Adult Education and Family Literacy Act Program

WIOA common measures along with other measures established by U.S. Department of Education, Office of Community, Technical and Adult Education will be used to assess the quality and performance of the providers. In addition to these measures, the programs will also be evaluated on state established goals for enrollment, overall academic level completions, attainment of high school equivalencies and National Career Readiness Certificates. Local eligible programs are responsible to meet all programmatic goals and outcomes that are set by the state. Performance outcomes for each provider will meet or exceed the levels of performance for the common measures set forth under WIOA and the measures established by the National Reporting System performance indicators for Title II Adult Education. The effectiveness of grantees in achieving continuous improvement toward meeting the measures will be continuously evaluated. The performance outcome measures shall consist of the following core indicators: (1) The percentage of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the program; (2) The percentage of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the program; (3) The median earnings of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the program; (4) The percentage of program participants who, during a program year, are in an education or training program that leads to a recognized postsecondary credential or employment and who are achieving measurable skill gains toward such a credential or employment; and (5) The indicators of effectiveness in serving employers established pursuant to clause (iv). Performance Accountability: In addition to the above outcome measures, the ACCS Adult Education state office has established goals for enrollment, academic performance, high school equivalency, and for the number of National Career Readiness Certificates earned. Each provider received their portion of the state goal based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) of the population 18 and over without a high school diploma. Continuous monitoring and evaluation of provider programs for quality of instruction and implementation of best practices and models for adult education is an ongoing process within the state. The process is defined as follows: Desk—top Monitoring—continuous process that includes the analysis of data from the AAESAP management information system and reports, such as the mid and end—of—year reports from providers. It informs management on how the provider is performing against the national and state expected measures. On—Site Monitoring includes review of Program Management; Recruitment, Orientation and Intake; Retention, Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction; Transition and Support Services; and Professional Development. Monitoring—the annual, systematic tracking of adult education program implementation. It consists of examining the progress made in the program against the agreed upon goals set forth in the application for funds. Monitoring also provides the opportunity to make constructive suggestions or recommendations. It employs systematic collection of data and on—site observations by providing stakeholders the extent of progress and achievement of objectives, proper and lawful use of funds, and compliance with federal and state level policies and guidelines. Program Performance shall be assessed using the ACCS adult education state approved monitoring instruments. On—site monitoring is an in—depth process that requires preparation in notification of the intent, dissemination of the monitoring tool, the actual intensive visit process, and the all—important findings, results, corrective action plan, and follow—up to ensure issues have been resolved. This allows the adult education state office to determine the provider’s understanding and ability to meet the intent and purpose of the WIOA Title II Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, and the requirements of the National Reporting System for adult education (NRS). Monitoring reports shall address specific findings and observations. Programs shall be monitored based on a risk analysis that incorporates data and information from the Alabama Adult Education System of Accountability and Performance (AAESAP) management information system. Adult Education has reasonable processes reflective of reporting requirements. For example, staff will provide a copy of the documented monitoring report within a timeframe based on business days from the conclusion of the visit. The provider will have a sufficient amount of time based on business days to respond with a written report reflective of the action required (i.e. corrective action plan or program improvement plan). Adult Education will determine the appropriate follow—up measures to ensure that the program has complied with the plan of action. Targeted Monitoring is performed to follow—up and verify the satisfactory completion of findings identified during the performance of on—site monitoring. ACCS adult education staff conducting the targeted monitoring visit shall notify the provider within an agreed upon reasonable time for the visit and notify the provider in writing if the result is satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Findings are the discoveries that the program is out of compliance or has issues that will impact the ability to accomplish the intent and purpose of WIOA, this plan, or initiatives directed by the Chancellor. Findings require a response and a solution for ensuring that it does not occur again. The response is followed up on again to confirm that the solution has been implemented and is working. Adult Education will annually evaluate the effectiveness of the adult education and literacy activities, including performance measures in Sec. 223. Program reviews and evaluations of state—administered adult education programs, services, and activities will be conducted based on data analysis, site visits, and evaluation instruments. Activities such as professional development, instructional curriculum, and resources implemented into service delivery will be consistently monitored and evaluated through the year. Types of activities may include self—evaluation of program activities; report of progress in achieving state goals for adult education; effectiveness of teacher training; provider effectiveness; extent to which state adult education technology needs have been met; extent to which adult education for workers, the homeless, and other special populations have been met; and use of results to determine achievement of levels of national and state performance measures, and effectiveness of WIOA implementation. Mid—year Report gives the programs an opportunity to answer specific questions that are designed to create constructive self—assessment on where the program is and where it needs to be by the end of the year. Challenges and successes are reported. All mid—year reports are reviewed and receive a reply from adult education state staff. Year—end Report is the written report from the local provider addressing the success and challenges that were experienced during the year. It is reflective, yet it provides the context for designing services and instructional programming during continuation years. This report may also alert staff of risks that are apparent and would require a monitoring visit or follow—up. The reports are used to discuss the readiness of WIOA implementation with questions that require programs to strategically assess employment and college and career readiness. The reports give insight into the challenges and barriers to success, which assists in designing professional development efforts. Evaluations are used after any professional development training offered at a local, regional, or state level to determine if the professional development training objectives were met. The evaluations are used by instructors and state-level staff to assess the success and areas of improvement that will need to occur before any additional training. Surveys are used to gather feedback from the practitioners to guide professional development needs and other activities pertinent to continuous improvement of programs and practitioners. The annual training plan includes state priorities, input from surveys about training needs, and focus groups to advise on all instructional components such as reading instruction, instruction related to the specific needs of adult learners, instruction provided by volunteers and paid personnel, and dissemination about models and promising practices. Survey results are reviewed with the focus groups to decide how the training would best be delivered, face-to-face or through online webinars. Best practices, innovative instructional methodologies, to communicate statewide key initiatives and policies, as well information regarding additional instructional resources and professional development opportunities are discussed in webinars. As discussed previously, the Adult Education office will assess the quality of providers of adult education and literacy activities through data reviews, monitoring visits, performance reports, mid—year reports, and on—site program reviews. An important piece of the on—site review is teacher observation and evaluation. This is also part of the annual personnel review that is the responsibility of the program director. Teachers are reviewed by a tool used by state staff and directors to capture and assess the observations made during the review. If a program fails to meet performance goals or other programmatic requirements, specific actions will be taken to improve the quality of the program. The state office uses the following process to improve the quality of adult education services. 1. Corrective Action Plan (CAP) — A CAP will be implemented with programs that are out of compliance with state and/or federal policies. The Adult Education state office will provide technical assistance throughout the corrective process, and by the end of a designated timeframe, programs should be able to correct the identified issues and resolve the CAP. 2. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) — A program improvement plan of action will be required for programs which are identified as low—performing when compared to the state performance on federal or state benchmarks. The plan will include specific action steps, such as student retention, post—testing and assessment, data analysis, training, and professional development which will be designed to improve program performance through an increase in the quality, rigor, and intensity of processes and direct services. 3. Program Self Review — A program self—assessment document is used to assist the programs in self—identifying programmatic and administrative compliance and the status of each area as related to adult education. The program can use the document as a guide to assess the strengths and opportunities for improving certain areas of need. Adult Education state staff will provide ongoing technical assistance, professional development, and other support to all programs. The type of technical assistance, professional development, and support will be based upon the specific area(s) of deficiency or need at a program level.