the
Page 5 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
2018-2019 school year.
A.4.vi.b: Comprehensive Support ALSDE indicates that it will identify all Title I public high schools with a graduation rate more
and Improvement SchoolsLow than ten percentage points below the State average which would currently result in identifying
Graduation Rates more schools than just those with graduation rates below 67 percent; however, this method may
not always result in the identification of all high schools with a graduation rate below 67 percent.
In addition, although ALSDE indicates that it will identify schools for comprehensive support and
improvement beginning 2018-2019, it is not clear that the SEA will identify schools in the
beginning of the 2018-2019 school year. The ESEA requires that a State include the year in which
it will first identify schools for comprehensive support and improvement and identify all public
high schools failing to graduate 67 percent or more of their students for comprehensive support
and improvement, consistent with the Secretarys April 2017 Dear Colleague letter that included
additional flexibility for a State to identify schools for comprehensive support and improvement
by the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year.
A.4.vi.f: Targeted Support and The ESEA requires a State to describe its methodology to identify schools in which the
Improvement Schools performance of any subgroup of students, on its own, would lead to identification under ESEA
Additional Targeted Support section 1111(c)(4)(D)(i)(I) using the States methodology under ESEA section 1111(c)(4)(D)
(i.e., Additional Targeted Support schools). Such methodology must include identifying these
schools either from among all public schools in the State, including both Title I and non-Title I
schools, or from among the schools identified as schools with one or more consistently
underperforming subgroups. In its State plan, however, ALSDE indicates that only Title I schools
that are considered low-performing will be identified for Additional Targeted Support.
A.4.viii.b: Exit Criteria for Although ALSDE provides exit criteria for schools identified for Additional Targeted Support, it
Schools Receiving Additional is not clear the number of years over which schools will have to exit identification. The ESEA
Targeted Support requires that a State establish the State-determined number of years over which schools identified
to receive Additional Targeted Support must satisfy the exit criteria.
A.5: Disproportionate Rates of Although ALSDE describes disproportionate rates of access to teachers for all high-poverty and
Access to Educators high-minority schools compared to low-poverty and low-minority schools for inexperienced and
out-of-field teachers, ALSDE does not specifically address ineffective teachers or schools
assisted under Title I, Part A. The ESEA requires that a State describe the extent, if any, that low-
income children enrolled in schools assisted under Title I, Part A are served at disproportionate
rates by ineffective, out-of-field, or inexperienced teachers. Additionally, the ESEA requires a
State to describe the measure(s) it will use to evaluate and publicly report its progress with
respect to how low-income and minority children are not served at disproportionate rates by
Page 6 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
ineffective, out-of-field, and inexperienced teachers. ALSDE states that it will report data related
to out-of-field and non-certified teachers, but does not describe how it will publicly report its
progress with respect to how low-income and minority children are not served at disproportionate
rates by ineffective and inexperienced teachers.
Title I, Part C: Education of Migratory Children
B.1: Supporting Needs of ALSDE describes how, in planning and implementing the Migrant Education Program (MEP), it
Migratory Children will identify and address the unique educational needs of migratory children, including preschool
migratory children and migratory children who have dropped out of school, through:
The full range of services that are available for migratory children from appropriate local,
State, and Federal educational programs;
Joint planning among local, State, and Federal educational programs serving migratory
children, including language instruction educational programs under Title III, Part A;
The integration of services available under Title I, Part C with services provided by those
other programs; and
Measurable program objectives and outcomes.
However, the ESEA requires that a State also describe how it will evaluate the MEP in the areas
described above, to ensure the unique educational needs of migratory children are identified and
addressed.
Title I, Part D: Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent,
or At-Risk
C.2: Program Objectives and The program objectives and outcomes that ALSDE includes in its State plan are the statutory
Outcomes purposes of the Title I, Part D program. These purposes do not constitute the program objectives
and outcomes established by ALSDE that will be used to assess the effectiveness of the Title I,
Part D program in improving the academic, career, and technical skills of children.
The ESEA requires that each SEA establish program objectives and outcomes that will be used to
assess the effectiveness of the Title I, Part D program in improving the academic, career, and
technical skills of children in the program.
Title V, Part B, Subpart 2: Rural and Low-Income School Program
H.1: Outcomes and Objectives The ESEA requires a State to provide information on program objectives and outcomes for
activities under Title V, Part B, Subpart 2, including how the SEA will use funds to help all
students meet the challenging State academic standards. While ALSDE provides a description
about its program objectives and outcomes under the ESEA generally, ALSDE does not identify
its objectives and outcomes for activities under the Rural and Low-Income School program
Page 7 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
(RLIS) (e.g., which of the objectives and outcomes under the ESEA programs in 5222(a) are the
objectives and outcomes for RLIS; or objectives and outcomes tailored specifically to ALSDEs
plans for RLIS). The ESEA requires a State to include a description of how it will use RLIS
funds to help all students meet the challenging State academic standards.
Education for Homeless Children and Youths Program, McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, Title VII, Subtitle B
I.2: Dispute Resolution In its State plan, ALSDE describes procedures for the resolution of disputes regarding the
educational placement of homeless children and youth. The plan does not, however, include
procedural timelines or any other information that indicates that these procedures would result in
the prompt resolution of disputes. The McKinney-Vento Act requires a State to describe
procedures for the prompt resolution of disputes.
I.4: Access to Services While ALSDE describes homeless children as being a named, targeted subgroup in various
preschool programs, it is not clear how this ensures that homeless children have access to
public preschool programs, administered by the SEA or LEA, as provided to other children in
the State. The McKinney-Vento Act requires a State to describe procedures that ensure that
homeless children have access to public preschool programs, administered by the SEA or an
LEA, as provided to other children in the State. (Requirement I.4i)
In its State plan, ALSDE describes the SEAs requirement that all students, including
homeless children and youth, have equal access to educational programs and support services
that are needed to meet the same challenging State academic achievement standards as other
students. ALSDE does not, however, include procedures that ensure that homeless youth and
youth separated from public schools are accorded equal access to appropriate secondary
education and support services, including by identifying and removing barriers that prevent
them from receiving appropriate credit for full or partial coursework satisfactorily completed
while attending a prior school, in accordance with State, local, and school policies. The
McKinney-Vento Act requires a State to describe procedures that ensure that homeless youth
and youth separated from public schools are accorded equal access to appropriate secondary
education and support services, including by identifying and removing barriers that prevent
them from receiving appropriate credit for full or partial coursework satisfactorily completed
while attending a prior school, in accordance with State, local, and school policies.
(Requirement I.4ii)
While ALSDE indicates that information is disseminated and training is provided for
Response to Intervention to address inclusion and provision of appropriate educational and
support services for homeless children and youth, it is not clear how this ensures that
Page 8 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
homeless children and youth do not face barriers to accessing academic and extracurricular
activities, including magnet school, summer school, career and technical education, advanced
placement, online learning, and charter school programs, if such programs are available at the
State and local levels. The McKinney-Vento Act requires the State to describe procedures
that ensure that homeless children and youth who meet the relevant eligibility criteria do not
face barriers to accessing academic and extracurricular activities, including magnet school,
summer school, career and technical education, advanced placement, online learning, and
charter school programs, if such programs are available at the State and local levels.
(Requirement I.4iii)
I.5: Strategies to Address Other In its State plan, ALSDE provides a strategy (a comprehensive monitoring system) to address
Problems problems resulting from enrollment delays that are caused by (i) requirements of immunization
and other required health records and (ii) residency requirements, and indicates the monitoring
system has been revised to reflect ESSA amendments. It is unclear, however, if this monitoring
system addresses problems resulting from enrollment delays that are caused by (iii) lack of birth
certificates, school records, or other documentation; (iv) guardianship issues; or (v) uniform or
dress code requirements. The McKinney-Vento Act requires a State to provide strategies to
address problems resulting from enrollment delays that are caused by (iii) lack of birth
certificates, school records, or other documentation; (iv) guardianship issues; or (v) uniform or
dress code requirements.
I.6: Policies to Remove Barriers In its State plan, ALSDE demonstrates that the State Coordinator will work with the State
Advisory Committee to review LEAs existing policies and practices for the enrollment and
retention of homeless children and youth and that ALSDE will facilitate approval of a revised
homeless State plan, as well as provide ongoing training related to barriers to enrollment and
retention due to outstanding fees, fines or absences. It is not clear, however, that the SEA and
LEA shall review and revise policies to remove barriers to the identification of homeless children
and youth, and the enrollment and retention of homeless children and youth in schools in the
State, including barriers to enrollment and retention due to outstanding fees or fines, or absences.
The McKinney-Vento Act requires the State to demonstrate that the SEA and LEAs in the State
have developed, and shall review and revise, policies to remove barriers to the identification of
homeless children and youth, and the enrollment and retention of homeless children and youth in
schools in the State, including barriers to enrollment and retention due to outstanding fees or
fines, or absences.
I.7: Assistance from Counselors While ALSDE describes that liaisons will be trained, it is not clear how homeless students will
Page 9 The Superintendent Ed Richardson
receive assistance from school counselors to advise such youths, and prepare and improve the
readiness of such youths for college. The McKinney-Vento Act requires a State to describe how
homeless youths will receive assistance from counselors to advise such youths, and prepare and
improve the readiness of such youths for college.
