The Head Start Act mandates that each Head Start recipient receive a monitoring review at least once every 3 years; each newly designated recipient be reviewed after the completion of its first year (and then at least once every 3 years thereafter); and all recipients that "fail to meet the standards" receive Follow-up reviews. Reviewers…

The Head Start Act mandates that each Head Start grantee receive a monitoring review at least once every 3 years; each newly designated grantee be reviewed after the completion of its first year (and then at least once every 3 years thereafter); and all grantees that "fail to meet the standards" receive Follow-up reviews. Reviewers…

The Head Start Act mandates that each Head Start grantee receive a monitoring review at least once every 3 years; each newly designated grantee be reviewed after the completion of its first year (and then at least once every 3 years thereafter); and all grantees that "fail to meet the standards" receive Follow-up reviews. Reviewers…

This report presents a summary of the findings of fiscal year (FY) 2016 monitoring reviews, fulfilling the reporting requirement in Section 641A(f) of the Head Start Act. It highlights the enhancements made to the FY 2016 monitoring review system, summarizes grantee review outcomes, and describes the types of findings most commonly identified in…

This report presents a summary of the findings of fiscal year (FY) 2018 Head Start monitoring reviews, fulfilling the reporting requirement in Section 641A(f) of the Head Start Act. It highlights the enhancements made to the FY 2018 monitoring review system, summarizes grantee review outcomes, and describes the types of findings most commonly…

This report presents a summary of the findings of fiscal year (FY) 2017 Head Start monitoring reviews, fulfilling the reporting requirement in Section 641A(f) of the Head Start Act. It highlights the enhancements made to the FY 2017 monitoring review system, summarizes grantee review outcomes, and describes the types of findings most commonly…

Full inclusion is a confusing topic. Many people misunderstand the "least restrictive environment" provision of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Districts need not educate every disabled child in a regular classroom for the entire day, but have numerous options, so long as each child is carefully evaluated. Recent…

The Hearing before the Committee on Education and the Workforce was held May 20, 1999. The hearing lists statements by educators, elected officials, and the Colorado Commissioner of Education on the Academic Achievement for All proposal, the Straight A's proposal. This proposal gives states a choice: they can either continue operating federal…

Following a brief preface, chapter 1 of this study discusses the federal government's expanding role over the last half century, including changing federal and state responsibilities in education. While chapter 2 describes the study's conceptual framework, its methodology, the criteria used for selecting eight states for analysis, and the major…

The 24th annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is organized into four major sections. Section 1 is on context/environment and includes four modules that address special education teacher quality (from the Study of Personnel Needs in Teacher Education (SPeNSE)); costs of special…

This collection of case studies of eight states--California, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Virginia, Wyoming--documents a 1981-82 investigation of federal and state administrative interactions across a select sample of federal education programs. To represent a wide spectrum of political, economic, and institutional…