[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 34 (Thursday, February 20, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8234-8260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4074]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Alabama Department of Education; Written Findings and Compliance 
Agreement

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of 
Education.

ACTION: Notice of written findings and compliance agreement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Section 457 of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) 
authorizes the U.S. Department of Education to enter into a compliance 
agreement with a recipient that is failing to comply substantially with 
Federal program requirements. In order to enter into a compliance 
agreement, the Department must determine, in written findings, that the 
recipient cannot comply until a future date with the applicable program 
requirements and that a compliance agreement is a viable means of 
bringing about such compliance. On March 27, 2002, the Assistant 
Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education (Assistant Secretary) 
entered into a compliance agreement with the Alabama Department of 
Education (ALDE). Under section 457(b)(2) of GEPA, the written findings 
and compliance agreement must be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Grace A. Ross, U.S. Department of

[[Page 8235]]

Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 400 Maryland 
Avenue, SW., room 3W118, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 260-
0967.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternate format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under title I, part A of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (title I), each State, including the 
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, was required to develop or adopt, 
by the 1997-98 school year, challenging content standards in at least 
reading/language arts and mathematics that describe what the State 
expects all students to know and be able to do. Each State also was 
required to develop or adopt performance standards, aligned with its 
content standards, which describe three levels of proficiency to 
determine how well students are mastering the content standards. 
Finally, by the 2000-2001 school year, each State was required to 
develop or adopt a set of student assessments in at least reading/
language arts and mathematics that would be used to determine the 
yearly performance of schools in enabling students to meet the State's 
performance standards.
    The Alabama Department of Education (ALDE) submitted, and the 
Department approved, evidence that it has content standards in at least 
reading/language arts and mathematics. In October 2000, ALDE submitted 
evidence of its final assessment system. The Department submitted that 
evidence to a panel of three assessment experts for peer review and 
following that review the Acting Assistant Secretary determined that 
Alabama must enter a compliance agreement with the Department. The ALDE 
submitted additional information and this evidence was peer reviewed in 
August 2001. Following that review, the Assistant Secretary for 
Elementary and Secondary Education concluded that ALDE's proposed final 
assessment system and performance standards did not meet a number of 
the Title I requirements.
    Section 454 of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1234c, sets out the remedies 
available to the Department when it determines that a recipient ``is 
failing to comply substantially with any requirement of law'' 
applicable to Federal program funds the Department administers. 
Specifically, the Department is authorized to--
    (1) Withhold funds;
    (2) Obtain compliance through a cease and desist order;
    (3) Enter into a compliance agreement with the recipient; or
    (4) Take any other action authorized by law. 20 U.S.C. 1234c(a)(1) 
through (a)(4).
    In a letter dated November 19, 2001, to Dr. Edward R. Richardson, 
Superintendent of Schools for the Alabama Department of Education, the 
Assistant Secretary notified ALDE that, in order to remain eligible to 
receive Title I funds, it must enter into a compliance agreement with 
the Department. The purpose of a compliance agreement is ``to bring the 
recipient into full compliance with the applicable requirements of law 
as soon as feasible and not to excuse or remedy past violations of such 
requirements.'' 20 U.S.C. 1234f(a). In order to enter into a compliance 
agreement with a recipient, the Department must determine, in written 
findings, that the recipient cannot comply until a future date with the 
applicable program requirements, and that a compliance agreement is a 
viable means for bringing about such compliance.
    On April 8, 2002, the Assistant Secretary issued written findings, 
holding that compliance by ALDE with the title I standards and 
assessment requirements is genuinely not feasible until a future date. 
Having first submitted its assessment system for peer review in October 
2000, ALDE was not able to make the significant changes to its system 
that the Department's peer review required in time to meet the spring 
2001 statutory deadline to have approved assessments in place. As a 
result, ALDE administered its unapproved assessment system in 2001. The 
Assistant Secretary also determined that a compliance agreement 
represents a viable means of bringing about compliance because of the 
steps ALDE has already taken to comply, its commitment of resources, 
and the plan it has developed for further action. The agreement sets 
out the action plan that ALDE must meet to come into compliance with 
the title I requirements. This plan, coupled with specific reporting 
requirements, will allow the Assistant Secretary to monitor closely 
ALDE's progress in meeting the terms of the compliance agreement. Both 
the Superintendent of ALDE, Dr. Edward R. Richardson, and the Assistant 
Secretary signed the agreement on March 27, 2002.
    As required by section 457(b)(2) of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(2), 
the text of the Assistant Secretary's written findings is set forth as 
appendix A and the compliance agreement is set forth as appendix B of 
this notice.

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in Text or Adobe 
Portable Document Format (PDF), on the Internet at the following site: 
www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister.
    To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. 
Government Printing Office (GPO) toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in 
the Washington, DC area at (202) 512-1530.

    Note: The official version of this document is the document 
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the 
official edition of the Federal Register is available on GPO access 
at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html.


(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1234c, 1234f, 6311)

    Dated: February 13, 2003.
Eugene W. Hickock,
Under Secretary of Education.

Appendix A--Text of the Written Findings of the Assistant Secretary for 
Elementary and Secondary Education

I. Introduction

    The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education 
(Assistant Secretary) of the U.S. Department of Education (Department) 
has determined, pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1234c and 1234f, that the Alabama 
Department of Education (ALDE) has failed to comply substantially with 
certain requirements of title I, part A of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 (title I), 20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq., and that it is 
not feasible for ALDE to achieve full compliance immediately. 
Specifically, the Assistant Secretary has determined that ALDE failed 
to meet a number of the title I requirements concerning the development 
of performance standards and an aligned assessment system within the 
statutory timeframe.
    For the following reasons, the Assistant Secretary has concluded 
that it would be appropriate to enter into a compliance agreement with 
ALDE to bring it into full compliance as soon as feasible. During the 
effective period of the compliance agreement, which ends three years 
from the date of these

[[Page 8236]]

findings, ALDE will be eligible to receive title I funds as long as it 
complies with the terms and conditions of the agreement as well as the 
provisions of title I, part A and other applicable Federal statutory 
and regulatory requirements.

II. Relevant Statutory and Regulatory Provisions

A. Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965
    Title I, part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 (title I), 20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq., provides financial assistance, 
through State educational agencies, to local educational agencies to 
provide services in high-poverty schools to students who are failing or 
at risk of failing to meet the State's student performance standards. 
Under title I, each State, including the District of Columbia and 
Puerto Rico, was required to develop or adopt, by the 1997-98 school 
year, challenging content standards in at least reading/language arts 
and mathematics that describe what the State expects all students to 
know and be able to do and performance standards, aligned with those 
content standards, that describe three levels of proficiency to 
determine how well students are mastering the content standards.
    By the 2000-2001 school year, title I required each State to 
develop or adopt a set of student assessments in at least reading/
language arts and mathematics that would be used to determine the 
yearly performance of schools and school districts in enabling students 
to meet the State's performance standards. These assessments must meet 
the following requirements:
    [sbull] The assessments must be aligned to a State's content and 
performance standards.
    [sbull] They must be administered annually to students in at least 
one grade in each of three grade ranges: grades 3 through 5, grades 6 
through 9, and grades 10 through 12.
    [sbull] They must be valid and reliable for the purpose for which 
they are used and of high technical quality.
    [sbull] They must involve multiple measures, including measures 
that assess higher-order thinking skills.
    [sbull] They must provide for the inclusion of all students in the 
grades assessed, including students with disabilities and limited 
English proficient students.
    [sbull] They must provide individual reports on the students 
tested.
    [sbull] Results from the assessments must be disaggregated and 
reported by major racial and ethnic groups and other categories.
    [sbull] 20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(3).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On January 8, 2002, title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act was reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 
2001 (NCLB) (Pub. L. 107-110). The NCLB made several significant 
changes to the Title I standards and assessment requirements. First, 
it requires that each State develop academic content and student 
achievement standards in science by the 2005-06 school year. Second, 
by the 2005-06 school year, it requires a system of aligned 
assessments in each of grades 3 through 8 and once during grades 10 
through 12. Third, it requires science assessments in at least three 
grade spans by the 2007-08 school year. Fourth, the NCLB 
significantly changes the definition of adequate yearly progress 
each State must establish to hold schools and school districts 
accountable, based on data from the 2001-02 test administration. 
Finally, by the 2002-03 school year, the NCLB requires State and 
school district report cards that include, among other things, 
assessment results disaggregated by various subgroups, two-year 
trend data, and percent of students tested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The General Education Provisions Act
    The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) provides a number of 
options when the Assistant Secretary determines a recipient of 
Department funds is ``failing to comply substantially with any 
requirement of law applicable to such funds.'' 20 U.S.C. 1234c. In such 
case, the Assistant Secretary is authorized to--
    (1) Withhold funds;
    (2) Obtain compliance through a cease and desist order;
    (3) Enter into a compliance agreement with the recipient; or
    (4) Take any other action authorized by law. 20 U.S.C. 1234c(a)(1) 
through (a)(4).
    Under section 457 of GEPA, the Assistant Secretary may enter into a 
compliance agreement with a recipient that is failing to comply 
substantially with specific program requirements. 20 U.S.C. 1234f. The 
purpose of a compliance agreement is ``to bring the recipient into full 
compliance with the applicable requirements of the law as soon as 
feasible and not to excuse or remedy past violations of such 
requirements.'' 20 U.S.C. 1234f(a). Before entering into a compliance 
agreement with a recipient, the Assistant Secretary must hold a hearing 
at which the recipient, affected students and parents or their 
representatives, and other interested parties are invited to 
participate. At that hearing, the recipient has the burden of 
persuading the Assistant Secretary that full compliance with the 
applicable requirements of law is not feasible until a future date and 
that a compliance agreement is a viable means for bringing about such 
compliance. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(1). If, on the basis of all the 
available evidence, the Assistant Secretary determines that compliance 
until a future date is genuinely not feasible and that a compliance 
agreement is a viable means for bringing about such compliance, the 
Assistant Secretary must make written findings to that effect and 
publish those findings, together with the substance of any compliance 
agreement, in the Federal Register. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(2).
    A compliance agreement must set forth an expiration date, not later 
than three years from the date of these written findings, by which time 
the recipient must be in full compliance with all program requirements. 
20 U.S.C. 1234f(c)(1). In addition, a compliance agreement must contain 
the terms and conditions with which the recipient must comply during 
the period that agreement is in effect. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(c)(2). If the 
recipient fails to comply with any of the terms and conditions of the 
compliance agreement, the Assistant Secretary may consider the 
agreement no longer in effect and may take any of the compliance 
actions described previously. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(d).

III. Analysis

A. Overview of Issues To Be Resolved in Determining Whether a 
Compliance Agreement Is Appropriate
    In deciding whether a compliance agreement between the Assistant 
Secretary and ALDE is appropriate, the Assistant Secretary must first 
determine whether compliance by ALDE with the title I standards and 
assessment requirements is genuinely not feasible until a future date. 
20 U.S.C. 1234f(b). The second issue that the Assistant Secretary must 
resolve is whether ALDE will be able, within a period of up to three 
years, to come into compliance with the title I requirements. Not only 
must ALDE come into full compliance by the end of the effective period 
of the compliance agreement, it must also make steady and measurable 
progress toward that objective while the compliance agreement is in 
effect. If such an outcome is not possible, then a compliance agreement 
between the Assistant Secretary and ALDE would not be appropriate.
B. ALDE Has Failed To Comply Substantially With Title I Standards and 
Assessment Requirements
    In October 2000, ALDE submitted evidence of its final assessment 
system. The Assistant Secretary submitted that evidence to a panel of 
three assessment experts for peer review. Alabama submitted additional 
information and this evidence was peer reviewed in August 2001. 
Following that review, the

[[Page 8237]]

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education concluded 
that ALDE's proposed final assessment system did not meet a number of 
the title I requirements. Specifically, the Assistant Secretary 
determined that ALDE must do the following:
    [sbull] Develop or select an academic assessment system that 
represents the full range of the ALDE's academic content standards and 
academic achievement standards in at least reading/language arts and 
mathematics and is consistent with the title I requirements for use of 
multiple measures of student achievement, including measures that 
assess higher-order thinking and understanding. Document the alignment 
of the assessment system with ALDE's academic content and student 
achievement standards.
    [sbull] Provide evidence that the State assessment shall be used 
for purposes for which such assessments are valid and reliable, and be 
consistent with relevant, nationally recognized professional and 
technical standards for such assessments.
    [sbull] Provide evidence supporting the proposed Alabama Student 
Assessment Program that includes information on the financial capacity 
of Alabama to complete this system so that it meets the requirements of 
title I, including performance standards, alignment, technical quality, 
inclusion of all students, reporting, and use in the State's 
accountability system.
    [sbull] Provide evidence of performance standards having three 
performance levels, with cut scores for all components of the 
assessment system, and the process to be used to determine that these 
performance standards are aligned with content standards and 
performance descriptors for all components of the assessment system 
incorporated into the State's accountability system.
    [sbull] Provide evidence of participation rates for each grade 
assessed, each subject (reading and math), and, for students with 
disabilities (SWD) and limited English proficiency (LEP) populations, 
the total enrollment, number assessed, and number exempted. The number 
assessed should be broken down by types of assessment accommodation 
(regular, standard accommodations, non-standard accommodations, and 
alternate) for all components of the State assessment system that are 
included in the accountability system.
    [sbull] Provide evidence of an approved comprehensive policy on 
assessment guidelines and accommodations for LEP students, clear 
guidance to LEAs and schools related to the use of language proficiency 
tests for the LEP team decisions on accommodations for assessments, and 
a plan for implementing the new LEP inclusion policies and for 
monitoring LEA compliance with those policies.
    [sbull] Provide evidence on the process used to incorporate data 
for SWD and LEP students into the assessment and accountability 
systems.
    [sbull] Provide evidence regarding the extent to which all 
components of the Alabama assessment program contribute to the 
alignment of the content and performance standards; a description of 
the State's approach for ensuring alignment; and information on the 
cognitive complexity of all of the Alabama assessments.
    [sbull] Provide evidence of a technical manual for the writing 
component and technical information on all the proposed components when 
they are available.
    [sbull] Provide evidence to show how Alabama will disaggregate its 
performance data in grade spans 3-5 and 6-9 by economically 
disadvantaged students versus non-economically disadvantaged, race/
ethnicity, and LEP status at the State, LEA, and school levels and on 
how Alabama will disaggregate its performance data by all the required 
categories at the high school level.
    [sbull] Provide evidence on how ALDE will provide individual 
student reports and State, LEA, and school profiles by student 
performance standards and how it will report and disseminate student 
performance information to the necessary stakeholders at the LEA and 
school levels.
C. ALDE Cannot Correct Immediately Its Noncompliance With the Title I 
Standards and Assessment Requirements
    Under the title I statute, ALDE was required to implement its final 
assessment system no later than the 2000-2001 school year. 20 U.S.C. 
6311(b)(6). ALDE submitted evidence of its assessment system in October 
2000 and August 2001 but the Assistant Secretary determined, on the 
basis of that evidence, that ALDE's system did not fully meet the title 
I requirements. Due to the enormity and complexity of developing a new 
assessment system that addressed the Assistant Secretary's concerns, 
ALDE was not able to complete that task between the time it first 
submitted its system for review and the spring 2001 assessment window. 
Thus, in spring 2001, ALDE administered the assessment that the 
Assistant Secretary had determined did not meet the title I 
requirements. As a result, the Assistant Secretary finds that it is not 
genuinely feasible for ALDE to come into compliance until a future 
date.
D. ALDE Can Meet the Terms and Conditions of a Compliance Agreement and 
Come into Full Compliance With the Requirements of Title I Within Three 
years
    At the public hearing, ALDE presented evidence of its commitment 
and capability to come into compliance with the title I standards and 
assessment requirements within three years. For example, Alabama 
successfully amended a law in 2000 that required the State Board of 
Education to implement a nationally normed test to assist in the 
assessment of student achievement in grades three through 11. Since 
that time, the State has been busy designing a new accountability 
system and adopting a new assessment plan for its schools, one that 
maintains high standards and comports with Federal law.
    Finally, ALDE has developed a comprehensive action plan, 
incorporated into the compliance agreement, that sets out a very 
specific schedule that ALDE has agreed to meet during the next three 
years for attaining compliance with the title I standards and 
assessment requirements. As a result, ALDE is committed not only to 
coming into full compliance within three years, but to meeting a 
stringent, but reasonable, schedule for doing so. The action plan also 
demonstrates that ALDE will be well on its way to meeting the new 
standards and assessment requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act 
of 2001. The compliance agreement also sets out documentation and 
reporting procedures that ALDE must follow. These provisions will allow 
the Assistant Secretary to ascertain promptly whether ALDE is meeting 
each of its commitments under the compliance agreement and is on 
schedule to achieve full compliance within the effective period of the 
agreement.
    The task of developing an assessment system that meets the title I 
requirements is not a quick or easy one. However, the Assistant 
Secretary has determined that, given the commitment of ALDE to comply 
with the terms and conditions of the compliance agreement, it is 
possible for ALDE to come into full compliance with the title I 
standards and assessment requirements within three years.

IV. Conclusion

    For the foregoing reasons, the Assistant Secretary finds the 
following:

[[Page 8238]]

(1) That full compliance by ALDE with the standards and assessment 
requirements of title I is not feasible until a future date; and (2) 
that ALDE can meet the terms and conditions of the attached compliance 
agreement and come into full compliance with the title I standards and 
assessment requirements within three years of the date of these 
findings. Therefore, the Assistant Secretary has determined that it is 
appropriate to enter into a compliance agreement with ALDE. Under the 
terms of 20 U.S.C. 1234f, that compliance agreement becomes effective 
on the date of these findings.

    Dated: March 27, 2002.
Susan B. Neuman,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Appendix B--Text of the Compliance Agreement

Compliance Agreement Under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act Between the United States Department of Education and the 
Alabama Department of Education

Introduction

    Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
(title I) required each State, including the District of Columbia and 
Puerto Rico, to develop or adopt, by the 1997-98 school year, 
challenging content standards in at least reading/language arts and 
mathematics that describe what the State expects all students to know 
and be able to do. Title I also required each State to develop or adopt 
performance standards, aligned with those content standards, that 
describe three levels of proficiency to determine how well students are 
mastering the content standards. By the 2000-2001 school year, title I 
required each State to develop or adopt a set of student assessments in 
at least reading/language arts and mathematics that would be used to 
determine the yearly performance of schools and school districts in 
enabling students to meet the State's performance standards.
    The Alabama Department of Education (ALDE) was not able to meet 
these requirements by the statutory deadlines. In order to be eligible 
to continue to receive title I funds while working to comply with the 
statutory requirements, Dr. Edward R. Richardson, Superintendent of 
ALDE, indicated ALDE's interest in entering into a compliance agreement 
with the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) of the 
United States Department of Education. On January 31, 2002, OESE 
conducted a public hearing regarding ALDE's ability to come into 
compliance with the title I standards and assessment requirements 
within three years. Based on testimony at that hearing, Dr. Joseph 
Morton, Deputy State Superintendent, determined that ``Alabama was one 
of the states that did not meet the deadline for title I compliance 
with all rules and regulations.'' The Deputy State Superintendent 
stated, ``I am here today to testify that it can be done within a 
three-year span from the date of initiation of a signed compliance 
agreement.'' The Deputy State Superintendent's written findings are 
attached to, and incorporated by reference into, this Agreement.
    Pursuant to this Compliance Agreement under 20 U.S.C. 1234f, ALDE 
must be in full compliance with the requirements of title I no later 
than three years from the date of the Assistant Secretary's written 
findings, a copy of which is attached to, and incorporated by reference 
into, this Agreement. Specifically, ALDE must meet, and document that 
it has met, the following requirements:
    1. Develop or select an academic assessment system that represents 
the full range of ALDE's academic content standards and academic 
achievement standards in at least reading/language arts and mathematics 
and is consistent with the title I requirements for use of multiple 
measures of student achievement, including measures that assess higher-
order thinking and understanding. Document the alignment of the 
assessment system with ALDE's academic content and student achievement 
standards.
    2. Provide evidence that the State assessment shall be used for 
purposes for which such assessments are valid and reliable, and be 
consistent with relevant, nationally recognized professional and 
technical standards for such assessments.
    3. Provide evidence supporting the proposed Alabama Student 
Assessment Program that includes information on the financial capacity 
of Alabama to complete this system so that it meets the requirements of 
title I, including performance standards, alignment, technical quality, 
inclusion of all students, reporting, and use in the State's 
accountability system.
    4. Provide evidence of performance standards having three 
performance levels, with cut scores for all components of the 
assessment system, and the process to be used to determine that these 
performance standards are aligned with content standards and 
performance descriptors for all components of the assessment system 
incorporated into your State's accountability system.
    5. Provide evidence of participation rates for each grade assessed, 
each subject (reading and math), and, for SWD and LEP populations, the 
total enrollment, number assessed, and number exempted. The number 
assessed should be broken down by types of assessment accommodation 
(regular, standard accommodations, non-standard accommodations, and 
alternate) for all components of the State assessment system that you 
included in the accountability system.
    6. Provide evidence of an approved comprehensive policy on 
assessment guidelines and accommodations for LEP students, clear 
guidance to LEAs and schools related to the use of language proficiency 
tests for the LEP team decisions on accommodations for assessments, and 
a plan for implementing the new LEP inclusion policies and for 
monitoring LEA compliance with those policies.
    7. Provide evidence on the process used to incorporate data for SWD 
and LEP students into the assessment and accountability systems.
    8. Provide evidence regarding the extent to which all components of 
the Alabama assessment program contribute to the alignment of the 
content and performance standards, a description of your State's 
approach for ensuring alignment; and information on the cognitive 
complexity of all of the Alabama assessments.
    9. Provide evidence of a technical manual for the writing component 
and technical information on all the proposed components when they are 
available.
    10. Provide evidence to show how Alabama will disaggregate its 
performance data in grade spans 3-5 and 6-9 by economically 
disadvantaged students versus non-economically disadvantaged, race/
ethnicity, and LEP status at the State, LEA, and school levels and on 
how Alabama will disaggregate its performance data by all the required 
categories at the high school level.
    11. Provide evidence on how your agency will provide individual 
student reports and State, LEA, and school profiles by student 
performance standards and how it will report and disseminate student 
performance information to the necessary stakeholders at the LEA and 
school levels.
    During the period that this Compliance Agreement is in effect, ALDE 
is eligible to receive title I, part A funds if it complies with the 
terms and conditions of this Agreement, as

[[Page 8239]]

well as the provisions of title I, part A and other applicable Federal 
statutory and regulatory requirements. Specifically, the Compliance 
Agreement sets forth action steps ALDE must meet to come into 
compliance with the title I standards and assessment requirements. ALDE 
must submit documentation concerning its compliance with these action 
steps.
    The action steps incorporated into this Compliance Agreement may be 
amended by joint agreement of the parties, provided full compliance can 
still be accomplished by the expiration date of the Agreement.
    In addition to all of the terms and conditions set forth above, 
ALDE agrees that its continued eligibility to receive title I, part A 
funds is predicated upon compliance with statutory and regulatory 
requirements of that program that have not been addressed by this 
Agreement, including the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act 
of 2001.
    If ALDE fails to comply with any of the terms and conditions of 
this Compliance Agreement, including the action steps, the Department 
may consider the Agreement no longer in effect and may take any action 
authorized by law, including the withholding of funds or the issuance 
of a cease and desist order. 20 U.S.C. Sec.  1234f(d).

    For the Alabama Department of Education:

    Dated: March 27, 2002.
Edward R. Richardson,
State Superintendent of Schools.

    For the United States Department of Education:

    Dated: March 27, 2002.
Susan B. Neuman,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
    Date this compliance agreement becomes effective: April 8, 2002.
    Expiration date of this agreement: April 8, 2005.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

[[Page 8240]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.020


[[Page 8241]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.021


[[Page 8242]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.022


[[Page 8243]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.023


[[Page 8244]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.024


[[Page 8245]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.025


[[Page 8246]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.026


[[Page 8247]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.027


[[Page 8248]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.028


[[Page 8249]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.029


[[Page 8250]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.030


[[Page 8251]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.031


[[Page 8252]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.032


[[Page 8253]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.033


[[Page 8254]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.034


[[Page 8255]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.035


[[Page 8256]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.036


[[Page 8257]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.037


[[Page 8258]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.038


[[Page 8259]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.039


[[Page 8260]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.040

[FR Doc. 03-4074 Filed 2-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C