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.