Skip to main content

Tools & Curriculum

Return to Tools & Curriculum

New Directors' Orientation Tutorial

The New Directors' Orientation Tutorial is made up of 14 self-paced modules to assist in learning basic program requirements. Each module is designed to be utilized based on a Director’s specific needs; there is not a set sequence for the tutorial to be completed. We encourage Directors to jump to the module that best fits their needs. Select a module below to view or download the corresponding materials.

Module 10. Migrant Education Program Reporting

Download Module Materials
Download Module Materials

Section 1: Getting Started

Getting Started
In This Section
• Tutorial Objectives
• How to Use the Tutorial
• Icons to Guide You
• Key Readings and Resources
3
Tutorial Objectives
Module 10 will enable new state directors to
1. understand the difference between Category 1 and Category 2 Child
Counts,
2. understand the funding implications of collecting and reporting Child
Count data accurately,
3. plan strategies for ensuring data quality, and
4. plan for annual Consolidated State Performance Reporting (CSPR).
4
How to Use the Tutorial
For optimal benefit from the tutorial, you should
• allow sufficient time to read the slides, reflect on the information, and
complete all activities on the slides or on the Quick Resource and
Reflection Sheets (QRRS) that can be downloaded as worksheets;
• read each slide as well as the information referenced in the slides;
• engage with the “What Do You Think?” slides to facilitate interaction
with the information (Answers will be provided directly following each
of these slides.);
5
How to Use the Tutorial
For optimal benefit from the tutorial, you should (continued)
• pause to reflect on your state program at the “Check-in” slides
(A QRRS document will typically accompany these.);
• complete the “Pop Quiz!” slides to reinforce key concepts;
• review your state’s Migrant Education Program (MEP) documents and
reports as directed;
• develop an action plan using the worksheets provided;
• add actionable items to your MEP planning calendar (See QRRS
14.2.); and
• contact your OME Program Officer for follow-up questions.
6
Icons to Guide You
The following icons will guide you in making the best use of this tutorial:
What Do You Think?
Check-in
Pop Quiz!
Quick Reference and Reflection Sheet (QRRS)
Action Planning
Calendar Item
7
Key Readings and Resources
You should have these documents readily available while completing
the module, as the module will refer to these documents for more
complete information on various topics.
• MEP Guidance on the Education of Migratory Children under Title I,
Part C of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965,
Chapter IX, Program Performance and Child Counts Reporting
• Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) Part II – form for
annual MEP state reporting
• Copy of the prior year’s submitted CSPR Part II
8

Section 2: What is Required

What is Required
In This Section
• Migrant Education Program (MEP)
Annual Performance Reporting
• Key Terms
9
Migrant Education Program
Annual Performance Reporting
The U.S. Department of Education requires state education agencies
(SEAs) to submit specific information about their MEP on an annual
basis. This information is reported with information on other formula
grant programs on the Consolidate State Performance Report (CSPR).
10
Migrant Education Program
Annual Performance Reporting
• Each year, states must provide MEP specific program performance
information through the CSPR, as well as:
o Their annual count of migrant children and
o Other data that in the form of narrative and check boxes
describe the procedures the state follows to obtain and verify
the Child Counts.
• The MEP specific section of the CSPR is contained in the CSPR’s Part
II.
Section 9303 of the ESEA
11
Migrant Education Program
Annual Performance Reporting
• Reporting through the CSPR simplifies the reporting process and
reduces the reporting burden on the state by combining reporting on
multiple programs into a single reporting instrument.
• In general, the state Child Count data are collected and reported on
the CSPR to:
o Determine the number of migrant children in each state, and
o Have the state confirm that it used the appropriate, required
processes and procedures to determine these numbers.
Sections 1303(e) and 1304(7) of the ESEA, as amended
12
Check-in
• The eligible migrant child data reported in the MEP section of the
CSPR are designed to promote accountability for the implementation
of the state MEP.
• The Child Count data reported in the MEP section of the CSPR have
implications for MEP funding for each state.
See QRRS 10.1 – Review Your Prior Year’s CSPR
13
Key Terms
For the purposes of the MEP, a child is eligible for the program if
he/she meets the following statutory definition of a migratory child (as
well as applicable regulatory definitions at 34 CFR § 200.81):
A child who is, or whose parent or spouse is, a migratory agricultural
worker, including a migratory dairy worker, or a migratory fisher, and
who, in the preceding 36 months, in order to obtain, or accompany
such a parent or spouse, in order to obtain, temporary or seasonal
employment in agricultural or fishing work—
(A) Has moved from one school district to another;
(B) In a State that is comprised of a single school district, has
moved from one administrative area to another within such
district; or
14
Key Terms (continued)
(C) Resides in a school district of more than 15,000 square miles,
and migrates a distance of 20 miles or more to a temporary
residence to engage in a fishing activity.
Children who are determined to be eligible for the program must have
their eligibility documented on a state-approved Certificate of Eligibility
(COE). Specific terms are further defined in the program regulations.
Section 1309(2) of the ESEA, as amended
15
Key Terms
For purposes of the MEP and state reporting, a state’s Child Count is
the total unduplicated number of eligible migrant students statewide
who can be counted for funding purposes.
• An unduplicated count is one in which an individual child is
included in a state's count only once, regardless of how many
places within the state that child may have resided or was served by
the MEP. Each SEA is required to submit unduplicated Category 1
and Category 2 Child Counts.
Juan, an eligible migrant child, lived and
attended school in 3 districts during the
regular school year. Juan should be counted
only once in the state Category 1 Child Count
data.
16
Key Terms
The Department collects from each state two separate migrant Child
Counts, known as the Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts:
• The Category 1 Child Count is the 12-month unduplicated statewide
total of children who are eligible to be counted for funding purposes.
It consists of all of the migrant children ages 3 through 21 who meet
the statutory and regulatory definition of a migratory (i.e., migrant)
child, and thus who, within three years of a qualifying move, resided in
the state for one or more days during the September 1 to August 31
performance period.
• The Category 2 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide total count
of eligible migratory (migrant) students who participated in one or
more of the state’s MEP summer or intersession projects. It consists
of all of the migrant children who were served for one or more days in
MEP-funded summer or intersession programs in the state during the
September 1 – August 31 performance period.
17
Key Terms
The statutory provision for Continuation of Services allows SEAs
discretion in determining whether to extend eligibility for MEP services
beyond the period for which they meet MEP eligibility requirements.
Specifically, it permits:
• A child who ceases to be a migratory child during a school term to
continue to be eligible for services until the end of such term;
• A child who is no longer a migratory child to continue to receive
services for one additional school year, but only if comparable
services are not available through other programs; and
• Secondary school students who were eligible for services in secondary
school to continue to be served through credit accrual programs until
graduation.
Section 1304(e) of the ESEA, as amended
18

Section 3: Overview of the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR)

Overview of the
Consolidated State
Performance Report
(CSPR)
In This Section
• Purpose
• Performance Goals of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),
as amended
• U.S. Department of Education Use of
Performance Data
• Government Performance and Results
Act (GPRA) Measures
• The Consolidated State Performance
Report (CSPR)
19
Purpose
The purpose of the CSPR is to
• Promote consolidated cross-program data collection,
• Reduce the burden on SEAs and streamline reporting requirements in
order to promote efficient program administration,
• Establish a uniform program reporting deadline, and
• Promote accountability for implementation of State Consolidated
Applications.
20
Performance Goals Under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended
After enactment of the current authorization of the ESEA in the No Child
Left Behind Act, ED established five overall goals under the ESEA. They
are:
1. By SY 2013-14, all students will reach high standards, at a minimum
attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics;
2. All limited English proficient students will become proficient in English and
reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better
in reading/language arts and mathematics;
3. By SY 2005-06, all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers;
4. All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug
free, and conducive to learning; and
5. All students will graduate from high school.
21
U.S. Department of Education
Use of Performance Data
ED uses the data collected in the CSPR for a number of purposes,
including gathering information about program performance required by
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).
• GPRA requires Federal departments and agencies to clearly describe
the goals and objectives of their programs, identify resources and
actions needed to accomplish goals and objectives, develop a means
of measuring progress, and report regularly on achievement.
• ED analyzes CSPR data to assist in determining the effectiveness of
the MEP based on the GPRA measures.
• ED advises States to use data submitted in the CSPR for program
improvement purposes.
22
Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) Measures
The four MEP GPRA measures ED has adopted for the MEP are:
1. Percentage of MEP students who scored at or above proficient on
their state’s annual reading/language arts assessments in grades 3-
8 and high school;
2. Percentage of MEP students who scored at or above proficient on
their state’s annual mathematics assessments in grades 3-8 and
high school;
3. Percentage of MEP students who were enrolled in grades 7-12 and
graduated or were promoted to the next grade level; and
4. Percentage of MEP students who entered 11
th
grade and had
received full credit for Algebra I.
23
The Consolidated State Performance Report
The CSPR consists of two parts, CSPR Part I and CSPR Part II.
• In Part I, states submit information related to the five ESEA Goals that
ED established in June 2002 for the content of Consolidated State
Applications, and for information required for the Annual State Report
to the Secretary, as described in Section 1111(h)(4) of the ESEA (in
Title I, Part A).
24
The Consolidated State Performance Report
Part II of the CSPR consists of information related to state activities and
outcomes of specific ESEA programs.
• While the information varies from program to program, ED needs the
specific information States must submit for MEP reporting to learn
about MEP performance and for other program needs. The reported
data provide information about program outcomes or results.
• The Migrant Child Counts and other MEP reporting items became part
of the CSPR Part II, beginning with SY 2012-2013 reporting.
25
The Consolidated State Performance Report
MEP reporting generally requires the submission of information about:
• The unduplicated annual counts of the number of migrant children
eligible for formula funding purposes (Child Counts 1 & 2),
• The numbers and characteristics of children participating in MEP
services,
• The types of services provided, and
• The number of participating children by age/grade level.
26
The Consolidated State Performance Report
In Section 2.3 of the CSPR Part II, states submit data on
implementation of the MEP for the performance period September 1
st
through August 31
st
of the preceding year. Collected data include:
• Numbers of eligible migrant children (by age/grade level);
• Participation data of migrant children served during either the regular
year, summer/intersession term, or program year*;
• School data;
• Project data; and
• Personnel /MEP-paid staff data.
*NOTE: Beginning with the data collected for the 2013-14 SY, MEP participation data
(other than Child Count Category 2) will be reported for the program year only.
27

Section 4: Child Counts

Child Counts
In This Section
• Child Counts Defined
• Accuracy of Child Counts Data
• Migrant Child Counts
28
Child Counts Defined
For the purposes of the MEP, a Child Count is the state’s numeric
calculation of the total of unduplicated number of eligible migrant
students statewide who can be counted for funding purposes.
The accuracy of the Child Counts data is extremely important as it has
implications for state funding allocations.
See Module 3: Funding Allocations for a review of how Child Counts are used to
consider adjustments in the state funding allocation calculation.
29
Accuracy of Child Counts Data
The SEA must have sufficient procedures in place to ensure that it is
counting only once those children who are eligible for the MEP.
• Such procedures are important to protecting the integrity of the state’s
MEP, and permit the early discovery and correction of eligibility
problems and thus help to ensure that only eligible migrant children
are counted for funding purposes and are served.
34 C.F.R. § 200.89(c) and (d)
30
Accuracy of Child Counts Data
Each state must have procedures in place to ensure that the Child
Counts:
• Are accurate,
• Are unduplicated,
• Reflect only eligible migrant children, and
• Are sufficiently well documented so that an outside reviewer who is
unfamiliar with the MEP would understand the process.
o If an SEA has reservations about the accuracy of its Child
Counts, it must inform the Department of its concern and
explain how and when it will resolve them.
31
Accuracy of Child Counts Data
An SEA official must certify that, to the best of his/her knowledge, Child
Counts and information contained in the CSPR are true, reliable, and
valid and that any false statement provided is subject to fine or
imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001.
34 C.F.R. § 200.89
32
Migrant Child Counts
Child Counts are collected in two separate categories:
• Category 1
o Consists of all of the eligible migrant children ages 3 through 21
who meet the statutory and regulatory definition of a migratory
(i.e., migrant) child, and thus who, within 36 months of a qualifying
move, resided in the state for one or more days during the
September 1
st
through August 31
st
performance period and
• Category 2
o Consists of all of the eligible migrant children who were served for
one or more days in MEP-funded summer or intersession
programs in the state during the September 1
st
through August
31
st
performance period.
33
Migrant Child Counts
• Migrant Child Count Category 1 collects data on eligible migrant
children residing in the state for at least one day:
o Age 3-5 (pre-kindergarten);
o In each grade level K-12 (e.g., K, grade 1, grade 2, etc.);
o Ungraded; and
o Out-of-school.
• If there are increases or decreases in these counts exceeding 10%
compared to the prior year, the SEA must provide an explanation of
the change.
34
Migrant Child Counts
• Migrant Child Count Category 2 collects data on eligible migrant
children served by the MEP during a summer/intersession term:
o Age 3-5 (pre-kindergarten);
o In each grade level K-12 (e.g., K, grade 1, grade 2, etc.);
o Ungraded; and
o Out-of-school.
• If there are increases or decreases in these counts exceeding 10%
compared to the prior year, the SEA must provide an explanation of
the change.
35
Migrant Child Counts
ED asks SEAs to respond to questions and to provide assurances about
their migrant Child Count data and validation procedures as well as the
state’s quality control processes. Areas include:
• The statewide student information system the SEAs used,
• Data collection procedures related to the required National Certificate
of Eligibility (COE),
• Assurance of the accuracy of Child Count data transmitted to EDFacts,
• Use of Migrant Student Information Exchange(MSIX) data, and
• Quality control processes for ensuring that determination of eligibility
procedures are effective and counts are accurate.
See Module 2: Eligibility and Identification & Recruitment
36
Pop Quiz!
37
Statement
True
False
1.
If a migrant child becomes eligible
for MEP services after the regular school year
has ended, but
participates in a following summer MEP literacy program, that child
is counted in both Category 1 and Category 2 Child Count data.
2.
If a student
ceased to be an eligible migrant child on November 1
st
of a regular
school year, the child should be included in the Category 1 Child Count data.
3.
If a student
ceased to be an eligible migrant child on April 15
th
during the regular
school year and is enrolled in an MEP summer reading program after the end of
that school year
because no other literacy programs are available, he/she should
be counted in both Category 1 and Category 2 Child Counts data.
4.
An eligible migrant child
attended MEP math tutoring sessions during each of the
three s
cheduled intersessions at a year-round school. The child should be counted
three times in the Category 2 Child Count.
5.
Juan was an eligible migrant child for the entirety of the school year. His family lived
in two different school districts across the state as a result of moving to work
different crop harvests. Since Juan received services in two districts, he should be
entered twice in the Category 1 Child Count.
Instructions: Determine whether the following statements are true or false.
Pop Quiz! – Response
# 1 is
TRUE
. The Category 1 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide
total number of eligible migrant children who were residents in a state
for one or more days during the September 1 – August 31 performance
period. The Category 2 unduplicated count of eligible migrant children
served in MEP summer/intersession projects is a subset of the larger
Category 1 Count.
#2 is
TRUE
. The Category 1 Child Count is the unduplicated statewide
total number of eligible migrant children who were residents in a state
for one or more days during the September 1 – August 31 performance
period.
38
Pop Quiz! – Response
#3 is FALSE. The migrant child should be counted in the Category 1
Child Count, because he/she was an eligible migrant child during the
regular school year. However, the child cannot be included in the
Category 2 Child Count because his/her period of eligibility ended prior
to the summer (even though he/she may have received services during
the summer under the “Continuation of Services” authority; see Slide
18).
#4 is FALSE. The child should be included only once in the Category 2
Child Count since this is an unduplicated count, and participation in
multiple MEP intersession projects during a year-round school year is
counted as one receipt of service.
39
Pop Quiz! – Response
#5 is FALSE. An unduplicated count is one in which an individual child
is included in a state's count only once, regardless of how many places
within the state that child may have resided or was served by the MEP.
In this case, the SEA must ensure that Juan is entered only once in the
Category 1 Child Count data (and Category 2 Child Count data if he
participated in a summer/intersession term).
40

Section 5: Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) Part II

The Consolidated
State Performance
Report (CSPR)
Part II
In This Section
• Overview
• Step 1: Communicate with Data Staff
• Step 2: Review Data Requirements
• Step 3: Set Timelines
• Step 4: Follow up with Local Operating
Agencies (LOAs) & Local Education
Agencies (LEAs)
• Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
• Step 6: Complete the Report
41
Overview
There are key steps that the state director can take each year to
prepare for and conduct the MEP data collection and reporting process.
Steps include:
1. Communicate with data staff;
2. Become familiar with the data requirements;
3. Identify key data collection and submission timelines;
4. Communicate with local operating agencies (LOAs) & local education
agencies (LEAs);
5. Monitor data for timeliness and accuracy; and
6. Include narratives that accurately, comprehensively, and concisely
address the question/criteria.
42
Step 1: Communicate with Data Staff
Establish and maintain contact with the SEA’s EDFacts coordinator and
CSPR coordinator.
• The EDFacts coordinator is responsible for transmittal of the state’s
collected data to the EDEN Submission System (ESS).
o The EDFacts coordinator is usually in the SEA’s information
technology department.
• The CSPR coordinator has oversight responsibility to ensure the
preparation, submission, and certification of data and comments
entered into the CSPR. Please note that in some states, the MEP
director may be responsible for inputting the data manually.
o The CSPR coordinator may be the same person as the EDFacts
coordinator, or may be someone in the state’s federal programs
office.
43
Step 2: Review Data Requirements
Become familiar with questions, guidance, and definitions pertaining to
data to be collected as described in the CSPR Part II.
• Note how data for each question are to be submitted to ESS. Ascertain
any changes to questions, file specifications, and other data-
submission requirements for the submission. Consult the resources
below for additional information:
o EDFacts File Specifications
o Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbooks
• The EDFacts coordinator will have further information regarding how
assessment data are to be submitted according to the Consolidated
State Accountability Workbook the SEA has prepared and submitted to
ED.
• Individual state workbooks and EDFacts File Specifications may be
found on the ED website.
44
Step 2: Review Data Requirements
The CSPR Part II requests additional reporting on a number of
components related to the state’s eligible migrant children and MEP
projects, including data about:
• Priority for services (PFS);
• Limited English proficient;
• Children with disabilities;
• Qualifying arrival date (QAD);
• Referrals;
• Academic status;
• Dropouts;
• High School Equivalency Diploma
(HSED);
• Continuation of services;
• Instructional services;
• Counseling services;
• Schools and MEP
enrollment;
• Schoolwide programs;
• MEP project data; and
• MEP staff, including state
director and staff, teachers,
counselors, recruiters,
paraprofessionals, record
transfer staff, and
administrators.
45
What Do You Think?
List ten possible actions related to MEP reporting for the CSPR that
should go on your MEP planning calendar.
Action Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
46
Step 3: Set Timelines
Planning for CSPR Part II reporting should begin early in the September
1
st
–August 31
st
so that you can plan and monitor data collection and
quality. Begin by determining and coordinating data collection, quality
review, and submission timelines.
• Be mindful of the ED annual data collection timeline.
• Ascertain from the EDFacts coordinator how data collection for
submission to ESS is done in your state (via the statewide longitudinal
database, online, paper collection, etc.). Discuss external and internal
agency timelines for data submission to ESS.
• Confer with the CSPR coordinator regarding specific aspects of your
state data collection and submission methods, as well as state-
specific timelines and deadlines.
47
What Do You Think? – Reflection
Action Item
Deadline
1.
CSPR Part II is due by 5:00 EST
Feb
13,
2015
2.
CSPR Part II is open for pre
-fill data
3.
Check accuracy of ED
Facts data prior to CSPR Part II open date
4.
Review
re-interview process results
5.
Meet with external re
-interview team to review procedures, methodology, and timeline
for quality control check of COEs.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Above are only a few suggestions of actions to be taken during the course of the performance
period to ensure that MEP data are accurate and submitted on time. What other action items
need to occur?
See QRRS 10.2 – Planning for the CSPR Part II
48
Step 4: Follow Up with Local Operating
Agencies and Local Education Agencies
• Communicate with LOAs and LEAs on a regular basis throughout the
year regarding data collection questions, definitions, data collection
methods, and all other pertinent information. Make sure all deadlines
for data collection and submission are communicated and met.
• Follow up with LOAs and LEAs that fail to report data, or report
unreasonably high or low counts of migrant children compared to past
migratory trends .
• Check to see if LOAs’ and LEAs’ migrant Child Counts are within 10%
of the submitted count for the same period the previous year.
o If not, meet with LEAs to determine the reason for the change.
49
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Monitor data collected and aggregated through ESS.
• Data for questions that have file specifications and are submitted
through ESS must be submitted annually by 5:00 PM EST in mid-
February (specific date varies annually). Data will appear in the CSPR
tool in an aggregated form when it opens in November prior to the
report due date.
50
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
The EDFacts Coordinator can provide a pre-fill report of the aggregated
data upon request.
• This report shows data submitted to EDFacts but not yet pre-
populated into the CSPR. State directors should obtain this report and
verify the aggregated data, particularly student counts, based on their
own records. It is best to verify these data well in advance of the
opening of the CSPR to allow time for any necessary revisions.
o Compare LEA data provided this year to data reported for the
previous year to identify unexplained discrepancies.
51
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Data collected through EDFacts can only be corrected through the ESS.
Corrections to these data cannot be made manually through the CSPR
data submission tool. The state EDFacts coordinator should be
contacted for assistance with any necessary revisions.
52
https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/edfacts/inde x.html
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Oversee collection and submission of data not collected by the ESS.
• The responsibility to oversee and facilitate the collection of all data on
migrant children served by LOAs with MEP subgrants is likely that of
the state director. The CSPR coordinator can provide further
information specific to your state’s data collection system and should
be consulted regarding the collection of this data.
• The state director may also be responsible for facilitating collection
and submission of relevant data from non-subgrantee LEAs that
respond to CSPR questions. The CSPR coordinator can provide further
information pertaining to these data collections.
53
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
Oversee collection and submission of data not collected by the ESS.
• It is likely that the EDFacts coordinator will want access to the data
that are not collected online well in advance of the opening of the
CSPR in November to provide adequate time for data preparation and
entry. Establish a deadline by which LOAs must submit their data that
allows ample time for the EDFacts coordinator to prepare the data for
entry when the CSPR opens.
*NOTE: that any revisions to data
not
collected through the ESS system must be
made through the CSPR tool.
54
Step 5: Monitor Data Collection
If there is conflicting information between the various state data
collection systems, the SEA’s MEP office should be the authoritative
source of state data on migrant students and MEP programs in all
systems.
55
Step 6: Complete the Report
Not all information requested on the CSPR Part II is collected through
the statewide data system and uploaded to ESS.
• In some cases, states may manually collect certain information,
particularly about MEP projects, from LOAs and LEAs.
o Having LOAs and LEAs report this information on a regular
schedule, multiple times per year, can help alleviate last minute
efforts to submit data.
o The ongoing and regular practice of submitting data allows time
for quality checks of data periodically, as well as the use of data
for formative review of the MEP.
56
Step 6: Complete the Report
• Understanding the ESS file transfer system format will also help
identify how LOAs and LEAs should submit required data to reduce
the burden of entering data manually.
• Ensuring that LOA and LEA staff understand the importance of
accurately reporting MEP data and the expectations for reporting
purposes will help as well.
o Provide training to LOA and LEA staff as needed (e.g., when there
is significant turnover in staff, or quality data checks indicate a
need).
o Ensure staff understand key terms and definitions.
57
Step 6: Complete the Report
Most MEP questions in the CSPR Part II include a narrative component.
These types of questions typically relate to:
• Increases/decreases (of more than 10%) from Child Counts data
submitted in the prior year,
• State reporting systems,
• Data collection and management procedures, and
• Data quality processes.
58
Step 6: Complete the Report
The CSPR Part II field for MEP narrative responses is limited to 8,000
characters. When responding to these questions:
• Be comprehensive, yet accurate and concise in addressing the
question;
• Review these questions in advance so that you can meet with others
who may need to contribute to this response; and
• Try setting up a Word or Excel file to capture responses in advance so
that you can review, edit, and format them before copying and pasting
responses into the system.
59
Step 6: Complete the Report
Allow time to review all data and narrative prior to the submission of the
CSPR Part II.
• Migrant Child Count data have implications for state funding.
• Quality Processes and Procedures for ensuring the accuracy of Child
Count data and other data on eligible migrant child must be included
in the report.
60
Step 6: Complete the Report
• Work with your state’s EDFacts and CSPR coordinators to ensure that
all MEP data are collected and transmitted accurately and timely.
• Communicate with LOAs and LEAs to ensure that everyone involved in
data collection and reporting understands the importance of accuracy
and timeliness in providing migrant Child Count data as well as other
data collected on MEP services and activities.
61

Section 6: Wrapping Up

Wrapping Up
In This Section
• Key Points
• Action Planning
• Resources
62
Key Points
Each year, states must provide MEP specific program performance
information through the CSPR.
• MEP reporting generally requires the submission of information about:
o The unduplicated annual counts of the number of migrant
children eligible for formula funding purposes,
o The numbers and characteristics of children participating in MEP
services,
o The types of services provided, and
o The number of participating children by age/grade level.
• Accuracy of Child Count data is critical, as it has implications for state
funding.
63
Action Planning
Consider the following questions to help you prepare for MEP data
reporting through the CSPR.
• How are the required data being collected?
o Are all data being collected through state data systems, or are
some data being collected manually?
• Are all data being collected in the correct format for easy upload to the
CSPR Part II form?
• What procedures are in place to ensure that the Child Count data are
correct?
• How much variance was there in Child Count data across the two
previous years?
64
Add any actionable items to
your MEP planning calendar.
See QRRS 10.3 – MEP
Performance Reporting
Resources for Migrant Education Program
Reporting
• MEP Guidance on Education of Migratory Children under Title I, Part C,
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 – Explanation
of guidelines to implement the laws and regulations related to the MEP
• EDFacts Initiative website – ED performance data system overview and
resource guides
(http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/edfacts/index.html)
• MEP Officers – List of OME contact information
(https://results.ed.gov/about/contact)
• Glossary of Terms – Alphabetical listing of key terms applicable to
migrant education
(https://results.ed.gov/idrmanual/section/glossary/glossary)
65
Previous Section  |   Back to Top  |   Next Section