[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 34 (Thursday, February 20, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8261-8285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4076]



[[Page 8261]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Idaho State 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 29, 2002, the Assistant 
Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Dr. Susan B. Neuman 
entered into a compliance agreement with the Idaho State Department of 
Education (ISDE). 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. Zollie Stevenson, Jr., U.S. 
Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 
400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3W200, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: 
(202) 260-1824.
    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.
    ISDE submitted, and the Department approved, evidence that it has 
content standards in at least reading/language arts and mathematics. In 
October 2000, ISDE submitted evidence of its final assessment system. 
The Department submitted that evidence to a panel of three assessment 
experts for peer review. Following that review, the Acting Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Tom Corwin 
concluded that ISDE's proposed final assessment system 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 October 16, 2001 to Dr. Marilyn L. Howard, State 
Superintendent of Public Instruction for Idaho, the Assistant Secretary 
Dr. Susan B. Neuman notified the ISDE 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 March 29, 2002, the Assistant Secretary issued written findings, 
holding that compliance by ISDE with the Title I standards and 
assessment requirements is genuinely not feasible until a future date. 
Having submitted its assessment system for peer review in October 2000, 
ISDE was not able to make the significant changes to its system that 
the Department's review required in time to meet the spring 2001 
statutory deadline to have approved assessments in place. As a result, 
ISDE 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 the ISDE 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 ISDE 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 the ISDE's progress in meeting the terms of the 
compliance agreement. The Idaho State Superintendent of Public 
Instruction, Dr. Marilyn L. Howard, signed the agreement on March 22, 
2002 and the Assistant Secretary signed it on March 29, 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: 
http://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)


[[Page 8262]]


    Dated: February 13, 2003.
Eugene W. Hickok,
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 Idaho 
State Department of Education (ISDE) 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 the ISDE to achieve full compliance 
immediately. Specifically, the Assistant Secretary has determined that 
ISDE 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 
the ISDE 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 findings, the ISDE 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.
    [sbull] Results from the assessments must be disaggregated and 
reported by major racial and ethnic groups and other categories.

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).

[[Page 8263]]

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 the ISDE is appropriate, the Assistant Secretary must 
first determine whether compliance by the ISDE 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 the ISDE will be able, within a 
period of up to three years, to come into compliance with the Title I 
requirements. Not only must the ISDE 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 the 
ISED would not be appropriate.

B. The ISDE Has Failed To Comply Substantially With Title I Standards 
and Assessment Requirements

    In October 2000, the ISDE submitted evidence of its final 
assessment system. The Assistant Secretary submitted that evidence to a 
panel of three assessment experts for peer review. Following that 
review, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 
Secondary Education Thomas Corwin concluded that ISDE's proposed final 
assessment system did not meet a number of the Title I requirements. 
Specifically, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary determined that the 
ISDE must do the following:
    [sbull] Provide information on Idaho's proposed standards based 
assessment system.
    [sbull] Provide evidence that its accountability system will allow 
the results of the Idaho final assessment system, including local 
assessments where applicable, to be the primary indicators of adequate 
yearly progress.
    [sbull] Provide evidence that performance standards have been 
developed and implemented and that they are aligned with Idaho's 
content standards and the Idaho assessment system that is being 
developed.
    [sbull] Provide clear and concise information on the enrollment of 
limited English proficient students and students with disabilities in 
the State at the assessed grade levels and provide information on the 
number of limited English proficient students and students with 
disabilities who take the standard form of the Idaho assessments and 
the Idaho assessments with accommodations, and the number of those 
students exempted or excluded from the Idaho assessment program.
    [sbull] Provide a copy of its inclusion policy for limited English 
proficient students and provide documentation that the State Board of 
Education has approved it. Included in that policy should be 
information on accommodations for limited English proficient students. 
A plan for implementing the new inclusion policies and for monitoring 
LEA compliance with the new inclusion policies when they are approved 
should also be provided.
    [sbull] Submit information on the technical quality of the Idaho 
alternate assessment for students with disabilities as well as 
information that indicates the extent to which accommodations 
associated with the norm-referenced tests and State-developed 
assessments yield valid results for students with disabilities, as well 
as information regarding any accommodations that are planned for the 
Direct Mathematics and Writing assessments and the technical quality of 
those accommodated assessments.
    [sbull] Document how it will incorporate performance data for all 
Idaho students into its reporting of results for assessment and 
accountability purposes.
    [sbull] Provide evidence regarding the extent to which the 
components of the Idaho Assessment Program are aligned with Idaho 
standards.
    [sbull] Provide technical information on each of the components of 
the Idaho Assessment Program and information on how Idaho ensures the 
fairness of its assessments for all students.
    [sbull] Provide evidence on how the multiple measures that have 
been incorporated in the Idaho Assessment Program affect the validity, 
reliability, and fairness of those assessments.
    [sbull] Disaggregate student performance by gender, race/ethnicity, 
migrant status, disability (versus non-disability), economic 
disadvantage (versus non-disadvantaged), and limited English 
proficiency status at the LEA and school levels. In addition, Idaho 
must add economic disadvantage to the categories that are currently 
being disaggregated at the State level.
    [sbull] Define for LEAs which students are to be included in 
determining adequate yearly progress (AYP) for schools and LEAs.
    [sbull] Provide a plan for evaluating the AYP of its small schools 
and K-3 schools.

C. The ISDE Cannot Correct Immediately Its Noncompliance With the Title 
I Standards and Assessment Requirements

    Under the Title I statute, ISDE was required to implement its final 
assessment system no later than the 2000-2001 school year. 20 U.S.C. 
6311(b)(6). ISDE submitted evidence of its assessment system in October 
2000, but the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary determined, on the 
basis of that evidence, that ISDE'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 Acting Deputy Assistant 
Secretary's concerns, the ISDE was not able to complete that task 
between the time it submitted its system for review and the Idaho 2001 
assessment window. Thus, in 2001, the ISDE administered assessments 
that the Acting Deputy 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 ISDE to come into compliance 
until a future date.

D. The ISDE 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, the ISDE presented evidence of its 
commitment and capability to come into compliance with the Title I 
standards and assessment requirements within three years. For example, 
Idaho entered into a contract to develop reading and mathematics 
assessments within one year at grades 4, 8 and 10. Idaho has 
established a process for developing performance descriptors and to 
define performance levels for its assessment system with broad based 
involvement of Idaho citizens and has established a timeline for 
approving the performance descriptors and performance levels. Idaho has 
also received approval from the Department for its academic content 
standards.
    Finally, the ISDE has developed a comprehensive action plan, 
incorporated into the compliance agreement, that sets out a very 
specific schedule that the ISDE has agreed to meet during the next 
three years for attaining compliance with the Title I standards and 
assessment requirements. As a result, the ISDE 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 the ISDE will be well

[[Page 8264]]

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 the ISDE must 
follow. These provisions will allow the Assistant Secretary to 
ascertain promptly whether the ISDE 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 the ISDE to 
comply with the terms and conditions of the compliance agreement, it is 
possible for the ISDE 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: (1) That full compliance by the ISDE with the standards and 
assessment requirements of Title I is not feasible until a future date; 
and (2) that the ISDE 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 the ISDE. 
Under the terms of 20 U.S.C. 1234f, that compliance agreement becomes 
effective on the date of these findings.

    Dated: March 29, 2002.
Susan B. Neuman,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.

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

Introduction

    Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
(Title I) required each State, along with 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 its content standards, that 
describe three levels of proficiency to determine how well students are 
mastering the content standards. Finally, 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 in 
enabling students to meet the State's performance standards.
    The Idaho State Department of Education (SDE) 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. Marilyn Howard, Idaho's Superintendent of 
Public Instruction, indicated the Idaho SDE'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 
December 13, 2001, OESE conducted a public hearing regarding Idaho 
SDE's ability to come into compliance with the Title I standards and 
assessment requirements within three years. Based on testimony at that 
hearing, the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education 
(Assistant Secretary) determined that compliance by Idaho SDE with the 
Title I standards and assessment requirements was genuinely not 
feasible until a future date because of the ``magnitude and complexity 
of meeting those requirements.'' The Assistant Secretary also 
determined that a compliance agreement represents a viable means of 
bringing about compliance because of the steps Idaho SDE has already 
taken to address its noncompliance, its commitment of resources, and 
the plans it has developed for further action. These plans are 
summarized in the Commitments and Timetable below.
    Pursuant to this Compliance Agreement under 20 V.S.C. sec. 1234f, 
Idaho SDE 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, Idaho SDE must ensure and 
document that it will have met the following requirements:
    1. Provide information on Idaho's proposed standards based 
assessment system. Provide a copy of the development contract for the 
new assessment system.
    2. Provide evidence that performance standards have been developed 
and implemented and that they are aligned with Idaho's content 
standards.
    3. Provide a copy of the Limited English Proficient student (LEP) 
inclusion policy and documentation of State approval. Include in the 
LEP policy information on accommodations for LEP students. Provide a 
plan for implementing the new LEP inclusion policies and for monitoring 
LEA compliance with the new inclusion policies when they are approved. 
Provide clear and concise information on the enrollment of LEP students 
and students with disabilities (SWD) in the state at the assessed grade 
levels and provide information on the number of LEP students and SWDs 
who take the standard form of the Idaho assessments and the Idaho 
assessments with accommodations, and the number of those students 
excluded from the Idaho assessment program.
    4. Provide evidence that the components of the Idaho Assessment 
Program are aligned with Idaho standards. Provide evidence that Idaho 
assessments are cognitively complex. Identify gaps and weaknesses of 
the assessment system. Provide evidence on how the multiple measures 
incorporated in the Idaho Assessment Program affect the validity, 
reliability, and fairness of those assessments.
    5. Provide technical information on each of the components of the 
Idaho Assessment Program. Provide information on how Idaho will ensure 
the fairness of its assessments for all students. Submit information on 
the technical quality of the Idaho alternate assessment for SWD as well 
as information that indicates the extent to which accommodations yield 
valid results for SWD.
    6. Provide evidence that student performance will be disaggregated 
by gender, race/ethnicity, migrant status, disability (versus non-
disability), economic disadvantage (versus non-disadvantaged), and 
limited English proficiency status at the school, district, and state 
levels.
    7. Demonstrate that the Idaho SDE has developed or adopted a set of 
high-quality, yearly student assessments that will be used as the 
primary means of determining the yearly performance of each local 
educational agency and school served under Title I, Part A. Provide 
evidence that the accountability system will allow the results of the 
Idaho final assessment system to be the primary indicators of adequate 
yearly progress. Document the incorporation of performance data for SWD 
and LEP students into the reporting of results for assessment and 
accountability purposes.
    8. Provide a plan for evaluating the adequate yearly progress of 
small schools and K-2 schools.

[[Page 8265]]

    9. Describe plans to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act of 
200 I assessment and accountability requirements.
    During the period that this Compliance Agreement is in effect, 
Idaho SDE is eligible to receive Title I, Part A funds if it complies 
with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as well as the 
provisions of Title I, Part A and other applicable federal statutory 
and regulatory requirements. Specifically, the Compliance Agreement 
sets forth below action steps Idaho SDE must meet to come into 
compliance with its Title I obligations.

Compliance Agreement, April 2002

U.S. Dept. of Education/ldaho State Dept. of Education

    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, 
Idaho 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 the Idaho SDE fails to comply with any of the terms and 
conditions of this Compliance Agreement, including the action steps 
below, the U.S. Department of Education 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.

    For Idaho's State Department of Education:
Dated: March 22, 2002.
Dr. Marilyn Howard,
Superintendent.

    For the United States Department of Education:
Dated: March 22, 2002.
Susan B. Neuman,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.

    Date this Compliance Agreement becomes effective (Date of 
Assistant Secretary's Written Decision and Findings): March .21-, 
2002.
    Expiration Date of this Agreement: March -.29--, 2005.

Compliance Agreement, April 2002

U.S. Dept. of Education/Idaho State Dept. of Education

BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

[[Page 8266]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.000


[[Page 8267]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.001


[[Page 8268]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.002


[[Page 8269]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.003


[[Page 8270]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.004


[[Page 8271]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.005


[[Page 8272]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.006


[[Page 8273]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.007


[[Page 8274]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.008


[[Page 8275]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.009


[[Page 8276]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.010


[[Page 8277]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.011


[[Page 8278]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.012


[[Page 8279]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.013


[[Page 8280]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.014


[[Page 8281]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.015


[[Page 8282]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.016


[[Page 8283]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.017


[[Page 8284]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.018


[[Page 8285]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20FE03.019

[FR Doc. 03-4076 Filed 2-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C