March 20, 2006

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS AND

IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY STATE GRANTS (ESEA TITLE II, PART A)

MONITORING REPORT

**Colorado Department of Education**

**January 24-25, 2006**

**U.S. Department of Education Monitoring Team:**

Margaret Miles

Michael Kestner

Darcy Pietryka (Westat)

**Colorado Department of Education (CDE)**

Dorothy Gotlieb, Deputy Commissioner 

Bill Windler, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Special Services

Barb Allen, Supervisor, Educator Licensing

Bridget Collins-Sullivan, Director Alternative Teacher Licensing
Programs,  

Patrick Chapman, Titles I, II, VI, and VI-D 

Bushrod White, Title II

Anita Foxworth, Title II

Arti Winston, Title II

Alyssa Pearson, Title I

Kirk Weber, Grants Fiscal Management 

**State Agency for Higher Education**

Matt Gianneschi, Chief Academic Officer, Colorado Commission on Higher
Education

Heather Delange, Administrative Assistant, Colorado Commission on Higher
Education

**Overview of Colorado:**

Number of Districts: 178

Number of Schools: 1,686

Number of Teachers: 45,401

### State Allocation (FY 2004[^1]) [\$32,641,626]{.underline} State Allocation (FY 2005) [\$32,606,438]{.underline}

LEA Allocation (FY 2004) [\$30,699,450]{.underline} LEA Allocation (FY
2005) [\$30,666,356]{.underline}

"State Activities" (FY 2004) [\$807,880]{.underline} "State Activities"
(FY 2005) [\$807,009]{.underline}

SAHE Allocation (FY 2004) [\$807,880]{.underline} SAHE Allocation (FY
2005) [\$807,009]{.underline}

SEA Administration (FY 2004) [\$286,022]{.underline} SEA Administration
(FY 2005) [\$285,714]{.underline}

SAHE Administration (FY 2004) [\$40,394]{.underline} SAHE Administration
(FY 2005) [\$40,350]{.underline}

**Scope of Review:**

Like all State educational agencies (SEAs), the Colorado Department of
Education (CDE), as a condition of receiving funds under Title I, Part A
and Title II, Part A of the *Elementary and Secondary Education Act*
(ESEA), as amended by the *No Child Left Behind Act* (NCLB), provided an
assurance to the U.S. Department of Education (the Department) that it
would administer these programs in accordance with all applicable
statutory and regulatory requirements, including those in Title I, Part
A that concern "Highly Qualified Teachers" (HQT) and those that govern
the use of Title II, Part A funds. See §9304(a)(1) of the ESEA. One of
the specific requirements the Department established for an SEA's
receipt of program funds under its consolidated State application
(§9302(b)) was submission to the Department of annual data on how well
the State has been meeting its performance target for Performance
Indicator 3.1: "The percentage of classes being taught by 'highly
qualified' teachers (as the term is defined in §9101(23) of the ESEA),
in the aggregate and in 'high-poverty' schools (as the term is defined
in §1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA)."

The Department's monitoring visit to Colorado had two purposes. One was
to review the progress of the State in meeting the ESEA's highly
qualified teacher requirements. The second was to review the use of ESEA
Title II, Part A funds by the SEA, selected LEAs and the State agency
for higher education (SAHE), to ensure that the funds are being used to
prepare, retain and recruit high-quality teachers and principals so that
all children will achieve to a high academic achievement standard and to
their full potential.

The monitoring review was conducted from January 24-25, 2006, at the
offices of the CDE. In addition to meeting with the CDE staff noted
above, as part of the review the Department monitoring team met with
Matt Gianneschi and Heather Delange, SAHE\
coordinators for administering the Eligible Partnerships program. The
monitoring team conducted conference calls with representatives of the
Fort Morgan School District and the Mapleton School District and
conducted a site visit to the Jefferson County School District.

#### Summary of Monitoring Indicators

+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| # Mo     |                               |                |        |
| nitoring |                               |                |        |
|  Area 1: |                               |                |        |
|  Highly  |                               |                |        |
| Qualifie |                               |                |        |
| d Teache |                               |                |        |
| r System |                               |                |        |
| s and Pr |                               |                |        |
| ocedures |                               |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| *        | **Description**               | # Status       | # Page |
| *Element |                               |                |        |
| Number** |                               |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Has the State developed and   | Findings       | 7      |
| Element  | implemented procedures,       |                |        |
| 1.1      | consistent with the statutory | Commendation   |        |
|          | definition of highly          |                |        |
|          | qualified, to determine       |                |        |
|          | whether *all* teachers of     |                |        |
|          | core academic subjects are    |                |        |
|          | highly qualified (§9101(23))? |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Are all new elementary school | Met            | NA     |
| Element  | teachers (including special   | Requirements   |        |
| 1.2      | education teachers, as        |                |        |
|          | appropriate) required to pass |                |        |
|          | a rigorous State test in      |                |        |
|          | reading, writing,             |                |        |
|          | mathematics, and the other    |                |        |
|          | areas of the elementary       |                |        |
|          | school curriculum to          |                |        |
|          | demonstrate subject-matter    |                |        |
|          | competency                    |                |        |
|          | (§9101(23)(B)(II))?           |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Are all new middle and        | Met            | NA     |
| Element  | secondary school teachers     | Requirements   |        |
| 1.3      | (including special education  |                |        |
|          | teachers, as appropriate)     |                |        |
|          | required to demonstrate       |                |        |
|          | subject-matter competency in  |                |        |
|          | each core academic subject    |                |        |
|          | they teach                    |                |        |
|          | (§9101(23)(B)(II)(ii))?       |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Are all veteran (i.e., those  | > Findings     | 8      |
| Element  | who are not new to the        |                |        |
| 1.4      | profession) elementary school |                |        |
|          | teachers (including special   |                |        |
|          | education teachers, as        |                |        |
|          | appropriate) required to      |                |        |
|          | demonstrate subject-matter    |                |        |
|          | competency by passing a       |                |        |
|          | rigorous State test or by     |                |        |
|          | completing the State's "High  |                |        |
|          | Objective Uniform State       |                |        |
|          | Standard of Evaluation"       |                |        |
|          | (HOUSSE) procedures           |                |        |
|          | (§9101(23)(C))?               |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Are all veteran middle and    | > Met          | NA     |
| Element  | secondary teachers (including | > Requirements |        |
| 1.5      | special education teachers,   |                |        |
|          | as appropriate) required to   |                |        |
|          | demonstrate subject-matter    |                |        |
|          | competency in each core       |                |        |
|          | academic subject they teach?  |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | For each set of HOUSSE        | NA             | NA     |
| Element  | procedures the State has      |                |        |
| 1.6      | developed, please describe    |                |        |
|          | how it meets each of the      |                |        |
|          | statutory requirements of     |                |        |
|          | §9101(23)(C)(ii).             |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | How does the SEA ensure that, | Finding        | 9      |
| Element  | since the beginning of the    |                |        |
| 1.7      | 2002-03 school year,          |                |        |
|          | districts hire only highly    |                |        |
|          | qualified teachers (including |                |        |
|          | special education teachers,   |                |        |
|          | as appropriate) to teach in   |                |        |
|          | Title I programs?             |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | How has the SEA ensured,      | Finding        | 9      |
| Element  | since the beginning of the    |                |        |
| 1.8      | 2002-03 school year, that     |                |        |
|          | districts that use ESEA Title |                |        |
|          | II funds to reduce class size |                |        |
|          | hire only highly qualified    |                |        |
|          | teachers for such positions?  |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Does the SEA's plan establish | Commendation   | 10     |
| Element  | annual measurable objectives  |                |        |
| 1.9      | for each LEA and school to    |                |        |
|          | ensure that annual increases  |                |        |
|          | occur:                        |                |        |
|          |                               |                |        |
|          | -   in the percentage of      |                |        |
|          |     highly qualified teachers |                |        |
|          |     at each LEA and school;   |                |        |
|          |     and                       |                |        |
|          |                               |                |        |
|          | -   in the percentage of      |                |        |
|          |     teachers who are          |                |        |
|          |     receiving high-quality    |                |        |
|          |     professional development  |                |        |
|          |     to enable them to become  |                |        |
|          |     highly qualified and      |                |        |
|          |     successful classroom      |                |        |
|          |     teachers                  |                |        |
|          |     (§1119(a)(2)(A))?         |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Does the SEA also have a plan | Finding        | 10     |
| Element  | with specific steps to ensure |                |        |
| 1.10     | that poor and minority        |                |        |
|          | children are not taught at    |                |        |
|          | higher rates than other       |                |        |
|          | children by inexperienced,    |                |        |
|          | unqualified, and/or           |                |        |
|          | out-of-field teachers? Does   |                |        |
|          | the plan include measures to  |                |        |
|          | evaluate and publicly report  |                |        |
|          | the progress of such steps    |                |        |
|          | (§1111(b)(8)(C))?             |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Has the State reported to the | Finding        | 11     |
| Element  | Secretary in its Consolidated |                |        |
| 1.11     | State Performance Report      |                |        |
|          | (CSPR) the number and         |                |        |
|          | percentage of core academic   |                |        |
|          | classes taught by highly      |                |        |
|          | qualified teachers, in the    |                |        |
|          | aggregate and in high-poverty |                |        |
|          | schools, consistent with the  |                |        |
|          | statutory definition of       |                |        |
|          | highly qualified              |                |        |
|          | (§1111(h)(4)(G); §9101(23))?  |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Critical | Does the State prepare and    | Finding        | 11     |
| Element  | disseminate to the public an  |                |        |
| 1.12     | Annual State Report Card      |                |        |
|          | (§1111(h)(1)(C)(viii))? If    |                |        |
|          | so, how is it disseminated?   |                |        |
+----------+-------------------------------+----------------+--------+

+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| # Mo     |                                |                  |      |
| nitoring |                                |                  |      |
|  Area 2: |                                |                  |      |
|  Adminis |                                |                  |      |
| tration  |                                |                  |      |
| of ESEA  |                                |                  |      |
| Title II |                                |                  |      |
| , Part A |                                |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| *        | # Description                  | ### Status       | ##   |
| *Element |                                |                  | Page |
| Number** |                                |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA allocate funds    | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | according to the statute,      |                  |      |
| 2.1      | using the most recent Census   |                  |      |
|          | Bureau data as described in    |                  |      |
|          | the Non-Regulatory Guidance    |                  |      |
|          | (§2121(a))?                    |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA require an        | Recommendation   | 12   |
| Element  | application from each LEA      |                  |      |
| 2.2      | before providing Title II,     |                  |      |
|          | Part A funding? If yes, what   |                  |      |
|          | information does the SEA       |                  |      |
|          | require in the LEA application |                  |      |
|          | (§2122(b))?                    |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | In particular, does the SEA    | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | require each LEA to describe   |                  |      |
| 2.3      | how the activities to be       |                  |      |
|          | carried out are based on the   |                  |      |
|          | required local needs           |                  |      |
|          | assessment (§2122(b))?         |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a procedure  | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | to determine the amount of     |                  |      |
| 2.4      | funds each LEA expended during |                  |      |
|          | the period of availability?    |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a procedure  | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | to regularly review the        |                  |      |
| 2.5      | drawdowns of the LEAs?         |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a written    | > Met            | NA   |
| Element  | policy on allowable carryover  | > Requirements   |      |
| 2.6      | funds?                         |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | If an LEA cannot obligate      | > Met            | NA   |
| Element  | funds within the 27 months of  | > Requirements   |      |
| 2.7      | availability (which includes   |                  |      |
|          | the extra year of availability |                  |      |
|          | permitted under the Tydings    |                  |      |
|          | amendment), does the SEA have  |                  |      |
|          | a procedure for reallocating   |                  |      |
|          | these funds to other LEAs?     |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA have records to   | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | show that each LEA meets the   |                  |      |
| 2.8      | maintenance of effort          |                  |      |
|          | requirements?                  |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA conduct regular,  | Recommendation   | 12   |
| Element  | systematic reviews of LEAs to  |                  |      |
| 2.9      | monitor for compliance with    |                  |      |
|          | Federal statutes and           |                  |      |
|          | regulations, applicable State  |                  |      |
|          | rules and policies, and the    |                  |      |
|          | approved subgrant application? |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Does the SEA ensure that it    | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | and its component LEAs are     |                  |      |
| 2.10     | audited annually, if required, |                  |      |
|          | and that all corrective        |                  |      |
|          | actions required through this  |                  |      |
|          | process are fully implemented? |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Has the SEA identified and     | Met Requirements | NA   |
| Element  | provided technical assistance  |                  |      |
| 2.11     | to LEAs that are not making    |                  |      |
|          | progress toward meeting their  |                  |      |
|          | annual measurable objectives   |                  |      |
|          | in meeting the highly          |                  |      |
|          | qualified teacher challenge    |                  |      |
|          | (§2141)?                       |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+
| Critical | Has the SEA provided guidance  | Recommendation   | 12   |
| Element  | to the LEAs on initiating      |                  |      |
| 2.12     | consultation with nonpublic    |                  |      |
|          | school officials for equitable |                  |      |
|          | services?                      |                  |      |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------------+------+

+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| #       |                                 |                  |      |
| Monitor |                                 |                  |      |
| ing Are |                                 |                  |      |
| a 3: St |                                 |                  |      |
| ate Act |                                 |                  |      |
| ivities |                                 |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| **      | # Description                   | ### Status       | ##   |
| Element |                                 |                  | Page |
| N       |                                 |                  |      |
| umber** |                                 |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| C       | Does the State use its State    | Commendations    | 12   |
| ritical | Activities funds to promote the |                  |      |
| Element | recruitment, hiring, training,  |                  |      |
| 3.1     | and retention of highly         |                  |      |
|         | qualified teachers and          |                  |      |
|         | principals?                     |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| C       | Does the State support          | Met Requirements | NA   |
| ritical | activities that focus on        |                  |      |
| Element | increasing the subject-matter   |                  |      |
| 3.2     | knowledge of teachers and that  |                  |      |
|         | assist teachers to become       |                  |      |
|         | highly qualified?               |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+

+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| #       |                                 |                  |      |
| Monitor |                                 |                  |      |
| ing Are |                                 |                  |      |
| a 4: St |                                 |                  |      |
| ate Age |                                 |                  |      |
| ncy for |                                 |                  |      |
|  Higher |                                 |                  |      |
|  Educat |                                 |                  |      |
| ion (SA |                                 |                  |      |
| HE) Act |                                 |                  |      |
| ivities |                                 |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| **      | # Description                   | ### Status       | ##   |
| Element |                                 |                  | Page |
| N       |                                 |                  |      |
| umber** |                                 |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| C       | Did the SAHE manage a           | Commendation     | 13   |
| ritical | competition for eligible        |                  |      |
| Element | partnerships?                   | Recommendation   |      |
| 4.1     |                                 |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+
| C       | Does the SAHE have procedures   | Recommendation   | 13   |
| ritical | to ensure that eligible         |                  |      |
| Element | partnerships include the        |                  |      |
| 4.2     | required members, i.e., an      |                  |      |
|         | institution of higher education |                  |      |
|         | and the division of the         |                  |      |
|         | institution that prepares       |                  |      |
|         | teachers and principals, a      |                  |      |
|         | school of arts and sciences,    |                  |      |
|         | and a high-need LEA?            |                  |      |
+---------+---------------------------------+------------------+------+

**[Area 1: Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) Systems and
Procedures]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 1.1:]{.underline} Has the State developed and
implemented procedures, consistent with the statutory definition of
highly qualified, to determine whether *all* teachers of core academic
subjects are highly qualified (§9101(23))?**

**[Finding 1:]{.underline}** The State's procedure for determining the
HQT status of elementary school teachers who predate the State's testing
requirement is not consistent with the statutory HQT definition. Since
1994 the State has required that new elementary school teachers pass a
rigorous State test of content knowledge; however, a substantial number
of elementary school teachers were hired before 1994 and therefore have
not demonstrated subject-matter competency. The State considers these
teachers to be highly qualified by virtue of holding full State
certification and a degree in elementary education, and the State has
not made a HOUSSE option available.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** The ESEA provisions governing teacher
quality include basic requirements (§1119(a) and (b)) that all teachers
of core academic subjects who teach in Title I programs and who were
hired after the first day of the 2002-03 school year first demonstrate
that they are highly qualified and that all other teachers of core
academic subjects in all public schools be highly qualified by the end
of the 2005-06 school year. Section 9101(23) of the ESEA expressly
defines a "highly qualified" teacher as one who has at least a
bachelor's degree, has full State certification and has demonstrated
competency in each subject he or she teaches in certain statutorily
prescribed ways.

The ESEA HQT provisions also include important requirements in §1111(h)
of the ESEA regarding public reporting to the people of Colorado and to
the U.S. Secretary of Education (the Secretary) on the extent to which
teachers of core academic subjects in the State's school districts are
highly qualified. Together, these ESEA requirements are a critical part
of the framework Congress established in NCLB for how States accepting
Title I, Part A funds would be held accountable for providing to all
students, and particularly those in Title I programs, teachers with the
knowledge they need to help those students not only to meet or exceed
their States' academic achievement standards, but to achieve to their
full academic potential.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** As discussed more
specifically in our determination for Critical Elements 1.4, 1.7 and 1.8
below, the CDE must submit a written plan with specific procedures and a
timeline the State will implement to ensure that determinations of
whether veteran elementary school teachers are highly qualified conform
to the definition in §9101(23) and the timeline in §1119(a)(1) and (2).

**[Finding 2:]{.underline}** The State offers an Interim License to
out-of-state teachers who hold full certification in another State but
have less than three years of teaching experience. This one-year permit,
renewable twice, is a license individuals may hold while they are
teaching and completing State assessment requirements. However, the
State deems all individuals with an Interim License as highly qualified.
Similarly, out-of-state teachers with three or more years of teaching
experience may be granted a full State license and deemed highly
qualified, regardless of demonstrated content knowledge. Out-of-state
elementary teachers are deemed highly qualified by virtue of an
elementary education certification, regardless of completion of an
assessment or HOUSSE procedures. Annually, an estimated two-third of the
State's new hires come from outside of Colorado.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** See Citation for Critical Element 1.1,
Finding 1, above.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** See Further Action Required
for Critical Element 1.1, Finding 1, above.

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The State is commended for working in
collaboration with its institutions of higher education to re-align
teacher preparation program standards with both student content
standards and assessments and national teacher standards.

**[Critical Element 1.4:]{.underline} Are all veteran (i.e., those who
are not new to the profession) elementary school teachers (including
special education teachers, as appropriate) required to demonstrate
subject-matter competency by passing a rigorous State test or by
completing the State's "High Objective Uniform State Standard of
Evaluation" (HOUSSE) procedures (§9101(23)(C))?**

**[Finding 1:]{.underline}** As noted in Critical Element 1.1, Finding
1, the State has a set of veteran elementary school teachers, including
special education teachers, licensed prior to 1994 that predate the
State's testing requirements and thus may not have demonstrated
subject-matter competency. However, the CDE considers these teachers as
highly qualified by virtue of holding full State certification and an
elementary education major. Thus, the State is not requiring these
teachers to demonstrate subject-matter competency as required by
statute.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 9101(23)(C) of the ESEA says that
veteran elementary school teachers can demonstrate subject-matter
competency either by passing a rigorous State assessment of academic
subject matter or by using the HOUSSE.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The CDE must revise its
procedures so that veteran elementary school teachers may demonstrate
subject-knowledge competency only by passing a test or by satisfying the
requirements of the State's HOUSSE procedure.

**[Finding 2:]{.underline}** As noted in Critical Element 1.1, Finding
2, the State considers out-of-state elementary school teachers to be
highly qualified, regardless of whether they have demonstrated content
knowledge.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** See Citation for Critical Element 1.4,
Finding 1, above.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** See Further Action Required
for Critical Element 1.4, Finding 1, above.

**[Critical Element 1.7:]{.underline} How does the SEA ensure that,
since the beginning of the**

**2002-03 school year, districts hire only highly qualified teachers
(including special education teachers, as appropriate) to teach in Title
I programs?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Because the State's procedures for
determining the HQT status of veteran elementary school teachers,
including special education teachers, who predate the testing
requirement or come from out of state are not consistent with statutory
requirements, the State is not able to ensure that districts have hired
only highly qualified teachers to teach in Title I programs. Similarly,
the State is not able to ensure that districts are properly exercising
their parental notification requirements.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 1119(a)(1) of the ESEA requires that
all teachers hired after the first day of the 2002-03 school year to
teach in Title I programs must be highly qualified.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The CDE must submit a written
plan with specific procedures and a timeline for requiring LEAs in the
State to ensure that all teachers hired to teach in Title I programs
since the first day of the 2002-03 school year, including special
education teachers providing direct instruction in core academic
subjects, demonstrate, in a manner consistent with statute, that they
are highly qualified in each core academic subject they teach by no
later than the end of the 2005-06 school year.

**[Critical Element 1.8:]{.underline} Has the SEA ensured, since the
beginning of the 2002-03 school year, that districts that use ESEA Title
II, Part A funds to reduce class size hire only highly qualified
teachers for such positions?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Though the State has implemented procedures
to ensure that LEAs pay only highly qualified teachers with ESEA Title
II funds to reduce class size, because the State's procedures for
determining the HQT status of veteran elementary school teachers,
including special education teachers, who predate the testing
requirement or come from out-of-state are not consistent with statutory
requirements, the State is not able to ensure that districts have, since
the 2002-03 school year, paid only highly qualified teachers with ESEA
Title II funds to reduce class size.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 2123(a)(2)(B) of the ESEA allows
LEAs to use ESEA Title II, Part A funds to pay highly qualified teachers
to reduce class size.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The CDE must submit a written
plan with specific procedures and a timeline for requiring LEAs in the
State to ensure that all teachers, including special education teachers
providing direct instruction in core academic subjects, paid with ESEA
Title II funds to reduce class size, are highly qualified.

**[Critical Element 1.9:]{.underline} Does the SEA's plan establish
annual measurable objectives for each LEA and school to ensure that
annual increases occur:**

-   **in the percentage of highly qualified teachers at each LEA and
    school; and**

-   **in the percentage of teachers who are receiving high-quality
    professional development to enable them to become highly qualified
    and successful classroom teachers (§1119(a)(2)(A))?**

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The State has a comprehensive data
management system that goes beyond the required data elements and allows
for quick and complete analyses. This system allows, among other things,
for the SEA to establish and track annual measurable objectives related
to HQT for each LEA. The State uses this system not only to collect and
analyze data, but also to drive planning and funding decisions.

**[Critical Element 1.10:]{.underline} Does the SEA also have a plan
with specific steps to ensure that poor and minority children are not
taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified
and out-of-field teachers? Does the plan include measures to evaluate
and publicly report the progress of such steps (§1111(b)(8)(C))?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Though the State is engaged in a range of
activities to ensure that poor and minority children are not taught at
higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified and
out-of-field teachers, the State does not have a written plan with
specific steps to address these needs.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the ESEA requires
each State to have a plan that describes "the specific steps the State
educational agency will take to ensure that both schoolwide programs and
targeted assistance schools provide instruction by highly qualified
instructional staff as required by §1114(b)(1)(C) and §1115(c)(1)(E),
including steps that the State educational agency will take to ensure
that poor and minority children are not taught at higher rates than
other children by inexperienced, unqualified or out-of-field teachers,
and the measures that the State educational agency will use to evaluate
and publicly report the progress of the State educational agency with
respect to such steps."

[]{.mark}

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The State must submit a
written plan with specific procedures to ensure that poor and minority
children are not taught at a higher rate than their peers by
inexperienced or unqualified teachers.

**[Critical Element 1.11:]{.underline} Has the State reported to the
Secretary in its Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) the number
and percentage of core academic classes taught by highly qualified
teachers, in the aggregate and in high-poverty schools, consistent with
the statutory definition of highly qualified (§1111(h)(4)(G);
§9101(23))?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Though the State reported HQT data, in the
aggregate and in high-poverty schools, because the State reported
veteran elementary school teachers, including special education
teachers, who predate the testing requirement to be highly qualified by
virtue of an elementary degree and because out-of-state veteran
elementary school teachers may not have demonstrated adequate
subject-matter competency, the State's HQT data were reported
incorrectly in the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR).

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 1111(h)(4)(G) of the ESEA requires
each SEA annually to report to the U.S. Secretary of Education on the
percentage of classes (in core academic subjects) taught by highly
qualified teachers in the State, local educational agency and school[^2]
(a summary of which §1111(h)(5) requires the Secretary annually to
report to Congress).

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The CDE must submit a written
plan with specific procedures and a timeline with a firm end date by
which the State will report to the Secretary through the CSPR in a
manner consistent with the statutory requirements, as required by
§1111(h).

**[Critical Element 1.12:]{.underline} Does the State prepare and
disseminate to the public an Annual State Report Card
(§1111(h)(1)(C)(viii))? If so, how is it disseminated?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Because the State reported veteran elementary
school teachers, including special education teachers, who predate the
testing requirement to be highly qualified by virtue of an elementary
degree and because out-of-state veteran elementary school teachers may
not have demonstrated adequate subject-matter competency, the State's
HQT data were reported incorrectly in the Annual State Report Card.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** Section 1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA
requires each SEA to include in its Annual State Report Card data on the
percentage of classes in the State not taught (in core academic
subjects) by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate and
disaggregate by high-poverty (as the term is defined in
§1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA) compared to low-poverty schools.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The CDE must report to the
public and to the Department, as required by §1111(h)(1)(C)(viii), the
percentage of classes not taught by highly qualified teachers at all
grade levels (and disaggregated by high-and low-poverty schools), as
required for the Annual State Report Card.

**[Area 2: Administration of ESEA Title II, Part A]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 2.2:]{.underline} Does the SEA require an
application from each LEA before providing Title II, Part A funding? If
yes, what information does the SEA require in the LEA application
(§2122(b))?**

**[Recommendation:]{.underline}** The monitoring team encourages the
State to move forward with its proposed e-Grants system for the State
and district management of federal funds, including grant applications,
budget information and application reviews.

**[Critical Element 2.9:]{.underline} Does the SEA conduct regular,
systematic reviews of LEAs to monitor for compliance with Federal
statutes and regulations, applicable State rules and policies, and the
approved subgrant application? (Please provide monitoring plan and
instruments onsite).**

**[Recommendation:]{.underline}** In 2005-06, the State began a new
system to both monitor compliance and build the capacity of districts.
This system utilizes a three-pronged approach that includes onsite
compliance monitoring, continuous monitoring through technical
assistance, and an annual desk review and risk assessment. The State
created a comprehensive monitoring rubric to assist districts in meeting
State and federal regulations. The monitoring team encourages the State
to adhere to its planned implementation of this system and to consider
establishing an onsite monitoring schedule.

**[Critical Element 2.12:]{.underline} Has the SEA provided guidance to
the LEAs on initiating consultation with nonpublic school officials for
equitable services?**

**[Recommendation:]{.underline}** Although the CDE provides basic
guidance reminding the LEAs of their consultation responsibility, the
Department recommends that the CDE should develop and provide additional
constructive guidance to the LEAs about initiating and documenting
consultation with non-public school officials for equitable services.

#### [Area 3: State Activities]{.underline}

**[Critical Element 3.1:]{.underline} Does the State use its State
Activities funds to promote the recruitment, hiring, training, and
retention of highly qualified teachers and principals?**

**[Commendation 1:]{.underline}** The State is commended on its
commitment to actively recruit and retain excellent teachers in schools
in high-poverty areas. Specifically, the State uses State Activities
funds for its competitive Rural Teacher Quality Grant program as well as
for extensive professional development activities, including math
institutes and "The Colorado System of School Support" --- school
support teams and comprehensive appraisals for district improvement.

**[Commendation 2:]{.underline}** The State is commended on using its
State Activities funds to support the Professional Development and
School Support Program (PDSSP) Web site. This Web site was developed as
a way to continually communicate information, activities and events to
teachers, principals, superintendents, administrative staff and parents
involved in the continuous school improvement activities of their
schools and districts.

**[Area 4: State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE)
Activities]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 4.1:]{.underline} Did the SAHE manage a competition
for Eligible Partnerships?**

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The SAHE revised its application
package, resulting in a clear and informative document that includes
many helpful resources, such as a list of high-need LEAs and a reviewer
rating form that includes, among other things, compliance with ESEA
Title II, Part A requirements and extensive involvement of project
personnel.

**[Recommendation:]{.underline}** The SAHE should consider moving up its
Request for Proposal (RFP) dissemination, application deadline and award
notification. The additional time should be beneficial to grantees in
planning and budgeting for activities.

**[Critical Element 4.2:]{.underline} Does the SAHE have procedures to
ensure that Eligible Partnerships include the required members, i.e., an
institution of higher education and the division of the institution that
prepares teachers and principals, a school of arts and sciences, and a
high-need LEA?**

**[Recommendation:]{.underline}** Though the SAHE ensures that all
grantees adhere to the 50 percent "special rule," the monitoring team
recommends that the SAHE explicitly include that requirement in the RFP.

[^1]: FY 2004 funds are those that became available to the State on July
    1, 2004.

[^2]: The Department currently is requiring States to report data on
    classes taught by highly qualified teachers at the State level only.
    However we reserve the right to require this information in future
    annual State reports to

    the Secretary.