Skip to content
Printer-friendly version

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.

Academic Achievement

Relying on Academic Performance Index (API) Growth and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) reports, CDE chooses LEAs for reviews based on two categories of academic achievement. The first category is the state’s API, which California Education Code 64001 stipulates as a selection criterion for FPM. If any Growth API scores (LEA or subgroup) at the district level are less than 800, CDE considers the LEA for review. The second category of academic achievement is the LEA’s Improvement Status under the federal Title I, Title II and Title III accountability systems. If an LEA meets these criteria: 1) Program Improvement (PI), year 2 or more; 2) Title II, Level Monitoring or C; and 3) Title III, year 4 or more, then the chance of selection is greater. There is a similar methodology to select county offices of education (COEs).

Fiscal Analysis

CDE also examines several aspects of potential fiscal risk. It selects LEAs with a high per pupil allocation and carryover percentage. It selects the COEs with the highest ranking in both combined categorical 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, ARRA (Title I Parts A and D, State Fiscal Stabilization Funds [SFSF], & Homeless), and Ed Jobs Fund.

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), then it is very likely that the LEA will be selected for a review.


There is a random selection of LEAs to receive a review.

Questions:   Federal Program Monitoring Office | | 916-319-0935