Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Monitoring Selection Criteria

CDE considers several factors, including compliance history, academic achievement, program size, and fiscal analysis in identifying LEAs for reviews. For each cycle it selects approximately 60 LEAs for monitoring.

General Information

CDE follows a risk-based approach to identify where it should use monitoring resources. This approach includes several analyses of risk factors to guide selection of the local educational agencies (LEAs) that will receive a Federal Program Monitoring (FPM) review. This enables the CDE to focus its monitoring resources to foster student achievement and fiscal compliance. These risk factors identified are not, by themselves, evidence of noncompliance.

Risk Factors

CDE considers several factors: academic achievement, fiscal analysis, program size, and compliance history, to select LEAs for review. The criteria may be adjusted based on the data available and the results of the analysis. For the 2016–17 school year, CDE will also consider an LEA’s 2010 – 11 CALPADS row 9 data and 2.4 reports as part of the compliance history factor.

Academic Achievement

California Education Code 64001 stipulates the state’s Academic Performance Index (API) Growth report as a selection criterion for FPM. Starting in 2015–16, CDE evaluated LEAs, county offices of education, and direct-funded charters for their overall growth and performance on API Growth reports from 2010–13.

Fiscal Analysis

CDE also examines LEAS for several aspects of potential fiscal risk, including high per pupil allocation and carryover percentage. A sample of LEAs and COEs which receive a large total allocation of categorical program funds and/or which have had Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 Single Audit findings will be selected for a review.

The funding sources used for the combined categorical carryover percentages are Title I (Parts A [Basic and Neglected] and D [Delinquent]), Title II Part A (Improving Teacher Quality [ITQ]), Title III (Limited English Proficient [LEP] & Immigrant), and Economic Impact Aid (EIA). The funding sources used for both the LEAs’ combined per pupil categorical allocation and COEs’ combined categorical allocation are Title I (Parts A, C [Migrant], and D); Title II Part A; Title III; Title X Part C (McKinney-Vento/Homeless), Career Technical Education (CTE), EIA (State Compensatory Education [SCE] & LEP.

Data Reporting

In order to apply the risk factor selection criteria, current certified data must be available for each LEA. Therefore, if an LEA is unable to submit and certify data, such as California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS) enrollment or Language Census collected through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), the likelihood increases that the LEA will be selected for a review.

Questions:   Federal Program Monitoring Office | | 916-319-0935
Last Reviewed: Thursday, March 10, 2016
Recently Posted in Compliance Monitoring
  • CDE EL Instrument 2016-17 (PDF) (added 30-Sep-2016)
    California Department of Education Program Monitoring 2016-17 English Learner Instrument.
  • PE Program Instrument (PDF) (added 07-Sep-2016)
    Federal Program Monitoring Office review instrument for Physical Education (PE) applicable for 2016-17 Cycle A and C reviews.
  • CRR Monitoring Instrument (PDF) (added 07-Sep-2016)
    The Civil Rights Review contains specific federal legal requirements that will be tested during the monitoring process. The instrument provides examples of evidence that may be used to demonstrate compliance.