U.S. Department of Education
The Department of Education (ED) is committed to serving and satisfying its customers. To this end, we have commissioned the CFI Group, an independent third-party research group, to conduct a survey that asks about your satisfaction with ED’s products and services and about ways that we can improve our service to you.
CFI Group and the Department of Education will treat all information in a secure fashion and will only provide aggregate results to Department personnel. All information you provide will be combined with information from other respondents for research and reporting purposes. Your individual responses will not be released. This brief survey will take about 15 minutes of your time.
If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Jeanne Nathanson at Jeanne.Nathanson@ed.gov.
This interview is authorized by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Control No. 1090-0007.
Please note that ALL questions on this survey (unless noted otherwise) refer to your experiences over the PAST 12 MONTHS.
Program
NOTE: THE FOLLOWING QUESTION WILL HAVE THE RESPONSE AUTOMATICALLY “PIPED IN” FROM THE RESPONDENT LIST. THE RESPONDENT WILL NOT SEE THE QUESTION Q1. THIS INFORMATION WILL DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE CORE AND CUSTOM QUESTIONS THAT THE RESPONDENT WILL RECEIVE.
Q1. PROGRAM ABOUT WHICH RESPONDENT WILL BE ANSWERING QUESTIONS:
(ISU)
State Fiscal Stabilization Fund
(OELA)
National Professional Development Program
Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program
(OII)
Investing in Innovation Program (i3)
Promise Neighborhoods Program
School Leadership Program (SLP)
Charter Schools Program Non-SEA
(OSERS)
State Directors of Special Education (Part B)
Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators
OSER’s Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Vocational Rehabilitation Program
(OVEA)
Adult Education and Family Literacy to the State Directors of Adult Ed (AEFLA)
Carl D. Perkins Career & Technical Education Program to the State Directors of Career & Technical Ed
(RMS)
Grant Recipient Agencies that are currently or previously engaged in risk mitigation activities with the RMS/MIT
(OESE)
Race to the Top (Early Learning Challenge Fund)
Physical Education Program (PEP)
Safe Schools Healthy Students (SS/HS)
21st Century Community Learning Centers
Mathematics and Science Partnerships
Striving Readers
Improving Teacher Quality State Grants
Teacher Incentive Fund
Payments for Federal Property (Section 8002)
Payments for Federally Connected Children (Section 8003)
Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Education Agencies
High School Equivalency Program (HEP) - Migrant Education
Migrant Education Program (MEP) -- Title I, Part C
Education for Homeless Children and Youth Grants for State and Local Activities/ McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program
Neglected and Delinquent State and Local
Title I, Part A - Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies
English Language Acquisition State Grants/Title III State Formula Grant Program
School Improvement Fund
Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Rural and Low Income School Program
Safe and Supportive Schools Program
Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Program
(OPE)
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU)
Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCU)
Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI)
Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP)
When answering the survey, please only think about your interactions with [ANSWER FROM Q1]
[INTRO IF Q1=1-34]
Please think about the interactions you have had with senior ED officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other ED staff.
PLEASE NOTE: This does not include ED-funded technical assistance providers, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors, etc.
[INTRO IF Q1=35-38]
Please think about the interactions you have had with senior ED officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other ED staff.
PLEASE NOTE: This does not include ED-funded technical assistance providers, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors – including those that service G5, e-Grants, grants.gov, the OPE Field Reader System, etc.
[Q2-8 ALL PROGRAMS]
On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the senior ED officers’ and/or other ED staff’s:
If a question does not apply, please select “N/A”.
Q2. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures
Q3. Responsiveness to your questions
Q4. Accuracy of responses
Q5. Sufficiency of legal guidance in responses
Q6. Consistency of responses with ED staff from different program offices
Q7. Collaboration with other ED programs or offices in providing relevant services
(Ask Q8 only if Q7 is rated<6)
Q8. Please identify a good example of collaboration across programs and/or offices that you would offer as a model for ED.
[ASK Q9a IF Q1=1-34]
Q9a. Do you have interaction with ED-funded providers of technical assistance (e.g., regional labs, comprehensive centers, equity assistance centers, national associations, U.S. Department of Education-funded contractors, etc.) separate from ED staff?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q17)
Don’t know (SKIP TO Q17)
[ASK Q9b IF Q1=35-38]
Q9b. Do you have interaction with ED-funded providers of technical assistance (e.g., regional labs, comprehensive centers, equity assistance centers, national associations, U.S. Department of Education-funded contractors such as those that service G5, e-Grants, grants.gov, the OPE Field Reader System, etc.) separate from ED staff?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q17)
Don’t know (SKIP TO Q17)
[Q10-16 ALL PROGRAMS]
Please think about your interactions with ED-funded providers of technical assistance. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate their:
If a question does not apply, please select “N/A”.
Q10. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures
Q11. Responsiveness to your questions
Q12. Accuracy of responses
Q13. Sufficiency of legal guidance in responses
Q14. Consistency of responses with ED staff
Q15. Collaboration with ED staff in providing relevant services
Q16. Collaboration with other ED-funded providers of technical assistance in providing relevant services
[Q17-22 ALL PROGRAMS]
Please think about your experience using ED’s online resources. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the:
Q17. Ease of finding materials online
Q18. Ease of submitting information to ED via the Web (e.g., grant applications, annual reports, and accountability data)
Q19. Freshness of content
Q20. Ability to accomplish what you want on the site
Q21. Ease of reading the site
Q22. Ease of navigation
[ASK Q17.1a-f, Q17.2a-e and Q17.3 IF Q1=35-38]
The following are online databases and Web sites that you may have used in your interactions with the Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE). Please rate your experience with each one that you have used on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent.”
If you have not used the resource, please select “N/A”.
Q17.1a. Field Reader System
Q17.1b. Grants.gov
Q17.1c. e-Grants
Q17.1d. G5
Q17.1e. Institutional Service Web pages
Q17f. How effective were contractors and/or staff in mitigating any problems you may have encountered with databases and Web sites?
Please rate your experience with each one that you have used on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent.”
If you have not used the resource, please select “N/A”.
Q17.2a. Field Reader System
Q17.2b. Grants.gov
Q17.2c. e-Grants
Q17.2d. G5
Q17.2e. Institutional Service Web pages
Q17.3. Please provide suggestions on any of the databases or Web sites that you have used that would help us to improve your experience with them. (Open end)
[Q23-24 ALL PROGRAMS]
Q23. Now think about how ED uses technology (e.g., conference calls, video-conferencing, Web conferencing, listservs) to deliver its services to you. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate ED’s effectiveness in using technology to deliver its services.
(Ask Q24 only if Q23 is rated<6)
Q24. Please describe how ED could better use technology to deliver its services.
[ASK Q25-28 ONLY IF Q1=1-34]
Q25. Think about how ED is working with the states and LEAs to develop an automated process to share accountability information. Please rate the quality of this assistance from ED. Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent.”
Q26. How effective has this automated process been in improving your state/LEA reporting? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective.”
Q27. What reporting system do you use for reporting accountability data?
EDEN/EDFacts
Other electronic system (Specify)
Do not use electronic system, submit hard copy
Q28. How much of a reduction in federal paperwork do you expect over the next few years because of ED’s initiative to promote the use of technology in reporting accountability data (e.g. EDEN/EDFacts)? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Not very significant” and “10” is “Very significant.”
[ASK Q29-Q33 ONLY IF Q1=1-34]
Think about the documents (e.g., publications, guidance, memoranda, and frequently asked questions) you receive from ED.
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent, please rate the documents’:
Q29. Clarity
Q30. Organization of information
Q31. Sufficiency of detail to meet your program needs
Q32. Relevance to your areas of need
Q33. Comprehensiveness in addressing the scope of issues that you face
[ASK Q29.1a-l IF Q1=35-38]
When you were preparing your application, how easy was it for you to locate and understand the information in the application package? Please rate the following on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “very difficult” and “10” is “very easy”.
Q29.1 Program Purpose
Q29.2 Program Priorities
Q29.3 Selection Criteria
Q29.4 Review Process
Q29.5 Budget Information and Forms
Q29.6 Deadline for Submission
Q29.7 Dollar Limit on Awards
Q29.8 Page Limitation Instructions
Q29.9 Formatting Instructions
Q29.10 Program Contact
[ASK Q34-37 ONLY TO ALL TO ALL OESE PROGRAMS Q1 = 14-34]
Q34. How effective have the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (OESE’s) technical assistance services been in helping you learn to implement your OESE-funded grant programs? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective.”
Q35. How useful have OESE’s technical assistance services been in serving as a model that you can replicate with your subgrantees? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful.” If you do not have subgrantees or this does not apply, please select “not applicable.”
Q36. Describe your best customer service experience during the past 12 months with the U.S. Department of Education staff who work on this program. (Open end)
Q37. Describe your worst customer service experience during the past 12 months with the U.S. Department of Education staff who work on this program. (Open end)
[Q38-Q43 ALL PROGRAMS]
Now we are going to ask you to please consider ALL of ED’s products and services and not only those we just asked about.
Q38. Using a 10-point scale on which “1” means “Very Dissatisfied” and “10” means “Very Satisfied,” how satisfied are you with ED’s products and services?
Q39. Now please rate the extent to which the products and services offered by ED have fallen short of or exceeded your expectations. Please use a 10-point scale on which "1" now means "Falls Short of Your Expectations" and "10" means "Exceeds Your Expectations."
Q40. Now forget for a moment about the products and services offered by ED, and imagine the ideal products and services. How well do you think ED compares with that ideal? Please use a 10-point scale on which "1" means "Not Very Close to the Ideal" and "10" means "Very Close to the Ideal."
Now please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the following statement.
Q41. Overall, when I think of all of ED’s products and services, I am satisfied with their quality.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Does Not Apply
Q42. In the past 6 months, have you issued a formal complaint to ED to express your dissatisfaction with the assistance you’ve received from an ED staff member?
Yes
No
Q43. Finally, please describe how ED can improve its service to you.
Thank you again for your time. To complete the survey and submit the results, please hit the “Finish” button below. Have a good day!
NOTE: EACH RESPONDENT WILL ONLY RECEIVE 1 SET OF APPROXIMATELY 8-12 CUSTOM QUESTIONS CONCERNING THEIR PROGRAM
ONLY IF Q1=State Fiscal Stabilization Fund ASK 1-7 BELOW
Please rate the following using a 10-point scale, where 1 means “poor” and 10 means “excellent.”
Accessibility of the ISU staff.
Responsiveness of the ISU staff.
Your working relationship with the ISU staff.
The clarity of information provided by the ISU staff.
The usefulness of information provided by the ISU staff.
Through web-based and other means, the support provided to you by ISU staff in developing and implementing a high-quality program.
Please share any comments on how the ISU can better support your work.
ONLY IF Q1=2 National Professional Development Program ASK 1-7 BELOW
Please rate the following using a 10-point scale where “1” means “Not helpful” and “10” means “Very helpful.” If a question does not apply, please select “N/A”.
How helpful was the meeting for project directors of Title III NPD grantees in providing information to carry out your program?
How helpful were the guidance materials for Title III NPD grantees in assisting you in preparing the grant annual performance report?
How helpful was your program specialist for Title III NPD program in responding to inquiries in a timely matter?
How helpful was your program specialist for the Title III, NPD program in providing technical assistance on grant management to assist you in administering your grant effectively?
How helpful was the webinar and follow-up teleconferences for Title III NPD In helping you prepare the grant annual performance report?
What recommendations you would like make to the program staff of Title III NPD program to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open end)
How helpful was the NCELA website in helping you identify program resources and meeting your technical assistance needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=3 NATIVE AMERICAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CHILDREN IN SCHOOL PROGRAM ASK 1-8 BELOW
Title III, Native American and Alaska Native Children in School, Customer Survey Questions
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very helpful” and “10” is “Very helpful,” please rate the following:
Meeting for project directors of Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program in providing information to carry out your program
Guidance materials for Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program in assisting you in preparing the grant annual performance report and the complete data report
Your program specialist for Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program in responding to inquiries in a timely matter
Your program specialist Title III, Native American and Alaska Native Children in School in providing technical assistance on grant management to assist you in administering your grant effectively?
Talking Stick virtual community of practice in assisting you with Native American and Alaska Native English learners’ related resources?
Webinars for Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School in assisting you with instructional strategies in teaching Native American and Alaska English learners?
What recommendations you would like make to the program staff of Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open end)
How can we improve the NCELA website to help you identify program resources and meet your technical assistance needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=4 Investing in Innovation Program (i3) NO CUSTOM QUESTIONS
ONLY IF Q1=5 Promise Neighborhoods Program ASK 1-14 BELOW
Does ED staff do a good job in communicating their expectations of grantees?
Yes
No
How useful is ED staff technical assistance as a model for your program? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”.
Which best describes how often you interact with ED staff?
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
A few times a year
Once a year or less
About which topics or purposes do you most often contact ED staff? (Open end)
Is technical assistance customer-focused and responsive to your needs?
Yes
No
How useful are webinars as a format for providing technical assistance? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”.
What additional formats would you prefer technical assistance be provided? (Open end)
How useful was the Promise Neighborhoods (PN) New Grantee Meeting in November 2010? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”.
How useful are quarterly calls with PN staff? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”.
What additional topics would you like to have discussed during meetings and conferences, either in-person or by phone? (Open end)
What could PN do to improve the structure of meetings and conferences, either in-person or by phone? (Open end)
How useful is the PN information you receive from ED? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”.
Share your suggestions on technical assistance topics that would be most helpful in implementing or managing your project? (Open end)
What type of additional information would you like to receive from the PN staff or office? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=6 SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM (SLP) ASK 1-12 BELOW
Meetings/Communications
Please rate the following questions that ask about meeting and communications. Use a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “not very satisfied” and “10” is “very satisfied.”
Opportunities that we provide you to connect with the other SLP programs for networking
Time it takes for your program officer to respond to your email and phone requests
Project director and evaluator meeting held last year
Topics covered at the last project directors and evaluator meeting
Overall communication and information provided by the program
Monitoring/Technical Assistance
Please rate the following questions that ask about monitoring and technical assistance. Use a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “not very satisfied” and “10” is “very satisfied.”
Webinars conducted by the SLP team
Technical assistance you receive by the program staff on project implementation
Technical assistance you receive by the program staff on project budget questions
Monitoring activities conducted of your project by program staff
Feedback you receive regarding your project performance
Feedback you receive regarding your annual performance
Annual performance report allows you the opportunity to provide program staff with an understanding of your project’s practices, challenges and accomplishments
ONLY IF Q1=7 CHARTER SCHOOLS PROGRAM NON-SEA ASK 1-14 BELOW
Custom Satisfaction Survey Questions
Please rate the following questions that ask about meeting and communications. Use a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “not very satisfied” and “10” is “very satisfied.”
Meetings/Communications
The dissemination of resources and opportunities the CSP provides
The time it takes for your program officer to respond to your email and phone requests
The project director meeting held February 2012 overall
The overall communication and information provided by the program
The 1st Quarterly Newsletter, New Charter Central
Monitoring/Technical Assistance
Please rate the following questions that ask about monitoring and technical assistance. Use a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “not very satisfied” and “10” is “very satisfied.”
The technical assistance you receive by the program staff on project implementation
The technical assistance you receive by the program staff on project budget questions
The monitoring activities conducted of your project by program staff
The feedback you receive regarding your project performance
That the annual performance report and quarterly reports allows you the opportunity to provide program staff with an understanding of your project’s practices, challenges and accomplishments
If you have requested a waiver, what improvements would you recommend? (Open end)
Again using a scale where “1” is “Very dissatisfied” and “10” is “Very satisfied,” please rate the following:
How satisfied are you with the guidance CSP provides on Federal grant compliance (i.e. Non-regulatory guidance, EDGAR, OMB Circular A-122, etc.)
Improvements
Are there any actions the CSP can improve to assist grantees better? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1= 8 State Directors of Special Education ASK 1-13 BELOW
Assistance from OSEP Staff.
Think about the technical assistance and support provided by State Contacts from the Monitoring and State Improvement Planning (MSIP) Division of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the staff’s:
Quality of assistance you received in developing your State’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions
Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)
Clarity of information provided in response to your requests
What improvements can you suggest regarding support from MSIP State contacts?
Think about the types of technical assistance and support provided by OSEP such as Dear Colleague letters, Question and Answer documents, MSIP monthly TA calls, OSEP-Director’s newsletter, topical webinars, etc.
Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet Federal requirements and/or improve program quality?
Which types of assistance were least helpful?
Assistance from OSEP–Funded TA Centers.
Think about the technical assistance provided by OSEP-funded TA Centers under IDEA.
Did you access materials or direct support from any of the Centers over the past year?
Yes
No (Skip to Q9)
Which Center did you work with the most? (Open end)
If you answered “yes” to question 7, think about the support you received from the Center you worked with the most and answer questions 8-11 using a 10-point scale where “1” is “Poor and “10” is “Excellent”.
The responsiveness to your State’s request for assistance, i.e., provided support in a timely manner
The impact on your State’s knowledge of implementation strategies
The impact on your State’s capacity and infrastructure to implement evidence- based practices or policies
The impact in supporting the State to work more effectively with local educational agencies
What technical assistance should the TA centers provide over the next year to help meet your State’s program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=9 Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators ASK 1-13 BELOW
Assistance from OSEP Staff
Think about the technical assistance and support provided by State Contacts from the Monitoring and State Improvement Planning (MSIP) Division of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the staff’s:
Quality of assistance you received in developing your State’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions.
Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)
Clarity of information provided in response to your requests.
What improvements can you suggest regarding support from MSIP State contacts?
Think about the types of technical assistance and support provided by OSEP such as Dear Colleague letters, Question and Answer documents, MSIP monthly TA calls, OSEP-Director’s newsletter, topical webinars, etc.
Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet Federal requirements and/or improve program quality?
Which types of assistance were least helpful?
Assistance from OSEP–funded TA Centers
Think about the technical assistance provided by OSEP-funded TA Centers under IDEA.
Did you access materials or direct support from any of the Centers over the past year?
Yes
No (Skip to Q9)
Which Center did you work with the most? (Open end)
If you answered “yes” to question 7, think about the support you received from the Center you worked with the most and answer questions 8-11 using a 10-point scale where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”.
The responsiveness to your State’s request for assistance, i.e., provided support in a timely manner.
The impact on your State’s knowledge of implementation strategies.
The impact on your State’s capacity and infrastructure to implement evidence- based practices or policies.
The impact in supporting the State to work more effectively with local early intervention programs and providers.
What technical assistance should the TA centers provide over the next year to help meet your State’s program improvement needs?
ONLY IF Q1= 10 OSERS REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (RSA) VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM ASK 1-12 BELOW
Please consider the technical support provided by state liaisons and teams from the State Monitoring and Program Improvement Division of the Rehabilitation Services Administration. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the staff’s:
Responsiveness to your questions and requests for technical assistance
Supportiveness in helping you complete your State Plan/data and fiscal reports/applicable Monitoring-related plans (Technical Assistance Plan (TAP), Corrective Action Plan (CAP), and Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) )
Timeliness of dissemination of monitoring guidance, information, and where applicable, monitoring reports
Dissemination of subregulatory guidance including policy directives, information memoranda, and technical assistance circulars
Provision of effective training and dissemination of relevant information through webinars, national conferences, email distribution lists, teleconferences, the RSA website, and resource documents
Sufficiency of communication with your agency
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the RSA website at http://rsa.ed.gov for the following:
Utility of the MIS for entering and retrieving reports and data
Ease of navigation of the website
Usefulness of information contained on the website
On a 10 point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10 is “Very Effective,” please rate the Technical Assistance and Continuing Education (TACE) centers’ effectiveness in meeting your agency’s needs related to:
Improving program performance through technical assistance
Improving program performance through continuing education
We welcome your input:
Please provide your suggestions for improving our technical support and service to you in the future.
ONLY IF Q1= 11 Adult Education and Family Literacy to the State Directors of Adult Ed (AEFLA) ASK 1-12 BELOW
1. Think about the National Reporting System as a way to report your state’s performance data to OVAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the NRS’s ease of reporting using the NRS Web-based system.
2. Think about the training offered by OVAE through its contract to support the National Reporting System (NRS). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the usefulness of the training.
If you have been monitored, think about the federal monitoring process as it relates to your AEFLA grant. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is,” Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process on the following:
3. Being well-organized
4. Providing pre-planning adequate guidance
5. Setting expectations for the visit
6. Using state peer reviewers in the federal monitoring process
Think about the national meetings and conference offered by OVAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”, please rate the information provided at these conference and institutes on the following:
7. Being up-to-date
8. Relevance of information
9. Usefulness to your program
Think about the national activities offered by DAEL. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is,” Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the activities on the following:
10. Usefulness of the products in helping your state meet AEFLA program priorities.
11. How well the technical assistance provided through the national activities address your program priorities and needs? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” means “does not address needs very well” and “10” means “addresses needs very well.”
12. What can DAEL do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance/program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1= 12 Carl D. Perkins Career & Technical Education Program to the State Directors of Career & Technical Ed ASK 1-9 BELOW
Think about the Consolidated Annual Report (CAR) as a way to report your state’s performance data to OVAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the CAR’s:
1. User-friendliness
2. Compatibility with state reporting systems
If you were monitored by OVAE within the last year, think about the federal monitoring process as it relates to your Perkins grant. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process in:
3. Identifying and correcting compliance issues in your state
4. Helping you to improve program quality
5. Think about the national leadership conferences and institutes offered by OVAE last year (i.e., NASDCTEc/OVAE Joint Spring Leadership Meeting in Washington, DC; Rigorous Programs of Study Grantee Meeting in Washington, DC; Quarterly State Director’s Webinars). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the effectiveness of these sessions on helping you to improve the quality of your career and technical education programs and accountability systems.
6. Think about the Perkins Collaborative Resource Network (PCRN) administered by OVAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate PCRN’s usefulness to your program.
If you used the state plan submission database last year, think about this process as a way of submitting your five-year state plan to OVAE. (If you did not use the state plan submission database please select “N/A.”) On a 10 point scale, where “1” is Poor” and “10” is Excellent,” please rate the database on its:
7. User-friendliness
8. Compatibility with state reporting systems
9. What can OVAE do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=13 Grant Recipient Agencies that are currently or previously engaged in risk mitigation activities with the RMS/MIT
Please use a 10-point, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent” to rate the Risk Management Service Management Improvement Team (RMS/MIT) staff on the following…
Accessibility of the RMS/MIT staff
General responsiveness of the RMS/MIT staff
Your working relationship with RMS/MIT staff
If your State received a site visit by the RMS/MIT in fiscal year 2011 (which started October 1, 2010), please rate the usefulness of the technical assistance provided. Use a 10-point scale, where “1” means “not very useful” and “10” means “very useful”. If you were not visited, please select “N/A”.
Overall, how would you rate the customer service you have received from the RMS/MIT in the past year? Please use a 10-point scale, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent”.
Now, how would you rate the customer service you have received from the RMS/MIT in the past three years? Please use a 10-point scale, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent”. If this question does not apply, please select “N/A”.
How has your understanding of internal controls and enterprise risk management increased as a result of working with members of the Department’s Risk Management Service Management Improvement Team (RMS/MIT)? (open-ended)
Are there any instances where the RMS/MIT has NOT been helpful? If so, please explain. (open-ended)
To what extent has your work with RMS/MIT positively impacted the following …
Please use a 10-point scale where “1” means “not very much” and “10” means “very much.”
Grants administration and fiscal management of Federal financial assistance at the State-level
Grants administration and fiscal management of Federal financial assistance at the Local-level (sub-recipients)
What can the RMS/MIT do over the next year to help your State or LEAs/school districts improve its fiscal management and grants administration? (open-ended)
ONLY IF Q1=14 Race to the Top (EARLY LEARNING CHALLENGE FUND)
As it relates to the Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge (RTT-ELC) program, please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent”
Accessibility and responsiveness of program staff
Timely resolution of questions by program staff
Clarity of information provided by program staff
Usefulness and relevance of technical assistance (e.g., webinars, meetings)
Usefulness and relevance of monthly conference calls
What additional topics would you like discussed during RTT-ELC meetings, webinars, or monthly phone calls to help you implement a high-quality program? (Open end)
What could the RTT-ELC team do to improve the structure or format of technical assistance? (Open end)
How frequently would you like to have in-person meetings, webinars, or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)
Please share any comments on how the RTT-ELC team can better support your work. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=15 Physical Education Program (PEP) ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about the one-on-one communications (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate your FPO’s:
1. Responsiveness to questions about PEP program requirements
2. Responsiveness to questions about applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other Federal regulations
3. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
4. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or instructions regarding annual performance reports
5. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding budget development, revisions, and reporting
6. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
Think about the written guidance, meetings, webinars, conference calls, and presentations from the PEP Federal Team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective,” please rate the following:
7. Instructions and guidance regarding GPRA data collection and reporting
8. Relevance and usefulness to your program and program activities
9. Relevance and usefulness to your program’s sustainability
10. How important is it that your Federal Project Officer conducts a site visit of your program to observe grant activities and monitor grant compliance and progress. Please base your response on a 10-point scale, where “1” is, “Not Very Important” and “10” is “Very Important.”
ONLY IF Q1=16 Safe Schools Healthy Students (SS/HS) ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about the one-on-one communications (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer (FPO). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate your FPO’s:
1. Responsiveness to answering questions about Safe Schools Healthy Students (SS/HS) program requirements and applicable Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) and other federal regulations
2. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
3. Usefulness of feedback on annual performance reports
Think about the written guidance, webinars, and presentations from the SS/HS Federal Team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective,” please rate the following:
4. Instructions regarding annual performance reports
5. Guidance regarding budget development, tracking, and reporting
6. If your Federal Project Officer has conducted a site visit for the purpose of monitoring grant compliance and progress, think about the site visit outcome and how it contributed to program or grant administration improvement. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is, “did not contribute to improvement” and “10” is “contributed a great deal to improvement,” please rate how much the site visit contributed to program or grant administration improvement.
7. Is your Federal Project Officer a Department of Education employee?
Yes
No
Think about the technical assistance you receive from the SS/HS TA providers. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective,” please rate how effectively the following technical assistance providers addressed the needs of your SS/HS project:
8. The National Center
9. The Communications Group
10. Think about the guidance and assistance received by the National Evaluation Team related to submitting data for the SS/HS National Evaluation (this includes GPRA data). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Useful” and “10” is “Very Useful,” please rate the usefulness of the guidance and assistance.
ONLY IF Q1=17 21st Century Community Learning Centers ASK 1-9 BELOW
1. We are specifically contacting two types of SEA State 21st CCLC coordinators: new 21st CCLC coordinators (less than 18 months in the position), and SEA State 21st CCLC coordinators with more than 18 months of experience in the position.
Please indicate if you are the following:
A new 21st CCLC SEA State coordinator (less than 18 months in the position)
A new SEA State 21st CCLC coordinators with more than 18 months of experience in the position.
2. Have you or any of the 21st CCLC State staff, received technical assistance or individualized support during the past year?
Yes
No
IF 2=1 YES ASK 3
3. Where and how the technical assistance or support take place? (Select all that apply)
Project Directors’ meeting sponsored by the Education Department
Conference call/email exchange with your Project Officer
Project Officer
Other Program (or other Department) staff site visit
Monitoring contractor (Please specify)
National association meeting (Please specify)
Other (Please specify)
4. How would you rate the quality of the technical assistance you received? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent”.
5. Please name the area(s) that the technical assistance or individualized support received helped you improve. (Open end)
6. Describe any concerns about the quality of the technical assistance received by your program officer. (Open end)
7. Did you receive timely and accurate feedback from your current Program Officer?
Yes
No
8. How would you rate your current Program Officer’s knowledge of applicable statutes, regulations, and policies? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very knowledgeable” and “10” is “very knowledgeable.”
9. How would you rate your current Program Officer’s knowledge of grant fiscal matters? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very knowledgeable” and “10” is “very knowledgeable.”
ONLY IF Q1=18 Mathematics and Science Partnerships ASK 1-10 BELOW
Please rate the responsiveness of the U.S. Department of Education staff. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”
Please rate the knowledge of the U.S. Department of Education staff on math and science issues and on program administration issues as they assist the states. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”
How helpful are the annual meetings for MSP state coordinators and project directors? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”
How helpful is the information on the MSP website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”
How easy to navigate is the MSP website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”
How helpful is the information on the web-based annual performance report? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”
How easy to navigate is the web-based annual performance report process? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”
Do you have suggestions for improving the annual performance report process? (Open-ended)
How helpful and knowledgeable is the contractor support for the program? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”
What can OESE do in the next year to support the states more effectively? (Open-ended)
ONLY IF Q1=19 Striving Readers ASK 1-14 BELOW
1. Please indicate your role.
1. Project Director (ASK Q9-14)
2. Evaluator (ASK Q2-9)
Think about the evaluation technical assistance provided by Abt Associates, the contractor overseen by the Department’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the contractor’s:
Technical assistance on the design of your study
Technical assistance on your analyses of impact and implementation data
Written guidance and input on evaluation report preparation
Technical assistance provided through annual Striving Readers meetings
Overall helpfulness with solving evaluation challenges and issues
Assistance in communicating with ED and grantee staff when appropriate
Overall helpfulness in building your organization’s capacity to do high-quality impact and implementation studies
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” how would you rate the extent to which Department of Education Program Officers, IES staff, and Abt Associates coordinated their efforts?
On a 10-point scale where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”, please rate the Department of Education Program Staff Skills, Knowledge and Responsiveness in the following areas:
Resolution of problems by your current Program Officer
Timeliness of response to questions or requests by your current Program Officer
Current Program Officer’s knowledge of applicable statutes, regulations, and policies
Current Program Officer’s knowledge of relevant program content.
Current Program Officer’s knowledge of program evaluation issues
ONLY IF Q1=20 Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ASK 1-7 BELOW
Please rate the accessibility of the U.S. Department of Education Title II, Part A program staff. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent.”
Please rate the responsiveness of the U.S. Department of Education Title II, Part A program staff. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent.”
How would you describe your working relationship with ED’s Title II, Part A program staff? (Open end)
How useful is the annual meeting for Title II, Part A grantees? Please rate the usefulness of the meeting on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful.”
What could the Department of Education do to improve the annual meeting for Title II, Part A grantees? (Open end)
If your State received a Title II, Part A /HQT monitoring visit during the past year, please answer the following questions.
How useful was the technical assistance provided during the monitoring visit? Please rate the usefulness of the technical assistance on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful.”
How informative was the visit in terms of establishing and explaining compliance requirements? Please rate the visit on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very informative” and “10” is “very informative.”
ONLY IF Q1=21 Teacher Incentive Fund ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about your experience in preparing and submitting your most recent Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) application.
Did you use the written instruction and guidance documents on how to prepare and submit your APR and core element documentation disseminated by TIF staff?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q3)
On a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective,” rate the quality of the documents in helping you complete and submit your APR and core element documentation.
Did you contact the TIF program office for technical assistance?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q7)
On a scale from “1” to 10, where 1 is “poor” and 10 is “excellent”; rate the TIF program staff’s:
Responsiveness to answering questions
Supportiveness in helping you complete and submit your APR and core element documentation
Knowledge about technical material
Think about your contacts with the TIF Program over the past year that did not involve technical assistance. If you have not contacted the TIF Program for a reason other than technical assistance during that time please answer not applicable.
Please rate the Teacher Incentive Fund Program staff on the following. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent.”
Ease of reaching the person who could address your concern
Ability to resolve your issue
What additional service could the program provide that would help you? (For example, information posted on-line, webinars, analysis tools, etc.) (Open end)
Please provide specific suggestions for how the TIF program can improve customer service. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=22 Payments for Federal Property (Section 8002) ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about your experience preparing and submitting your most recent Impact Aid application, including gathering and organizing data and preparing the e-application.
Did you use the written instruction and guidance documents provided for the application?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q3)
On a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” rate the effectiveness of the documents in helping you complete the application.
Did you contact the Impact Aid Program for technical assistance?
Yes
No
(SKIP TO Q7)
On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the Impact Aid Program staff’s:
Responsiveness to answering questions
Supportiveness in helping you complete your application
Knowledge about technical material
Have you attended any Webinars or in person meetings where IAP staff provided you information on the Section 8002 program, application submission, or the review process?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q9)
Did the presentation and/or materials prepared help you understand your responsibilities in submitting data?
Yes
No (ASK Q8a)
8a. Please explain. (Open end)
How was the quality of the interaction with Impact Aid program staff members during the review process? Please use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent.”
What additional communications would you like to receive regarding the status of your application, prior to receiving a payment? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=23 Payments for Federally Connected Children (Section 8003) ASK 1-17 BELOW
Think about your experience preparing and submitting your most recent Impact Aid application, including gathering and organizing data and preparing the e-application.
Did you use the written instruction and guidance documents provided for the application?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q3)
On a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” rate the effectiveness of the documents in helping you complete the application.
Did you contact the Impact Aid Program for technical assistance?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q5)
4. On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the Impact Aid Program staff’s performance in answering your questions and helping you to complete your application.
5. Did you contact the G5 Helpdesk for technical assistance?
Yes
2. No (SKIP TO Q7)
6. On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the G5 Helpdesk’s performance in resolving your problem.
7. Have you participated in any Webinars or meetings where IAP staff provided you information on the Section 8003 program and the review process?
1. Yes
No (SKIP TO Q10)
Did the presentation and/or materials prepared help you to understand your responsibilities in completing the application or submitting data?
1. Yes
No (ASK Q9)
Please explain. (Open end)
Has your school district been contacted by the Impact Aid Program in the past year regarding a monitoring or field review of your application?
Yes
No (SKIP TO Q13)
Did the letter you received provide sufficient explanation of what and how you need to prepare your documents for the review?
Yes
No (ASK Q12)
Please explain. (Open end)
Did you receive timely communications regarding the outcome of the review?
Yes
No (Ask Q14)
Please explain. (Open end)
Please use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent” to rate the Impact Aid staff members on the following.
15. Ease of reaching the person who could address your concern
16. Ability to resolve your issue
17. Please provide any additional specific suggestions for how the Impact Aid Program can improve customer service. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=24 Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Education Agencies ASK 1-13 BELOW
Think about the particular ways in which you have received technical support and/or assistance from the Office of Indian Education (OIE). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective”, please rate the effectiveness of technical assistance in:
1. Helping you with your implementation of Title VII Formula grant program in your State/LEA
2. Responsiveness to answering questions and/or information requests
3. Disseminating accurate information
4. Timeliness of providing information to meet your application deadlines
5. Think about the guidance documents (E.g. Getting Started; Frequently Asked Questions; Additional Program Assurances, Web Sites) provided by OIE program office. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful”; please rate the usefulness of the information in the guidance documents.
6. Think about your working relationship with the Title VII, Office of Indian Education program office. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective”, please rate the effectiveness of this relationship.
Think about the process for applying for a grant through the Electronic Application System for Indian Education (EASIE). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”, please rate the EASIE System on the following:
7. Ease of using system in applying for a grant
8. Disseminating information in a timely manner
9. Training provided on the EASIE system and grant application process
10. Overall user-friendliness of the EASIE application system
Think about the support and technical assistance provided by OIE during grant application process.
11. Please rate the support and technical assistance on a 10-point scale, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent”.
12. If you have been monitored, please comment on the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process in such areas as providing guidance and/or improving program quality. (Open end)
13. What can OIE do over the next year to better meet your school district’s technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=25 High School Equivalency Program (HEP) - Migrant Education ASK 1-7 BELOW
Please rate the usefulness of the pre-application webinar for the purpose of preparing your organization’s HEP application. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful”. Select “N/A” is this question does not apply.
Please rate the usefulness of EMAPS for the purpose of submitting your project’s Annual Performance Report. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful”.
How essential is a fully-functioning electronic submission tool for HEP Annual Performance Report data to the management and analysis of APR data. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “Not very essential” and “10” is “Very essential”.
How useful was the Listserv for receiving important information regarding the HEP program. Use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful”.
Please provide at least one important informational topic that the Listserv provided to you, and also provide at least one important topic that you would like to see from the Listserv in the future. (Open end)
How have you received technical assistance during the past year? (Select all that apply)
OME-sponsored Directors Meeting
List serve
Telephone call
Association meeting
Webinar
Other (Specify)
Please provide at least one technical assistance topic that has been useful to you, and at least one technical assistance topic that you will need in the future, in order to improve the performance of your HEP project. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=26 Migrant Education Program (MEP) -- Title I, Part C ASK 1-16 BELOW
Think about the Office of Migrant Education’s (OME) technical assistance efforts. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of OME’s technical assistance efforts in helping you…
Meet program compliance requirements
Improve performance results
Meet Migrant Education Program (MEP) fiscal requirements
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor”, and “10” is “Excellent,” how would you rate the usefulness of the following Technical Assistance activities:
If an area does not apply, please select “N/A”
Annual Directors Meeting
New Directors Meeting
OME Conference
MEP WebEx Workshops
MSIX Help Desk
REACTs Listserv
10. Please select two of the following six areas in which you would like technical assistance.
Child Eligibility/Identification & Recruitment
Provision of Services
Parental Involvement/Parent Advisory Committee
Comprehensive Needs Assessment/Service Delivery Plan
Program Evaluation
Fiscal Requirements
Think about the staff in OME. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” please rate your current program officer on his or her…
Resolution of problems
Accuracy of responses
Responsiveness to questions or requests
Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures
Knowledge of relevant program content
Think about the guidance documents (e.g., updates to the Non-Regulatory Guidance, the Technical Assistance Guide to Re-interviewing, New Directors Handbook) provided by OME. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful,” please rate the usefulness of the information in the guidance documents.
ONLY IF Q1=27 Education for Homeless Children and Youth Grants for State and Local Activities/ McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about the technical assistance (TA) you received from individual ED program staff for the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program, including coordination with activities arranged by the technical assistance contractor, National Center for Homeless Education), or independently.
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the US Department of Education and NCHE staff on the following:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW USDE and NCHE
US Department of Education
Responsiveness in answering questions.
Knowledge of technical material
Technical Assistance Center (NCHE)
Q1a.Responsiveness in answering questions.
Q2a.Knowledge of technical material
On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance efforts provided by the US Department of Education and NCHE staff in helping you with the following:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
US Department of Education
Meeting program compliance requirements
Assisting you (as State Coordinators) to impact performance results
Technical Assistance Center (NCHE)
Q3a.Meeting program compliance requirements
Q4a.Assisting you (as State Coordinators) to impact performance results
On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the quality and usefulness of the TA methods provided by NCHE:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW QUALITY AND USEFULNESS
Quality
Direct one-on-one TA calls
Webinars
State Coordinators meeting
Website
Products
Usefulness
Q5a.Direct one-on-one TA calls
Q6a.Webinars
Q7a. State Coordinators meeting
Q8a. Website
Q9a.Products
Please respond to the following open-ended question regarding your thoughts on how to improve the assistance and monitoring you receive.
What can the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program office do over the next year to meet your State’s technical assistance, program improvement and coordination needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=28 Neglected and Delinquent State and Local ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about the technical assistance (TA) you received from individual ED program staff for the Title I, Part D program, including coordination with activities arranged by the technical assistance contractor, Neglected or Delinquent Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC), or independently.
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the US Department of Education and NDTAC staff on the following:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW USDE and NDTAC
US Department of Education
Responsiveness in answering questions.
Knowledge of technical material
Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC)
Q1a.Responsiveness in answering questions.
Q2a.Knowledge of technical material
On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance efforts provided by the US Department of Education and NDTAC staff in helping you with the following:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
US Department of Education
Meeting program compliance requirements
Assisting you (as State Coordinators) to impact performance results
Developing cross-agency
Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC)
Q3a.Meeting program compliance requirements
Q4a.Assisting you (as State Coordinators) to impact performance results
Q5a.Developing cross-agency
On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the quality and usefulness of the TA methods provided by NDTAC:
Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.
FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW QUALITY AND USEFULNESS
Quality
Direct one-on-one TA calls
ND Community calls
Webinars
State Coordinators meeting
Website
Products
Usefulness
Q6a.Direct one-on-one TA calls
Q7a.ND Community calls
Q8a.Webinars
Q9a.State Coordinators meeting
Q10a.Website
Q11a.Products
Please respond to the following open-ended question regarding your thoughts on how to improve the assistance and monitoring you receive.
What can the Title I, Part D program office do over the next year to meet your State’s technical assistance, program improvement and coordination needs?
ONLY IF Q1=29 TITLE I PART A – IMPROVING BASIC PROGRAMS OPERATED BY LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES (LEAs)
Additional 2012 custom questions – Title I, Part A – Improving Basic Programs Operated by LEAs
ESEA Flexibility Initiative
Think about the technical assistance you received on ESEA flexibility prior to submission of your Flexibility request. Please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance on a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is "Not very effective" and “10” is "Very effective.”
Was the ESEA flexibility request process easy to understand?
Yes
No
Don't Know
What can ED do to improve the request process? (Open end)
Think about the technical assistance you received following the peer review of your ESEA flexibility request. Please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is "not very effective" and 10 is "very effective".
What can ED do to improve technical assistance around ESEA flexibility?
Using a scale from 1 to 10, where “1 means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent”, please rate the following:
The accessibility of the U.S. Department of Education ESEA flexibility program staff
The responsiveness of the U.S. Department of Education ESEA flexibility program staff
How would you describe your working relationship with ED's ESEA flexibility staff? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=30 English Language Acquisition State Grants/Title III State Formula Grant Program
ASK 1-15 BELOW
Think about the technical assistance (TA) you have received from the Title III program staff. In particular, think about the individual TA you have received from the Title III program officer assigned to your state.
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the program officer assigned to your state on the following...
1. Timeliness
of response
2. Clarity of information
3. Usefulness to your program
Think about the one-on-one consultations, (including email, telephone, and other interactions), you have had with your Title III program officer over the last year. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in…
4. Providing you an interpretation of the Title III statute and/or regulations
5. Helping with your implementation of Title III in your state
Now think about all of the technical assistance you have received through Title III webinars, or other TA activities, including use of technology enhanced communications (e.g. listservs).
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate this type of technical assistance on the following...
6. Method
of delivery
7. Clarity of information
8. Usefulness to your program
9. What can the Title III program staff do over the next year to meet your State’s technical assistance needs? (Open end)
10. Have you received a Title III onsite monitoring visit in the past 2 years (e.g. 2009-10 or 2010-11)?
Yes (ASK Q11-12)
No (SKIP TO Q13)
Don’t know (SKIP TO Q13)
Please rate the effectiveness of the Title III monitoring process on a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” with respect to…
11. Helping your State comply with Title III requirements
12. Helping your State improve programs for English learners
13. Please share any comments on how to improve the Title III onsite monitoring process. (Open end)
Think about your experiences seeking information at OELA’s National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition’s Web site (www.ncela.gwu.edu). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the Web site in:
14. Providing you with the information you needed
15. Helping you inform programs serving ELLs in your state
ONLY IF Q1=31 School Improvement Fund ASK 1-12 BELOW
Think about the technical assistance (TA) you have received from the Title I program staff regarding School Improvement Grants (SIG).
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by program staff on the following...
1. Timeliness
of response
2. Clarity of information
3. Usefulness to your program
Think about the one-on-one consultations, (including email, telephone, and other interactions), you have had with Title I program staff regarding SIG. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in…
4. Providing you an interpretation of the SIG statute and/or regulations
5. Helping with your implementation of SIG in your state
6. What can the Title I program staff do over the next year to meet your State’s technical assistance needs regarding SIG? (Open end)
7. Think about the SIG application process. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is not easy to understand and “10” is very easy to understand, please rate the ease of the SIG application process.
8. What can ED do to improve the application process? (Open end)
9. Have you received a SIG onsite monitoring visit in the past year?
Yes (ASK Q10-11)
No (SKIP TO Q12)
Don’t know (SKIP TO Q12)
Please rate the effectiveness of the SIG monitoring process on a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” with respect to…
10. Helping your State comply with SIG requirements
11. Helping your State improve SIG programs
12. Please share any comments on how to improve the SIG onsite monitoring process. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=32 Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Rural and Low Income School Program ASK 1-15 BELOW
Think about the one-on-one consultations you have had with program officers. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in:
Providing you with an interpretation of Rural Low Income Schools (RLIS) legislation/regulation
Providing guidance on eligibility and/or other reporting requirements
Helping you with the implementation of the Rural Low Income Schools Program
Think about the guidance document provided by the Rural Low Income Schools program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful” please rate the guidance documents on:
Helping you with compliance efforts
Helping you improve performance results
Helping you provide guidance and oversight to sub-recipients
Helping you provide technical assistance to sub-recipients
Think about your experiences seeking information from the Rural Low Income Schools Program Web Site http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reaprlisp/index.html. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the website on the following:
Usefulness in providing the information you needed.
User friendliness
Think about the monitoring and technical assistance provided by the program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the monitoring and technical assistance on the following:
Responsiveness to information requests
Helpfulness in resolving implementation/eligibility issues
Supportiveness in helping you complete eligibility spreadsheets
Supportiveness in helping you meet annual reporting requirements
Think about the REAP pre-award and post-award teleconferences as a mode of technical assistance. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” please rate the effectiveness of the teleconferences in:
Helping you with program implementation for RLIS
Helping you complete and submit accurate eligibility spreadsheets for RLIS
ONLY IF Q1=33 SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE SCHOOLS ASK 1-10 BELOW
Please see the program-specific questions for the Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) program below. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
Think about the one-on-one communication (via phone or email) with your Federal project officer. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate your Federal project officer on the following:
Responsiveness and accuracy in answering questions related to S3 program requirements
Responsiveness to answering questions related to Department of Education (EDGAR) and other Federal regulations
Relevance and usefulness of technical assistance related to grant implementation and administration
Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
Effectiveness in providing instructions and guidance related to annual performance reports and GPRA data collection
Effectiveness in providing instructions and guidance related to budget development, revisions, and reporting
Think about the technical assistance, including meetings, written guidance, webinars, and presentations that you receive from the S3 technical assistance team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the following:
Relevance and usefulness to your project and program activities
Relevance and usefulness to your project’s sustainability
Frequency of communication
Use of technology to deliver services
ONLY IF Q1=34 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL COUNSELING PROGRAM (ESSC) ASK 1-10 BELOW
Think about the one-on-one communications (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer. On a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very effective" and "10" is "Very effective," please rate your FPO's:
Q1. Responsiveness to questions about ESSC program requirements
Q2. Responsiveness to questions about applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other Federal regulations
Q3. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
Q4. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or instructions regarding annual performance reports
Q5. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding budget development, revisions, and reporting
Q6. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
Think about the written guidance, meetings, conference calls, and presentations from the ESSC Federal Team. On a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very effective" and "10" is "Very effective," please rate the following:
Q7. Instructions and guidance regarding GPRA data collection and reporting
Q8. Relevance and usefulness to your program and program activities
Q9. Relevance and usefulness to your program's sustainability
Please base your response on a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very important" and "10" is "Very important."
Q10. How important is it that your Federal Project Officer conducts a site visit of your program to observe grant activities and monitor grant compliance and progress.
ONLY IF Q1=35 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), 36 Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCU), 37 Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) OR
38 Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) ASK 1-8 BELOW
Program Custom Questions
Thinking about the Program Officer who assisted you, using a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” is “Strongly disagree” and “10” is “Strongly agree,” please rate the following:
Professionalism/Courtesy - The representative responded to my service request professionally and in a courteous manner.
Knowledge - The representative was knowledgeable about the program.
Timeliness - The representative resolved my service request in a timely manner.
Overall, you were satisfied with the service provided by the representative
Please respond to the following “Open End” questions as succinctly as possible.
If you participated in the 2011 Institutional Service Project Directors’ Conference, did you find it useful? (Open end)
With respect to the Annual Performance Report form. Are the instructions clear? Do the questions relate to your project’s activities? Do the statistics requested provide an appropriate picture of the achievements of your grant? What are your suggestions for improving the annual report process? (Open end)
What more can Institutional Service or specific Divisions within the area do to meet your technical needs? (For example: improved communication through social media use, webinars, analysis tools, etc…) (Open end)
What additional services can the Division in which your grant is administered make available to you? (Open end)
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 2021-02-03 |