Policy Guidance for Title I, Part A - Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies - April 1996

A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Example of Ranking Schools & Allocating Funds in an LEA Serving Attendance Areas Above the District Poverty Rate

Example 3 Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. 11-May-95

Per-Pupil Calculation (125% Not Required)
Amount LEA determines to allocate per poverty child
(LEA Direction)		 $573.96
Total Title I Allocation for LEA $2,366,573
Reservations
    Neglected - $10,000
    1% parent involvement - $23,664
    Homeless - $10,000
    Administration, including capital expenses - $184,909

Remaining amount to be distributed to schools $2,138,000

ALLOCATION TO ELIGIBLE SCHOOLS
Total Enrollment Children from Low-Income Families: Public Children from Low-Income Families: Private Total Percent Poor Eligible Schools
1=Yes
0=No		 Attendance Area Allocation (No. of Poor X $573.96) Allocation Generated By Public School Poor Children Allocation Generated By Public School Poor Children (1)
LEA Total 14,059 6,767 100 6,867 LEA AVG. 48.84% 7 $2,138,000 $2,094,953 $43,047
Violet Hill 870 850 20 870 100.00% 1 $499,345 $487,866 $11,479
Oakdale MS 276 202 8 210 76.09% 1 $120,532 $115,940 $4,592
Elemwood 951 591 24 615 64.67% 1 $352,985 $339,210 $13,775
Valley View 696 444 0 444 63.79% 1 $254,838 $254,838 $0
Hobson 601 367 10 377 62.73% 1 $216,383 $210,643 $5,740
Berlieth HS 933 550 5 555 59.49% 1 $318,548 $315,678 $2,870
Davis 1,134 646 8 654 57.67% 1 $375,370 $370,778 $4,592
Indian Rock MS 1,695 815 0 815 48.08% 0
Roosevelt HS 203 95 0 95 46.80% 0
Takoma HS 1,080 487 6 493 45.65% 0
Camp Springs 1,026 449 14 463 45.13% 0
White Hill 857 293 3 296 34.54% 0
Bannaker 874 299 2 301 34.44% 0
Eastern MS 490 142 0 142 28.98% 0
Taft HS 2,073 509 0 509 24.55% 0
Wilson HS 300 28 0 28 9.33% 0

(1) The LEA must reserve the amount of funds generated by private school children and in consultation with appropriate private school officials may (1) combine those amounts to create a pool of funds from which the LEA provides equitable services to eligible private school children in greatest need of those services; or (2) provide equitable services to eligible children in each private school with the funds generated by children from low-income families who attend that private school.
-###-

[Example of Ranking Schools & Allocating Funds in an LEA using the 35% Eligibility Provision] [Table of Contents] [Example of Ranking Schools & Allocating Funds in an LEA]