The Allocation Schedule for each Consortium from the state budget will be posted within 45 days of the day the Governor signs the budget. Per AB104, only 1/12 of the allocation can be dispersed each month to consortia. We have been working with legislative staff to highlight how this hinders program roll-out and management of expenditures. We are hopeful this stipulation may change but at this point, consortia will receive 1/12 of their allocation per month whether direct funded or using a fiscal agent.

We are working on that.

The AB104 legislation, Section 84914 does allow a consortium to reduce funding for ineffectiveness. Per the legislation, if the member has been consistently ineffective in providing services that address the needs identified in the adult education plan and reasonable interventions have not resulted in improvements, the consortium can reduce their funding. Consortium must document the reasonable interventions, and the member responses to these interventions. The consortium must share these activities with its members at a public meeting, and if a reduction is to take place that must also be documented in the meeting minutes and be agreed to by members using their governance plan.

Both MOE and Consortia Allocations have always been from the same place: the AEP. Both were always intended to carry out the approved Three-Year and Annual Plans for AEP. In the first year only, MOE was called out separately. It will not be called out separately going forward. Allocations will only be made as AEP Consortia Allocation. Starting in 16/17, there is no longer MOE - it now called Consortium funding.

On the AEP website, on the For AEP Grantees tab: http://aebg.cccco.edu/For-AEBG-Grantees

AB104 has a provision that requires that all members receive at least the same allocation every year, unless each member agrees and signs off on the allocation schedule to a different amount.

Yes, if you have unanimous agreement to do so among your consortium members.

Yes, but only through unanimous agreement of the consortium members.

Please report errors as soon as possible to the AEP.

See Program Guidance for a detailed breakdown on life of the funds and reporting deadlines. The AEP Office encourages all consortia to spend the funding in the year it is received, knowing in some cases funds may need to be carried over. However, keep in mind, that the State is tracking student enrollment and outcomes on a year-to-year basis. If funding is not spent and the program is not meeting the needs of the region, your consortium and members may be deemed ineffective and funding may be reduced as a result.

All members will need to sign the CFAD, which that allocation schedule is part of. In addition, you should keep meeting minutes and attendance sheets to document that you followed the Governance Plan for your Consortium in order to reach this agreement.

Please keep meeting minutes and sign-in sheets in your records.

No. The funds must all be allocated by May 2nd. The detail of how they will be expended, and the chance to sub-contract if needed will be due in July with the Annual Plan.

Only the member allocations should be listed on the CFAD adding up to the total consortium amount. A member would have to be designated as a fiscal agent.

Yes. AB104 ensures no less than the prior year’s allocation.

Yes.

Per AB104 legislation, the consortium is permitted to use up to 5% for administration of the consortium. This does not mean that the fiscal agent “has to” receive 5%, but instead can use up to 5%. Those activities are mostly fiscal in nature. If the MOE and Non-MOE funds are combined in 16-17, then yes, the consortium totals are larger and the potential for more administrative costs is greater. However, consortium administrative activities and their cost should be discussed and understood by the consortium members.

The AEP Office has not received a sample non-financial MOU, but as soon as it becomes available, it will be posted on the AEP website, under the Resources tab.

Not at this time.  But we will be reviewing any 15/16 funds that are not spent by 12/31/17 and factoring that into 18/19 allocations.

Not that we are aware of.

Community College Community Ed or Community Service Program cannot be co-mingled with AEP state funding. Community College Community Education has regulations that prevent it from using AEP funds.

Yes - if consortium members are in agreement as they move/transfer funding.  It is important that students’ needs are met to the fullest extent enabled by the funding resources, regardless of which member provides the services. That can mean sub-contracting with another member or returning the funds to the consortium for redistribution, if a member cannot utilize the money they were allocated for AEP purposes. As these are state funds, they can be rolled over for one year after the year of disbursal. See the Program Guidance for more information.

Yes. And the gap in services left by the member who is departing should be addressed by the consortium, as the money is available to support the implementation of your AEP plan.

Yes, they could. It would take a unanimous agreement from the consortium membership to do so, since no consortium member shall receive no less funding than the prior year, unless all agreed to it.

The guarantee of “no less funding than the prior year” unless otherwise agreed to is in legislation already, but if it helps to manage discussions at the local consortium level, you can certainly put that in your bylaws too.

Yes, they would receive the same amount unless the member and the rest of the consortium agree otherwise. However, if they still receive the same funding once the curriculum development is finished, their funds are still obligated to the implementation of your AEP plan and achieving the plan goals.

It is important to have the means to stabilize programs in order to consistently serve regional needs, address gaps and meet other objectives. Implementation of student-focused best practices should drive decisions in use of funds as the system seeks stability and, hopefully, future growth.

Unspent MOE funding for 15-16 would have to be subcontracted with another adult education provider within the consortium or returned to the State. If returned to the state, this money will go back into the $500 M Consortia pot for statewide redistribution. MOE money was released in 15-16, and had its own certification process. That is why MOE funds cannot revert to the consortium if unspent. In 16-17, MOE funding is rolled into the consortium allocation, and if a member is not spending their consortium allocation, it can be reallocated by the consortium using subcontracting methods. Both MOE and Consortia Funding are governed by the AEP rules and AB104 legislation.

Not necessarily, as the consortium would still need to cost out the time and effort it takes to administer the consortium level activities. Even if your consortium opts for direct funding, the State still only wants one report per consortium. The consortium would have to designate a coordinator position and resources to cover these activities. See Program Guidance for specifics on the consortium administration activities.

The “prior year” allocation figure for Year 2 is based on the total of MOE and/or Consortium Allocation in 2015-16. As a consortium, you can agree to shifts in amounts as needed if you are all in agreement.

Yes. The “prior year” rule applies throughout the AEP 3-year Plan period, unless the legislature changes it (which is not anticipated). See the Program Guidance for more information.

When completing the CFAD form, consortium members must decide how to fund their consortium coordinator and other supporting staff and resources. In 15-16, the consortium coordinator was funded by various means – using either a fiscal agent structure, pooling resources from various members, or other alternatives. Whatever funding mechanism you used, that member (or members) will receive the same amount in 16-17 (using the AB104 legislative language). Please consider this when discussing how to pay for the coordinator activities in 16-17.

Yes, though other decisions can be made according to your local governance plan and any by-law agreement, decisions regarding allocation amounts have to be agreed upon by all members.

Yes, it most likely would, but be aware that a reimbursement process is NOT the model the Legislature intended. Legislative staff are stressing the intent of the fiscal agent is to run a pass-through process. The funds should be distributed directly to members and NOT provided through a reimbursement process. Please check with your fiscal staff for the most appropriate MOU or sub-agreement to pass-through funding.

It depends on many things – but it’s up to the members of the consortia to determine whether or not these partners receive funding.

Each year of AEP funding will be tracked separately – 15-16 will have code 15-328-XX in the online system. The 16-17 funding will have code 16-328-XX, and so on. Each year will be tracked online through the life of the funding – even if it’s carried over into the next year. Just don’t co-mingle 15-16 funding with 16-17 funding – the budget and expenses are to be tracked, and reported separately. We are developing a new fiscal system that will come online in 17/18.  Stay tuned for changes.

It is referenced in the updated AEP Program Guidance (Pages 11-13) posted on the website 3-17-2016.

The Consortia Allocation calculation is based on the demographic data for each consortia region to determine level of need, so it already factors in the data for all areas within each region. It is a local consortia decision to determine whether the new program receives consortia funds from the amount being allocated to that region.

Mini-grants to members can be included their allocations in the CFAD, or they can be part of sub-contracting between partners. The 3-Year plan is a high level view of what your consortium hopes to achieve in this 3-year window. More detailed information is contained in each of the Annual Plans. Financial reports provide an even more detailed look into where funds were spent on what activity.

You can use existing 15-16 funding from members and subcontract for services. If you have already allocated your 16-17 funding, you can still subcontract with members for services. Remember, if the new member did not receive a direct allocation from the fiscal agent (or was direct funded), but rather receive the funding via a subcontract using another member’s funding, they are not entitled to funding in the next year. They would be treated just like any other adult education provider that has a subcontract with a member.

Yes, the Final Allocation Schedule from the state will be released within 15 days after the Governor signs the state budget. It will be posted on the AEP website. It is unlikely there will be any big changes. If you see a discrepancy, please let us know ASAP.

Consortium Funds and MOE funds were always available for all allowable activities necessary for the implementation of your Three-Year and Annual Plans. In other words, you have always been able to use Consortium Funds for operational and instructional costs, and that will continue to be the case. It is always good to enhance your funding through seeking grants and leveraging, but it is not impacted by the unification of MOE with Consortium Funds into one fund. For information on tracking expenditures, see the updated AEP Program Guidance on the Policy Guidance web page.

In the case of a K-12 adult school that didn’t have dedicated funding in prior years, this would not be considered supplanting. However, if that school is also receiving Perkins, CalWORKS, WIOA, or other fund sources – and replaces that with AEP funds – then there could be a supplanting issue. In the case of a community college that has received apportionment for courses in the seven AEP program areas, and replaces that apportionment with AEP funds - then there could be a supplanting issue.

However, if in 15-16, the member used only reserves and received no MOE or Non-MOE funding, it may be difficult to receive AEP funding in 16-17 unless other consortium members agree to give them funding from their allocations.

In the case of a K-12 adult school that didn’t have dedicated funding in prior years, this would not be considered supplanting. However, if that school is also receiving Perkins, CalWORKS, WIOA, or other fund sources – and replaces that with AEP funds – then there could be a supplanting issue. In the case of a community college that has received apportionment for courses in the seven AEP program areas, and replaces that apportionment with AEP funds - then there could be a supplanting issue.

However, if in 15-16, the member used only reserves and received no MOE or Non-MOE funding, it may be difficult to receive AEP funding in 16-17 unless other consortium members agree to give them funding from their allocations.

Yes – the consortia amounts will be larger in 16-17. AB104 legislation allows for a 5% cap related to consortium administrative activities (mostly fiscal type). Members that receive funding will also be able to charge their indirect rate. See the FAQs and link to the indirect rate and its definition. The AEP Office advises that each consortium discuss the activities and administrative costs of the consortium before making a decision on who is responsible and how much that amount will be. For more information, see the updated AEP Program Guidance.

As long as it is a unanimous consortium agreement, yes. The allocation schedule could be different year to year, depending on your consortium agreements, but the 5% total administration cap for the consortium level activities still applies.

According to AB104, the total amount received by a consortium member in the prior year is what they would receive in the following year, unless the consortium is in agreement to change it. Since fiscal agent costs are not broken out separately in the Allocation Schedule, there is no formal way to differentiate that amount. Whatever amount a member receives, it has to go to implementing your AEP plan and meeting your goals. Keep in mind, fiscal agent or not, the members are responsible to fund the consortium administrative activities and provide a point of contact to the State.

Members receive the same amount of AEP funds as they received in the prior year. If a member received funding in 15-16 to administer the consortium and now that has changed – those funds are now available to be used for AEP program related activities. If the consortium has agreed to make changes regarding Fiscal Agent or “AEP coordinator,” it is allowable if all membership agrees to this change.

Yes, that is possible. However, we need to maximize resources that go directly to students if we want to achieve the goals of AEP and keep, or even grow the funding. While having adequate administrative resources to operate the program is necessary, it is important that the maximum amount possible goes to direct services to students.

Please see the updated program guidance on this topic at: http://aebg.cccco.edu/For-AEBG-Grantees/Guidance-Regulations (updated 3/17/16, pages 13 and 14). Make sure you don’t confuse the administrative cap of 5% at the consortium level with the indirect rate allowed by members to be charged on AEP funds received – we are discussing two different levels. One level is at the consortium level, for consortium administrative activities (as referenced in the AEP program Guidance), and the other level is at the member level. When a member receives AEP funds for activities put forth in the annual plan, the member district can charge the approved indirect rate.

Please review the Program Guidance for allowable administrative expenditures.

Only administrative activities can be charged to administration. Almost all duties defined as “administrative” are considered fiscal type activities per the AB104 program guidance. Who performs these duties is not relevant. A project director, or co-lead, or part-time staff might also have other programmatic duties and those cannot be charged to administration. You will have to keep track of time and effort for administration charges based on allowable administrative activities for all staff who perform them. Please review the Program Guidance for details

No – consortium administrative activities are limited to the 5% cap whether you have a fiscal agent or are direct funded. If you are going direct funding, you will still need a person to administer the activities of the consortium per the program guidance. Your consortium will have to figure out how to pool resources to pay for those consortium level activities. A member’s indirect cost is to be used at the member level for those indirect type activities. Be careful not to confuse consortium administrative costs with a member level indirect costs. Please review the Program Guidance for additional information.

This would depend on the consortium coordinator activities. In some cases, the consortium coordinator may be responsible for some administrative type activities. Please see Program Guidance for a complete list of consortium administrative activities, and a list of consortium coordinator activities. Each consortium operates differently, so there may be overlap.

Depends on what activities you are claiming as administrative. Please see the updated Program Guidance (starts on page 13) for what you can claim as administrative activities (which are mostly fiscal in nature). Here is the link to the program guidance documents: http://aebg.cccco.edu/For-AEBG-Grantees/Guidance-Regulations

The Preliminary Allocation for 16-17 and 17-18 will be the only document with the allocations listed until the final allocations are released 15 days after the Governor signs the budget. We do not anticipate any changes between the preliminary allocation and the final allocation. Apportionment schedules will be released 30 days after the final allocations are posted. We encourage AEP consortium members and fiscal agents to obtain local board approval now so that AEP funding can be allocated locally when the 16-17 school year begins.

We ask that if the consortium wishes to change a member allocation, they refer to the AB104 legislation for restricting funding to members (see section 84914). If the three criteria listed in the AB104 legislation are not applicable to your member’s situation because the consortium wishes to pool resources for consortium wide activities, or shift member funds around from the prior year to meet current year needs, the State request that all members be in agreement for these types of changes. Evidence showing member agreement would be a signed CFAD.

Yes - Consortium members and/or fiscal agents may use their agreed upon subcontracting process for moving funding among members after the CFAD is submitted on May 2, 2016. Please refer to your consortium MOU that is in place among consortium members. If you do not have a consortium MOU, it is strongly recommended that you put one in place to define the responsibilities (financial and programmatically) of each of your members and how the consortium will operate per the State guidelines.

Please refer to the CDE Fiscal Division for questions related to MOE expiration. Non-MOE funding activities must end by 12/31/17. Final expenditure reports for AEP 15-16 Non-MOE funding are due 1/31/18 with close processing through February/March 2018.

Yes. That is correct for 16-17 funding. MOE funding from 15-16 can be carried over into the next year. All AEP funding is restricted funding (MOE & Non-MOE) and must follow the AB104 legislation related to program areas, member decision making, annual planning, 3 year planning, etc.

The AEP Office is working on a process. For now, funding will be disbursed to fiscal agents and direct funded members with instructions for planning documents. The submission of the planning documents will come later in the year and will require member approval and public comment. Funding will be apportioned by June 30, 2016. Funding must be expended by December 31, 2017. More details will be out soon.

85% will go to consortia and 15% will stay at the state level.

It can be used to launch a system but you are correct, it is one-time money and on-going operations should be based on on-going fund sources.

Yes. It was a small amount and it was added to the Data and Accountability fund (D&A). It was the only way the AEP Office was able to get the $4.8M out to consortia without having to completely redo the CFADs. The two columns of funding on the D&A Allocations are Unspent & D&A funds – both will goes towards Data & Accountability objectives and activities.

We ask that if the consortium wishes to change a member allocation that they refer the AB104 legislation for restricting funding to members (see section 84914). If the three criteria listed in the AB104 legislation are not applicable to your member’s situation because the consortium wishes to pool resources for consortium wide activities, or shift member funds around from the prior year to meet current year needs, the State request that all members be in agreement for these types of changes. Evidence showing member agreement would be a signed CFAD.

If you are direct funded, you will receive your apportionment in the first 12 months of the state fiscal year. If you wish to alter or revise the amount you received, you may do so through the subcontracting process. If you have a fiscal agent, they will receive the consortium apportionment in the first 12 months of the state fiscal year. If the fiscal agent wishes to alter or revise the amount being allocated to members, they may do so, with member agreement, through the subcontracting process.

Your tables will show remaining funds from prior year allocations. The tables will also show projected funding for the upcoming year. It is critical that consortia keep those tables separate – don’t co-mingle fund years in your tables even though they might be spent on similar activities. Track the funds separately - use separate annual plans and separate reporting.

Yes – your fiscal agent for 15-16 will be responsible for tracking the 15-16 expenses until these funds are exhausted. That means filing online reports for the 15-16 funds, providing progress updates, and closing out the account in the spring of 2018. This is their responsibility, even if in 16-17 you are direct funded.

For 2015-16, the Adult Education Block Grant distributes $500 million, as follows:
$336.9 million for maintenance of effort (MOE) funding to eligible county offices of education and school districts based on 2012-13 General Fund expenditures on adult education programs. This funding is distributed directly to the local educational agency (LEA).
$163.1 million for consortia funding (also known as non-MOE funding) to adult education consortia based on a region’s share of statewide adult education need. This funding may be distributed directly to consortium members or to a fund administrator designated by the consortium. Starting in 16-17, 17-18, and beyond the AEP funding continues at $500M per year.  The funding is ongoing.

Not quite. AEP Funds are to be released no later than 45 days after the state budget is signed by the Governor. Also take into account processing time by State Controller’s Office, and County Offices of Education in the funding release time. Keep in mind, the State can withhold funding if a consortium has not submitted its deliverables.

There are no statutory provisions preventing an LEA from carrying over funds; however, a consortium may change the amount of adult education funds available in future years based on actual prior fiscal year spending.

Per California Education Code Section 84912, funds are apportioned in twelve equal payments to each LEA on a monthly basis.

The AEP Apportionment funding comes from the state general fund, but are earmarked for the specific purposes described in AB104 for the AEP. They are not part of general funds coming to the k-12 school districts or the community colleges.

Members can take their state approved indirect or for colleges the negotiated indirect rate for their member allocation.

Consortium fiscal agents - taking care of only consortium fiscal activities - can take up to a 5% administration or indirect for consortium level activities. 
5% admin is taken on the entire consortium allocation. But is restricted to fiscal activities only. 
The indirect at the member level is limited to that member's allocation. So you would have to look at what Yuba CCD was allocated by the consortium for programmatic activities - and they could take their indirect on that amount. 
Indirect activities are listed in the program guidance.

The amount of funds to be distributed to a member of that consortium shall be equal to or greater than the amount distributed in the prior fiscal year, unless the consortium makes at least one of the following findings related to the member for which the distribution would be reduced:

(A) The member no longer wishes to provide services consistent with the adult education plan.
(B) The member cannot provide services that address the needs identified in the adult education plan.
(C) The member has been consistently ineffective in providing services that address the needs identified in the adult education plan and reasonable interventions have not resulted in improvements.

(a-b) If a member no longer wishes to provide services or cannot provide services, if possible, reallocate their funds to other members in the consortium. The consortium membership should amend planning documentation to ensure services are being covered in the region (as a result of a member that no longer wishes to provide services or cannot provide services). The consortium must also notify the AEP Office and update the CFAD allocation schedule for 17-18.

(c) If a consortium decides that a member has been consistently ineffective in providing services that address the needs identified in the adult education plan, and is not following the member requirements as listed in the AEP Program Guidance Section 5, and the Annual Plan General Assurances, the consortium must take the following steps:

1, Document the member’s ineffectiveness (what requirements are they not meeting, etc.)
2. Notify the member that they are being monitored for effectiveness and their funds could be reduced as a result.
3. Notify AEP TAP for technical assistance for the member.
4. Provide the information in #1-#3 to the AEPOffice.
5. Work with AEP TAP and the AEP Office to determine if reasonable interventions have not resulted in improvements.
6. If no improvements after steps #1-4, reduce the member’s funding and update the CFAD allocation schedule for 17-18. Copy the AEP Office on all correspondence related to member funding reduction.

The members of the consortium may decide to designate a member to serve as the fund administrator to receive and distribute funds from the program. If a member is chosen to be the fund administrator, the member shall commit to developing a process to apportion funds to each member of the consortium pursuant to the consortium’s adult education plan within 45 days of receiving funds appropriated for the program. This process shall not require a consortium member to be funded on a reimbursement basis.

We anticipate the 2017-18 apportionments to be released by CDE Accounting possibly the first week of October. Once the State Controllers releases, it will be approximately three weeks until payment is received by the agency.

If you have a fiscal agent, changes can be made to the CFAD throughout the current year. The cutoff date is May 2nd. As we move into the new system, the AEP Office will evaluate an updated process.

Consortium Director, with 100% agreement by the members, would reallocate funding. The AEP Office would need to be notified as well. Previously this was done with an updated CFAD with all members signing off. Once the reallocation is approved – the fiscal agent would have to work out the transfer of funds among members. This may be difficult if the members has already encumbered the funds. Before starting down the path to transfer funds/update the CFAD – check with your fiscal agent to see if it’s even possible at the local level.

We are moving to a new system. The new system will be tracking current year and prior year funding. There will not be any codes used, just fiscal years. More details will be released later this fall.

If a Consortium Member would like to reallocate funds, the Consortium Director, with 100% agreement by the members, can reallocate the funds. The Consortium would need to notify the AEP Office of the change. Once the reallocation is approved – the fiscal agent would have to work out the transfer of funds among members. Prior to starting this process, the Consortium Director should check with the fiscal agent to see if this is possible because the funds may have been encumbered already.

If this moves forward, you would be required to work with the AEP Office to update your CFAD reflecting the change.

We are moving to a new system. The new system will be tracking current year and prior year funding. There will not be any codes used, just fiscal years. More details will be released in a few weeks.

Last year’s trailer bill language said that all funds must be pass through to members within 45 days. You cannot use sub agreements unless you are a member that received their pass through and is contracting with another provider. The fiscal agent should not be holding any sub agreements. The chancellor’s office issued the following memo on how to pass through funds to members.

http://aebg.cccco.edu/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Cw-O6gUujhQ%3d&portalid=1

The CFAD is the only official document the State has to show member agreement on AEP funds. So as your allocations change – so must your CFAD. You can update the allocations in NOVA – so you don’t have to use a paper CFAD/stand-alone document. But there is still a certification process. I have copied Nicole & Ryan who can give the details on how to certify your consortium allocations as result of your awards process or reallocation to members throughout the year.

The CFAD is the only official document the State has to show member agreement on AEP funds. So as your allocations change – so must your CFAD. You can update the allocations in NOVA – so you don’t have to use a paper CFAD/stand-alone document. But there is still a certification process. I have copied Nicole & Ryan who can give the details on how to certify your consortium allocations as result of your awards process or reallocation to members throughout the year.

Consortia that need to adjust their 16-17 and/or 17-18 allocations will need to update the allocation amounts in NOVA and submit a revised signed CFAD document. Here are the steps to do that:

Changing allocations for your consortium members requires submitting a revised CFAD and obtaining signatures from all of your members that indicates agreement/approval of the allocation changes. You will need to submit a revised CFAD document with signatures based on the updated amounts. You should upload this document to the document library and select the box for “Amendment”. We are working on creating a template for the CFAD updates, but in the meantime please print a copy of your CFAD and handwrite the changes, sign and scan to upload as an amendment.

For FY 16-17 allocation changes, the revised amounts should be reflected in the 16-17 carryover line of the member budgets. You will also need to submit a revised 16-17 CFAD document with signatures based on the updated amounts. Please follow the same process as outlined above for submitting a revised CFAD document.

You can edit the member allocations by clicking on Allocations (located on the blue navigation pane on the left side of the screen). Please see screenshot below.

Here is the process as Neil has described it:

Amending the CFAD might take some time (getting signatures). You can always adjust you budget later in the pending quarter or the following quarter.

Members expenses & budget changes are due 3/1/18. Consortium certification will be due by 3/31/18. You could attempt to have your CFAD submitted and approved prior to the 3/1/18 member expenses report (and budget changes). The member allocations can be adjusted at that point.

For 16-17 allocation changes, you should reflect these changes when members report their 16-17 Carryover Amounts when submitting their budgets. You will need to submit a revised CFAD document with signatures from your members that indicates agreement/approval of the allocation changes based on the updated amounts for 16-17. You can hand write in the changes, sign and scan to upload them as an amendment. The system should allow you to submit 16-17 carryover amounts that do not match the CFAD. You should upload these documents to the document library and select the box for "Amendment."

We will note these hardships in our report to the legislature.

If smaller districts are overwhelmed by this exercise, please tell them to do the best they can, knowing that some of this data may be used for policy decisions. There is no penalty for zero reporting, but it doesn’t help us move the program forward.

Yes - you are able to complete an allocation amendment for last year today. You are able to make allocation amendments on fund years at anytime until the funding expires.

Yes, the two members will need to approve the prior allocation amendment for NOVA to update the totals to start the next amendment.

A new Allocation Amendment will need to be done for the July increase. The amendment summary can be updated in the new amendment.

The allocation information is in the NOVA fiscal management system. Each consortia member allocations are listed.

Prior year allocations can be found on the CAEP website, caladulted.org. You will click on Administrators, Funding and then Annual CAEP Allocations. There you will find the allocation schedules by year.

Funds are scheduled to be released per the CDE schedule that was posted. A list of K12/COE Fiscal Agents and Direct Funded agencies, their entitlements and the apportionment payment schedule can be viewed on the California Department of Education CAEP Funding Results web page. A list of Community College Fiscal Agents and Direct Funded Community College agencies can be viewed on the California Community College Chancellor’s Office Apportionment Reports web page.

Below are a few options to support your request:

1. Consortium with member agreement can always make one-time allocation amendments during the year. This means going into NOVA and moving funds from one district to another. Since your consortium is direct funded – you would have to physically transfer money around among members. Allocation amendments have no impact on the annual allocations via the CFAD (which by statute is based on prior year amounts). But you can use whatever mechanism you want for the reallocation adjustment discussion following your by-laws for one-time re-allocations.

2. Now, if the consortium wanted to adjust the annual allocations via the CFAD – there is specific education code that must be followed. This cannot be superseded by by-laws. Rules under EC 84914 (a) Member gets the same amount as they did in the prior year. (b) For the COLA – member receives the same proportional share based on prior year funding. (c) Member annual allocation amounts maybe reduced as follows (1) the member no longer wishes to do what they said they were going to do, (2) the member can’t do what they said they were going to do, or (3) member is ineffective.

Link to the education code: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EDC&sectionNum=84914.

If the consortium wants to change the amounts for the upcoming year, you must have members that no longer wish to provide services according to the 3 year/annual plan, or can’t provide the services, or are ineffective and reasonable intervention have not resulted in improvements.

Since it is a Direct Funded consortium, the monies will be sent between agencies. The State will send the member's original allocation amount to them. Any transfer of funds beyond the original allocation done through an Allocation Amendment will be paid by the member giving the funds. This can be done by writing a check to the member who received the increase.

There are a few ways to receive various adult education fund streams…

1. WIOA II – apply through CDE to obtain federal literacy funds serving adult students.
2. LCFF – review the county LCAP and see if any local control formula funding has been set aside for adult education.
3. CAEP – contact your regional adult education consortium and become involved in the regional planning process for adult education. The consortium makes the funding decisions.
4. CalWORKs – check with county social service if they have employment & training dollars for their clients that the county office could run instructional programs to meet their needs.
5. Perkins – check with local K12 district in the county/region about the availability of adult education Perkins dollars.

There is no set aside pot of adult education funds for K12 districts or county offices unless they go through the fund sources above (and the process to apply for the funds).

If they are a member and just curious where to find their allocation:

The money should come from the County Treasury if they are a K-12 direct funded.

Once received, the money should be put into a Fund 11 with a resource code of 6391.

The coming year's allocations are posted in the CFAD section of NOVA. Once the consortium certifies the CFAD, the allocations will move to the Allocations section of NOVA.

The rules are everyone gets COLA unless you have cause under EC 84914 for them not to get the COLA. Having a fiscal agent doesn’t affect the COLA requirement. It just makes it easier to move money around. So as long as you have the discussion about who gets COLA, and who doesn’t – and if everyone gets it – the CFAD will show that documentation.

The one issue with having the fiscal agent “hang on” to the money is that trailer bill language (which is now code) mandates that fiscal agents must release the funds within 45 days of receipt. So the fiscal agent can’t hold the funds. But the consortium could make a decision to fund future projects (with everyone pitches in X amount), and then when those expenses come due, the fiscal agent deducts or pays that amount from what should be going out that month. It’s a little complex because there could be delays in payment from the state. So it could work – but it’s a lot of work for the fiscal agent. And you would have to figure out who is paying for the future projects (who gets the invoice), how that is deducted from the member allocations, and make sure the fiscal agent actually has the funding in their account (and hasn’t violated the 45 day hold requirement).

A better solution – go through the CFAD process. Then after its submitted agree to hold X amount for consortium projects. Also agree upon who will pay for these projects (fiscal agent or another member). Then do an one-time allocation amendment to move funds to the agreed upon member and they pay the bills. This method will keep you from violating the 45 day rule.

Per the CAEP Office, the pass through for a fiscal agent is limited to 45 days upon receipt of funds. They can charge up to 5% indirect, but that is negotiable. Some fiscal agents charge nothing, some charge a small amount, and some charge more. So – it varies.

The fiscal agent must follow the fiscal education code for CAEP.

Plus a community college fiscal agent must follow the Budget and Management Manual.

If the consortium wants to fund new members that have no prior year funding, they should use the allocation amendment process after the CFAD is submitted to reallocate consortium funds to the new member.

The best explanation is in our fiscal management guide Section 2.

Here is the folder on the website with the detailed formula

The CFAD is the official allocation document for each year. We advise consortia if they are going to do a one-time allocation, to do this using the allocation amendment process after the CFAD is submitted. Per State regulations, the member may receive no less than the prior year’s CFAD unless there is cause to reduce their allocation (EC 84914).

So if that member received a 1% COLA on the CFAD, than that increase would be reflected in this year’s calculation. Using the current years official CFAD, all members would receive an allocation amount proportional to the percentage they received last year.

If the 1% was given via an allocation amendment and not the CFAD, then you will not be required to give it again this year.

There is no way to discern this information in NOVA. In NOVA, you can use the FIFO chart to see the remaining funds, by FY, for the member who is holding the common consortium funds. However, the member would have to determine of their available funds, how much is the common consortium funds.

Yes - you will complete an allocation amendment based on the fund year you are re-allocating the monies. For example, like I used in the webinar, if a member will not use all of their 2018-19 funding by the expiration date, you would complete an allocation amendment for 2018-19 to move monies from one member to the next.

Based on CAEP policy:

1. Allocation decisions and any consortium decision must be discussed via a public meeting (per CAEP ed code).
2. Members must receive the same amount as in the prior year (EC84914)
3. Only members that meet one of the three criteria in EC84914 can have their prior year amount reduced.
4. For 20-21 – all members are eligible for the COLA – unless the consortium invokes EC84914.
5. Voting on who gets the COLA is not allowable. Everyone is eligible for the COLA (unless you invoke EC84914).

Q: Do member allocations for the May 2nd due date require 100% member participation?
A: Yes – all members must be at a public (virtual) meeting to discuss & decide on the CFAD that is due 5/2. Decision making & public meetings are mandated in the CAEP ed code. All members must certify the CFAD in NOVA after the public meeting & decisions are made by the members.

Q: Does approval require consensus?
A: Approval requires certification via NOVA by each member. How the consortium comes to an allocation decision is based on their by-laws. But – under ed code 84914 – each member receives the same amount as the prior year. Per CDE/Chancellor’s Office (official guidance for 20-21) – all members are eligible to receive the COLA – based on the proportional share from the prior year allocation. So the members are kind of lock in on the decision making unless a member invokes EC84914 to reduce their allocation amount.

Q: We are not looking to reduce the prior year’s allocation just reserve COLA with the fiscal agent.
A: Since State guidance says all members must receive a proportional share of the COLA, in order to reduce a member’s COLA from their proportional share – you must cite cause under EC84914. If you invoke 84914, you must cite that in you CFAD narrative and all members must agree to it by certifying.

Q: Additionally, we are amending 19-20 allocations to increase one of our members. Does that require a vote at a public meeting or just approval in NOVA?
A: Any decisions by the consortium must be done in a public meeting setting per the CAEP education code. Once approved via the public meeting, all members must certify the allocation amendment in NOVA (along with the new budget and any change to the member’s plan).

Q: Can member A just email and request the fiscal agent reduce their allocation to fund member B and then approve in NOVA?
A: You must have public meeting minutes to track all decisions for the consortium. Plus all members must approve/certify in NOVA.

With a corrective action plan, the consortium can extend from June 30th and have a new spend down date of December 31st for the remaining funds.

You can always invoke Ed Code 84914 to reduce a member below their proportional amount if it qualifies under at least one of the three criteria of 84914. That could be one way of reducing consortium held funds. But members would have to agree that it would meet at least one of the criteria under EC 84914 and certify the change in NOVA. If the criteria for reducing an allocation does not fit, there is another way. The reduced amount has been applied to each agency in NOVA. So while that must stay the way it is, there is a way for you to give funds to them to recoup what they were reduced by. It will take a little more work on the college's part. 1. First, all members who will receive an allocation for 20-21, including the college, must all submit an allocation amendment for the May Revise reduction. 2. The college can then do one allocation amendment for each member to move the same amount that was just reduced, over to the member. If they funds being moved are from 19-20, then the allocation amendment will need to happen in the 19-20 Allocation section. This is more work on the college. If you have 5 members, you will have to do a total of 6 amendments; one for 20-21 May Revise and then one for each member.

It is advised that members meet to discuss the May Revise reductions; however, consortia should check with their districts to see if a public meeting, including a vote, is required.

It is also advised for consortia upload their meeting minutes or discussion notes in the Supporting Documents section in NOVA.

When you met last month, that was to certify the original allocations, before the reduction, correct?

If so, it will be a district decision if another meeting/vote is required.

If it is not required, you will still want to upload the minutes from the previous meeting where the vote was held to approve the allocation.