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 experience as a grant recipient of the [Program Name from Q1] and the ways we can improve our service to you.
CFI Group and the Department of Education will treat all information in a secure fashion. Your answers are voluntary, but your opinions are very important. Your responses will remain anonymous and will only be reported in aggregate to Department personnel. This brief survey will take about 15 minutes of your time. This survey is authorized by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Control No. 1090-0007 which expires on May 31, 2018.
If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Blanca Rodriguez at blanca.rodriguez@ed.gov.
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 THE RESPONDENT WILL RECEIVE.
Note that individuals will be asked to respond based on their experiences with the program (e.g., OELA) vs. the individual research centers.
Q1. PROGRAM RESPONDENTS WILL BE ANSWERING QUESTIONS FOR:
Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA)
Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program
National Professional Development Program
Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE)
Adult Education and Family Literacy to State Directors of Adult Education
Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education State Directors
Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)
Financial Improvement and Post Audit Operations / Indirect Cost Group (FIPAO/ICG)
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE)
6. Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships (FLAS)
7. Student Support Services
8. Upward Bound
9. Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI)
10. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
IDEA-State Directors of Special Education (Part B)
IDEA-Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators (Part C)
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE)
Improving Teacher Quality State Grants
21st Century Community Learning Centers
Preschool Development Grant
Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy
Payments for Federally Connected Children (Section 8003)
High School Equivalency Program (HEP) – Migrant Education
Project Prevent
Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Educational Agencies & National Activities
Migrant Education Programs (Title I, Part C)
22. Education for Homeless Children and Youth Grants for State and Local Activities/ McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program
School Improvement Fund
Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies – Title I
English Language Acquisition State Grants (Title III State Formula Grants)
Neglected and Delinquent State and Local Agency Programs
27a. School Climate Transformation Grants/State Department of Education
27b. School Climate Transformation Grants/Local Education Agency
28a. Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Rural and Low Income School (RLIS) Program
28b. Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) Program
When answering the survey, please only think about your interactions with [ANSWER FROM Q1]. (Note: Individuals will be asked to respond based on their experiences with the program (e.g., OELA) vs. the individual research centers).
ED Staff
[INTRO IF Q1=1-5, 11-28]
Please think about the interactions you have had with senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff.
PLEASE NOTE: This does not include technical assistance to states to build state capacity to implement education reforms, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors, etc. (Note: Do not include statement for IES)
[INTRO IF Q1=6-10]
Please think about the interactions you have had with senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff.
PLEASE NOTE: This does not include technical assistance to states to build state capacity to implement education reforms, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors – including those that service G5, grants.gov, etc.
[Q2-8 ALL PROGRAMS]
On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers’ and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] 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 [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff from different program offices
Q7. Collaboration with other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] programs or offices in providing relevant services
Q8. [Ask Q8 only if Q7 is rated<6] Please identify a good example of collaboration across programs and/or offices that you would offer as a model for [PROGRAM NAME from Q1].
Technical Assistance to States to Build State Capacity to Implement Education Reforms
[Q9-14
ALL PROGRAMS]]
Q9. Is this grant program administered by a State Department of Education?
1. Yes
2. No (SKIP TO Q15)
3. Don’t Know (SKIP TO Q15)
Q10. Please rate the extent to which the technical assistance services provided by DEPARTMENT STAFF have helped build your state capacity to implement education reforms (e.g., college and career-ready standards and assessments; differentiated recognition, accountability, and support systems; effective teachers and leaders; turning around the lowest-performing schools; data systems to support instruction). Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “no impact” and “10” is “very high impact”.
Here are examples of technical assistance that DEPARTMENT STAFF might provide: Non-regulatory guidance; Frequently asked questions (FAQs); Non-regulatory guidance/FAQ addenda; Help desk; Listserv; Outreach; Training (webinars, Director meetings, conference workshops); Consultative services (teleconferences, on-site meeting, video conferences); Peer-to-Peer information sharing among grantees.
Q11. Please rate the extent to which the technical assistance services provided by DEPARTMENT-FUNDED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS have helped build your state capacity to implement education reforms. Department-funded technical assistance providers include regional labs, comprehensive centers, equity assistance centers, national associations, U.S. Department of Education-funded contractors, etc. Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “no impact” and “10” is “very high impact”.
Here are examples of technical assistance that DEPARTMENT-FUNDED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS might offer: Training (webinars, workshops, and conferences); Consultative services (teleconferences, on-site meetings, video conferences); Facilitation services; Providing experts to teach skills and advise in their areas of specialization.
Given the technical assistance provided by both Department staff and Department-funded technical assistance providers, to what extent have you been able to accomplish the following RESULTS? Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is “no results” and “10” is “very high results”.
Q12. Increased knowledge/awareness regarding key issues in education reform.
Q13. Higher quality implementation of this program.
Q14. Our state was able to develop, improve or support promising practices.
[Q15-20 ALL PROGRAMS]
Please think about your experience using [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s online resources. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the:
Q15. Ease of finding materials online
Q16. Ease of submitting information to [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] via the web (e.g., grant applications, annual reports, and accountability data)
Q17. Freshness of content
Q18. Ability to accomplish what you want on the site
Q19. Ease of reading the site
Q20. Ease of navigation
[Q21-22 ALL PROGRAMS]
Q21. Now think about how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] 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 [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s effectiveness in using technology to deliver its services.
(Ask Q22 only if Q21 is rated<6)
Q22. Please describe how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] could better use technology to deliver its services.
[ASK Q23-26 ONLY IF Q1=3-5, 11-28]
Q23. Think about how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] is working with the states and LEAs to develop an automated process to share accountability information. Please rate the quality of this assistance from [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]. Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent.”
Q24. 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.”
Q25. What reporting system do you use for reporting accountability data?
EDEN/EDFacts
Other electronic system (Specify)
Do not use electronic system, submit hard copy
Q26. How much of a reduction in federal paperwork do you expect over the next few years because of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’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 intro text ONLY IF Q1=1-5, 11-28]
Documents
Think about the documents (e.g., publications, guidance, memoranda, and frequently asked questions) you receive from [PROGRAM NAME from Q1].
[ASK Q27-Q31 IF Q1=1-5, 11-28]
On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent, please rate the documents’:
Q27. Clarity
Q28. Organization of information
Q29. Sufficiency of detail to meet your program needs
Q30. Relevance to your areas of need
Q31. Comprehensiveness in addressing the scope of issues that you face
[ASK Q32-Q41 IF Q1=6-10]
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”.
Q32. Program Purpose
Q33. Program Priorities
Q34. Selection Criteria
Q35. Review Process
Q36. Budget Information and Forms
Q37. Deadline for Submission
Q38. Dollar Limit on Awards
Q39. Page Limitation Instructions
Q40. Formatting Instructions
Q41. Program Contact
[ASK Q42-45 ONLY TO ALL TO ALL OESE PROGRAMS Q1 = 13-28]
Q42. 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.”
Q43. 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.”
Q44. 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)
Q45. 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)
[Q46-Q51 ALL PROGRAMS]
Now we are going to ask you to please consider ALL of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services and not only those we just asked about.
Q46. Using a 10-point scale on which “1” means “Very Dissatisfied” and “10” means “Very Satisfied,” how satisfied are you with [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services?
Q47. Now please rate the extent to which the products and services offered by [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] 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.”
Q48. Now forget for a moment about the products and services offered by [PROGRAM NAME from Q1], and imagine the ideal products and services. How well do you think [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] 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.
Q49. Overall, when I think of all of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services, I am satisfied with their quality.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
e. Does Not Apply
Closing
Q50. In the past 6 months, have you issued a formal complaint to [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to express your dissatisfaction with the assistance you’ve received from an [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff member?
a. Yes
b.
No
Q51. Finally, please describe how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] 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 1-12 CUSTOM QUESTIONS CONCERNING THEIR PROGRAM
Again, only think about your interactions with of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] when answering the following questions.
ONLY IF Q1=1 NATIVE AMERICAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CHILDREN IN SCHOOL PROGRAM ASK 1-10 BELOW
How often do you receive monitoring and/or technical assistance support from your program officer?
a. At least weekly
b. Monthly
c. Quarterly
c. Yearly
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how helpful is that monitoring and/or technical assistance?
How often do you visit the OELA ed.gov website (http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/index.html)?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the OELA ed.gov website?
How often do you visit the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA) website or use the NEXUS newsletter?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the NCELA website and the NEXUS newsletter?
How often do you visit the OELA Facebook page?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the OELA Facebook page?
What, if any, improvements have you seen in OELA over the last year? (open end)
What recommendations do you have of the program staff to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=2 National Professional Development Program ASK 1-10 BELOW
How often do you receive monitoring and/or technical assistance support from your program officer?
a. At least weekly
b. Monthly
c. Quarterly
c. Yearly
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how helpful is that monitoring and/or technical assistance?
How often do you visit the OELA ed.gov website (http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/index.html)?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the OELA ed.gov website?
How often do you visit the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA) website or use the NEXUS newsletter?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the NCELA website and the NEXUS newsletter?
How often do you visit the OELA Facebook page?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Every few months
e. Never
On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is “Poor” and 10 is “Excellent,” how useful is the OELA Facebook page?
What, if any, improvements have you seen in OELA over the last year? (open end)
What recommendations do you have of the program staff to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=3 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 OCTAE. 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 OCTAE 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 OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”, please rate the information provided at these conferences 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 does 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= 4 Carl D. Perkins Career & Technical Education Program to the State Directors of Career & Technical Ed ASK 1-10 BELOW
1. Think about the Consolidated Annual Report (CAR) as a way to report your state’s performance data to OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the CAR’s user friendliness.
If you were monitored by OCTAE 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:
2. Identifying and correcting compliance issues in your state
3. Helping you to improve program quality
Think about your formal interactions with OCTAE last year. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the effectiveness of these sessions in helping you to improve your Perkins administration, implementation, and accountability systems.
4. Office Hours
5. New State Director’s Orientation
6. Quarterly State CTE Directors Webinars
7. Personal Communications (telephone calls and e-mail correspondence)
8. Think about the Perkins Collaborative Resource Network (PCRN) administered by OCTAE. On a 10-point scale,
where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate PCRN’s usefulness to your program.
9. Think about the Perkins State Plan Portal as a means to submit your annual revisions, budgets, and performance levels. On a 10-point scale, where 1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the user-friendliness of the portal.
10. What can OCTAE do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=5 Financial Improvement and Post Audit Operations / Indirect Cost Group (FIPAO/ICG) ASK 1-14 BELOW
On a 10-point scale where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent, please rate the Department of Education Indirect Cost Group Staff in the following areas:
Knowledge of applicable regulations and guidance regarding indirect cost rates.
Timeliness of responses for technical assistance.
Timeliness of providing indirect cost rates.
Professionalism and Courtesy of the staff.
Would you be agreeable to a standardized computerized indirect rate submission format?
Yes
No
(if Q5=b) Please indicate the reason(s) why not.
What is the experience level of your staff preparing the indirect cost rate proposal?
Inexperienced – Less than 2 years
2-4 years
5-7 years
More than 7 years
Would you attend regional training sponsored by the Indirect Cost Group?
Yes
No
(if Q8=b) Please indicate the reason(s) why not.
What areas related to Indirect cost would you say your staff need training the most? (Rank in order as 1 being the most needed)
Restricted Rate Calculations
Subawards and Subcontracts
Subrecipient Indirect cost rates
Exclusions
Calculations of LEA Indirect rates
Other, please specify (PN: “Other” not required in ranking)
Give an example of the best customer service you have had in the last year with the Indirect Cost Group. (open end)
Have you been satisfied with the service received from the Indirect cost negotiators during a site visit?
Yes
No
(if Q12=b) Please indicate the reason(s) why not.
What improvements would you suggest to help provide for a more timely receipt of the indirect cost rate agreements? (Open End)
ONLY IF Q1=6 Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships Program ASK 1-15 BELOW
1. How long have you been working on the current Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships (FLAS) grant? (Choose one that most closely approximates the amount of time.)
a. Less than one year
b. 1-2 years
c. 2-3 years
d. 3-4 years
e. 4 or more years
Think about your experience with receiving technical assistance FLAS program specialist. On a 10-point scale where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent please rate your program specialist on:
2. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies and procedures, including programmatic knowledge as necessitated by the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA)
3. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter, etc.)
4. Timely resolution of general programmatic and financial issues
5. Timely acknowledgement and processing of FLAS requests such as language approval requests and overseas program requests
6. Ability to respond to all issues raised based solely on interpretation of laws, regulations and Department policies without personal bias or administrative preference
7. The quality of information or feedback received from FLAS program staff
8. Is the process for the dissemination of the FLAS tracking survey helpful? If not, please provide suggestions for easing the process. (Open end)
9. Is the “demonstrated need” competitive preference priority effectively providing FLAS funding to students in need?
a. Yes
b. No (IF ‘No’ SELECTED) ASK Why not? (open end)
Think about the extent to which FLAS contributes to the production of expertise in area studies, international studies, and modern foreign languages to meet national needs. On a 10-point scale where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent please rate the extent to which you agree with the following:
10. FLAS is effective in recruiting students to enroll in area studies and modern foreign languages courses.
11. FLAS recipients are more likely to achieve advanced proficiency in less commonly taught languages
12. FLAS fellowships leverage institutional support for language instruction (instructor salaries, professional development, course development)
On a 10-point scale where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent please rate the extent to which the FLAS fellowship is still relevant for training students for:
13. Global competitiveness
14. Career preparation
15. Academia
ONLY IF Q1=7 Student Support Services ASK 1-9 BELOW
1. How long have you been working on the current grant?
(Choose one that most closely approximates the amount of time.)
a. Less than one year
b. 1-2 years
c. 2-3 years
d. 3-4 years
e. 4 or more years
Please rate the service/support received from your assigned SSS program specialist in the following areas on a 1 to 10 scale where 1 means Poor and 10 means Excellent. If a specific service or program support area does not apply, please select “N/A”.
2. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA
3. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter, etc.)
4. Ability to assist you in interacting with institutional officials, if necessary, in the resolution of critical internal SSS program issues
5. Ability to interpret legislation and regulations, specifically, on the administration (including calculation of correct institutional match for grant aid, if applicable) and assistance with procedures for distribution of grant aid monies
6. Knowledge of and ability to assist with the submission of the SSS annual performance report
7. Processing of administrative action requests, including changes in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days
8. Ability to respond to all issues raised based solely on interpretation of laws, regulations and Department policies without personal bias or administrative preference
9. Please provide any additional comments on your assigned SSS program specialist. (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=8 Upward Bound ASK 1-11 BELOW
1. How long have you been working on the current Upward Bound (UB) grant? (Choose one that most closely approximates the amount of time.)
a. Less than one year
b. 1-2 years
c. 2-3 years
d. 3-4 years
e. 4 or more years
In interacting with the UB program specialist responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support on a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is Poor and 10 is Excellent on the following areas. If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”.
2. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA
3. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter, etc.)
4. Ability to assist you in interacting with institutional officials, if necessary, in the resolution of critical internal programmatic issues.
5. Knowledge of the annual performance report
6. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the report
7. Processing of administrative action requests, including change in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days
8. Ability to respond to all issues raised based solely on interpretation of laws, regulations and Department policies without personal bias or administrative preference
9. Please provide any additional comments on the Upward Bound program specialist who worked with you. (open end)
Finally, please provide any additional comments on information you would like to see provided through:
10. Technical assistance webinars/workshops (open end)
11. UB website content (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=9 Hispanic Serving Institutions ASK 1-12 BELOW
1. How long have you been working on the current grant?
(Choose one that most closely approximates the amount of time.)
a. Less than one year
b. 1-2 years
c. 2-3 years
d. 3-4 years
e. 4 or more years
Think about your experience with receiving technical support from the Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) Program Division. On a 10-point scale where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent” please rate the HSI-Division according to the following:
2. Responsiveness to questions
3. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures
4. Ability to resolve issues
5. Use of clear and concise written and verbal communication
6. Timely resolution of general programmatic and/or financial issues
7. Which best describes how often you interact with HSI-Division staff?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. A few times a year
e. Once a year
f. Less than once a year
8. Based on your expectations and experience, tell us what additional services you would like this Program Office to provide. (open end)
9. Describe difficulties you’ve had with current program office services. (open end)
10. Please provide at least one specific suggestion for how we can improve this program. (open end)
11. Please provide at least one example how this grant is making a positive contribution towards achieving the mission of the institution. (open end)
12. Please provide at least one example of how the grant increases student persistence toward degree attainment? (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=10 Historically Black Colleges and Universities ASK 1-20 BELOW
1. How long have you been working on the current grant? (Choose one that most closely approximates the amount of time.)
a. Less than one year
b. 1-2 years
c. 2-3 years
d. 3-4 years
e. 4 or more years
Think about your experience seeking information from the HBCU Program website. Using a 10 point scale, where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent. Please rate the website on the following:
2. Ability to navigate the information needed
3. User friendliness
In interacting with the HBCU program officer responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support in the following areas using a scale from 1 to 10 where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent. If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”.
4. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulation, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.
5. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter etc.)
6. Knowledge of the annual performance report
7. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the annual performance report
8. Professionalism/Courtesy - The representative responded to my service request professionally and in a courteous manner.
9. Timeliness - The representative resolved my service request in a timely manner.
10. Processing of or assisting with administrative actions, as such:
- Budget revisions, within 30 days
- Change in key personnel
- Compliance Issues
- Fiscal Issues
- Grant Management Issues
- No-Cost Extension Issues
- Annual Performance Report
- Grant Closeout
11. Your overall level of satisfaction with the service provided by the representative.
12. With respect to the Annual Performance Report form, are the instructions clear?
a. Yes
b. No
13. Do the questions relate to your project’s activities?
a. Yes
b. No
14. Do the statistics requested provide an appropriate picture of the achievements of your grant?
a. Yes
b. No
15. What are your suggestions for improving the annual report process? (open end)
16. What suggestions do you have for improving the content of the annual performance report? (open end)
17. Does the leadership of your institution provide the support required for the successful implementation of the grant?
a. Yes
b. No
18. Please provide at least one major example how this grant is making a positive contribution in achieving the mission of the institution? (open end)
19. Provide examples that show the impact the grant is making on increasing student persistence toward degree attainment? (open end)
20. What additional services can the Division in which your grant is administered make available to you? (For example: improved communication through social media use, webinars, analysis tools, etc.). (open end)
ONLY IF Q1=11 IDEA - State Directors of Special Education (Part B) ASK 1-6 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:
1. Clarity of information received in developing your state’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions
2. Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)
3. 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.
4. Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet federal requirements and/or improve program quality?
5. Which types of assistance were least helpful?
6. Which types of assistance (on-site, virtual, specific TA Center(s), MSIP staff, etc.) were most effective in helping you develop and implement your SSIP?
ONLY IF Q1=12 IDEA - Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators (Part C) ASK 1-6 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:
1. Clarity of information received in developing your state’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions.
2. Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)
3. 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.
4. Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet federal requirements and/or improve program quality?
5. Which types of assistance were least helpful?
6. Which types of assistance (on-site, virtual, specific TA Center(s), MSIP staff, etc.) were most effective in helping you develop and implement your SSIP?
ONLY IF Q1=13 Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ASK 1-8 BELOW
Think about the support you have received from the Office of State Support (OSS) program staff regarding [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] (i.e. responses to State questions, assistance meeting program requirements, connecting you to resources). On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the effectiveness of OSS program staff in supporting your State’s implementation of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]:
Provides timely responses to State requests and questions
Provides assistance in a manner that is useful and appropriate based on our needs
Demonstrates understanding of my State’s specific context
Think about your participation in OSS performance monitoring (i.e. quarterly Progress Checks). Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective to rate OSS performance monitoring on the following:
Helps my State assess how well we are accomplishing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] goals
Helps my State address grant implementation challenges
Supports the establishment and strengthening of cross-program connections and coordination (e.g. SEA staff collaboration between Title I and Title III SEA staff) within my State
Streamlines the federal performance reporting process and requirements
Think about technical assistance you may need to help you effectively implement [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] over the next year (e.g. opportunities for peer learning, support transitioning to the Every Student Succeeds Act.)
How can the services provided by OSS be improved to effectively support you over the next year in implementing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to meet the needs of your State? (Please cite specific recommendations) (open ended)
ONLY IF Q1=14 21st Century Community Learning Centers ASK 1-10 BELOW
How long have you served as the 21st CCLC State Director?
Less than two years
More than two years
I am not the state director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for less than two years.
I am not the state director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for more than two years.
Please rate the knowledge of the U.S. Department of Education staff on 21st CCLC program grant administration 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.
Think about the national leadership conferences, institutes, and webinars sponsored by OESE (i.e. SEA Coordinators’ meetings, 21st CCLC Summer Institute, webinars on family engagement, inclusion, request for proposal development, uniform guidance, etc.). 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 21st CCLC program implementation.
How helpful is the information and guidance provided to you by the US Department of Education staff and contracted staff in preparing for monitoring activities (monitoring calls, virtual reviews, onsite monitoring reviews? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being not very helpful and “10” being very helpful.
How likely are you to recommend the 21st CCLC program’s You for Youth (Y4Y) website to your State’s grantees as a technical assistance resource? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being not at all likely and “10” being extremely likely.
How easy is it to navigate is the Y4Y website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being not very easy and “10” being very easy.
Would you prefer 21st CCLC program in-person meetings to include SEAs only OR SEAs and Center-level staffs?
SEAs only
Both SEAs and Center-level staffs
Based on your selection of [PIPE IN Q7 SELECTION], please rate the extent to which you prefer that the 21st CCLC program convene regional technical assistance meetings. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being never and “10” being always.
Based on your selection of [PIPE IN Q7 SELECTION], please rate the extent to which you prefer that the 21st CCLC program convene national technical assistance meetings (TA sessions that include sub-grantees and include topics identified by all stakeholders). Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being never and “10” being always.
What technical assistance topics can the 21st CCLC program provide at meetings to support the states more effectively? (Open-ended)
ONLY IF Q1=15 Preschool Development Grants (PDG) ASK 1-7 below
As it relates to the Preschool Development Grants program, please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent.
1. Accessibility and responsiveness of program staff
2. Timely resolution of questions by program staff
3. Clarity of information provided by program staff
4. Usefulness and relevance of technical assistance (e.g., webinars, meetings)
5. Usefulness and relevance of monthly conference calls
6. What could the PDG team do to improve the structure or format of technical assistance? (Open end)
7. How frequently would you like to have in-person meetings, webinars, or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=16 Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program ASK 1-10 BELOW
On a 10-point scale where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent, please rate the Department of Education Program Staff’s Skills, Knowledge and Responsiveness in the following areas:
1. Resolution of problems by your current Program Officer
2. Current Program Officer’s knowledge of applicable statutes, regulations and policies
3. Current Program Officer’s knowledge of relevant program content
Think about the national meetings, Peer Exchange Networks (PENs), etc. sponsored by OESE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent, please rate:
4. The effectiveness of these sessions on helping you to improve the quality of your SRCL program implementation
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:
5. Responsiveness to questions about program requirements
6. Responsiveness to questions about applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other federal regulations
7. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
8. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or instructions regarding annual performance reports
9. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding budget development, revisions, and reporting
10. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
ONLY IF Q1=17 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
[IF Q1=a] 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
4. [IF Q3=a] 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
No
6. [IF Q5=a] 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?
a. Yes
b. No
[IF Q7=a] Did the presentation and/or materials prepared help you to understand your responsibilities in completing the application or submitting data?
Yes
No
[IF Q8=b] 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
[IF Q10=a] Did the letter you received provide sufficient explanation of what and how you need to prepare your documents for the review?
Yes
No
[IF Q11=b] Please explain. (Open end)
Did you receive timely communications regarding the outcome of the review?
Yes
No
[IF Q13=b] 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=18 High School Equivalency Program (HEP) - Migrant Education ASK 1-11 BELOW
As it relates to the High School Equivalency Program (HEP), please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent.
1. Accessibility and responsiveness of program staff
2. Timely resolution of questions by program staff
3. Clarity of information provided by program staff
4. Usefulness and relevance of the strategies for technical assistance (e.g., webinars, policy documents, meetings)
5. Usefulness and relevance of conference calls
6. Usefulness and relevance of courtesy calls.
7. What additional topics would you like discussed during HEP meetings, webinars, or phone calls to help you implement a high-quality program? (Open end)
8. What could the HEP team do to improve the content of technical assistance? (Open end)
9. What could the HEP team do to improve the structure or format of technical assistance? (Open end)
10. How frequently would you like to have webinars or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)
11. Please share any comments on how the HEP team can better support your work. Please include any ideas that the HEP team may use to better support your work as it relates to your project’s specific needs. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=19 Project Prevent Grant Program ASK 1-7 BELOW
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:
1. Responsiveness to questions about Project Prevent Grant Program requirements and applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other federal regulations
2. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails
3. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding the development, revision and reporting of budgets, the collection of GPRA data, and the submission of annual performance
4. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
Think about the technical assistance, including meetings, written guidance, webinars, and presentations that you receive from the P2 technical assistance team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the following:
5. Relevance and usefulness to your project and program activities
6. Frequency of communication
7. Use of technology to deliver services
ONLY IF Q1=20 Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Education Agencies ASK 1-8 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. Responsiveness of OIE staff in answering questions and/or information requests.
2. Timeliness of OIE staff in providing information to meet your Title VII application and APR deadlines.
3. Quality of support and technical assistance provided by OIE staff on Title VII program implementation.
4. Effectiveness of guidance documents OIE provides, e.g. Getting Started; Frequently Asked Questions, website links and EASIE Community website.
Think about the application process when 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:
5. Ease of using the EASIE system when applying for a grant.
6. Quality of training via webinars provided by the EASIE system and grant application process.
Open ended questions for your comments:
7. 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)
8. Over the next year, what can OIE do to better meet your technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=21 Migrant Education Program (MEP) -- Title I, Part C ASK 1-8 BELOW
1. If you are a new MEP director (new as of May 2012) and have participated in one of the New Directors Discussions, what was most useful for implementing the program, and what would you like to see added or changed?
2. What topics would you like to see addressed during the semi-annual conference calls between you and your program officer? (open end)
3. Which of this year’s technical assistance webinars were most useful to you?
a. CSPR Series
b. MSIX Toolkit
c. MSIX Data Quality Grants
d. MSIX Regulations Series
4. Please indicate why this webinar was helpful and/or how we could improve our webinars in the future.(open end)
5. How useful were the announcements provided on the MEPSTATE Listserv? Please rate the content provided in the MEPSTATE listserv using a 10 point scale, where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent.
6. How do you feel about the frequency of the MEPSTATE Listserv?
I receive too many MEPSTATE Listserv messages.
I am satisfied with the frequency of MEPSTATE Listserv messages.
I would like to receive MEPSTATE Listserv message more frequently.
7. Please check up to three technical assistance topics that you will need in the future, in order to improve the performance of your MEP. (Check boxes with the maximum of three to be selected for the topics below) [PN: Multi-select with max of 3 choices. Randomize]
a. Child Eligibility
b. Comprehensive Needs Assessment
c. Continuation of Services
d. Fiscal Requirements
e. Interstate Coordination
f. Parental/Family Engagement
g. Priority for Services
h. Program Evaluation
i. Quality Control
j. Records Exchange
k. Recruitment
l. Re-interviewing
m. Service Delivery Models
n. Service Delivery Plan
o. Subgrant Formulas
p. Service Delivery Strategies (Instructional and Support)
q. Subrecipient Monitoring
r. Other, please specify
6. How can we change the content or navigation of our online resource, Results.ed.gov, in order to make your experience more useful? (Open end)
7. What is the most useful method for OME to communicate pertinent information, such as new developments or policy, to you (e.g. webinars, in-person presentations, conference calls, etc.) (Open end)
8. Please share any comments on how the MEP team can better support your work as a state director. (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=22 Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program – McKinney-Vento ASK 1-11 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)
1a.Responsiveness in answering questions.
2a.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
Developing cross-agency collaborations
Technical Assistance Center (NCHE)
3a. Meeting program compliance requirements
4a. Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results
5a. Developing cross-agency collaborations
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
6a.Direct one-on-one TA calls
7a.Webinars
8a. State Coordinators meeting
9a. Website
10a.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=23 School Improvement Fund ASK 1-8 BELOW
Think about the support you have received from the Office of State Support (OSS) program staff regarding [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] (i.e. responses to State questions, assistance meeting program requirements, connecting you to resources). On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the effectiveness of OSS program staff in supporting your State’s implementation of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]:
Provides timely responses to State requests and questions
Provides assistance in a manner that is useful and appropriate based on our needs
Demonstrates understanding of my State’s specific context
Think about your participation in OSS performance monitoring (i.e. quarterly Progress Checks). Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective to rate OSS performance monitoring on the following:
Helps my State assess how well we are accomplishing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] goals
Helps my State address grant implementation challenges
Supports the establishment and strengthening of cross-program connections and coordination (e.g. SEA staff collaboration between Title I and Title III SEA staff) within my State
Streamlines the federal performance reporting process and requirements
Think about technical assistance you may need to help you effectively implement [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] over the next year (e.g. opportunities for peer learning, support transitioning to the Every Student Succeeds Act.)
How can the services provided by OSS be improved to effectively support you over the next year in implementing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to meet the needs of your State? (Please cite specific recommendations) (open ended)
ONLY IF Q1=24 TITLE I PART A – IMPROVING BASIC PROGRAMS OPERATED BY LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES (LEAs) ASK 1-8 BELOW
Think about the support you have received from the Office of State Support (OSS) program staff regarding [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] (i.e. responses to State questions, assistance meeting program requirements, connecting you to resources). On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the effectiveness of OSS program staff in supporting your State’s implementation of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]:
Provides timely responses to State requests and questions
Provides assistance in a manner that is useful and appropriate based on our needs
Demonstrates understanding of my State’s specific context
Think about your participation in OSS performance monitoring (i.e. quarterly Progress Checks). Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective to rate OSS performance monitoring on the following:
Helps my State assess how well we are accomplishing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] goals
Helps my State address grant implementation challenges
Supports the establishment and strengthening of cross-program connections and coordination (e.g. SEA staff collaboration between Title I and Title III SEA staff) within my State
Streamlines the federal performance reporting process and requirements
Think about technical assistance you may need to help you effectively implement [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] over the next year (e.g. opportunities for peer learning, support transitioning to the Every Student Succeeds Act.)
How can the services provided by OSS be improved to effectively support you over the next year in implementing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to meet the needs of your State? (Please cite specific recommendations) (open ended)
ONLY IF Q1=25 English Language Acquisition State Grants/Title III State Formula Grant Program
ASK 1-8 BELOW
Think about the support you have received from the Office of State Support (OSS) program staff regarding [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] (i.e. responses to State questions, assistance meeting program requirements, connecting you to resources). On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the effectiveness of OSS program staff in supporting your State’s implementation of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]:
Provides timely responses to State requests and questions
Provides assistance in a manner that is useful and appropriate based on our needs
Demonstrates understanding of my State’s specific context
Think about your participation in OSS performance monitoring (i.e. quarterly Progress Checks). Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective to rate OSS performance monitoring on the following:
Helps my State assess how well we are accomplishing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] goals
Helps my State address grant implementation challenges
Supports the establishment and strengthening of cross-program connections and coordination (e.g. SEA staff collaboration between Title I and Title III SEA staff) within my State
Streamlines the federal performance reporting process and requirements
Think about technical assistance you may need to help you effectively implement [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] over the next year (e.g. opportunities for peer learning, support transitioning to the Every Student Succeeds Act.)
How can the services provided by OSS be improved to effectively support you over the next year in implementing [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to meet the needs of your State? (Please cite specific recommendations) (open ended)
ONLY IF Q1=26 Neglected and Delinquent State and Local Agency Programs ASK 1-23 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, the National Technical Assistance Center for the Education of Neglected or Delinquent Children and Youth (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
1. Responsiveness in answering questions.
2. Knowledge of technical material
Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC)
3. Responsiveness in answering questions.
4. 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
5. Meeting program compliance requirements
6. Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results
7. Developing cross-agency collaborations
Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC )
8. Meeting program compliance requirements
9. Assisting you (as state coordinators) build your capacity to impact performance results
10. Developing cross-agency collaborations
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
11. Direct one-on-one TA calls /emails or written communication s
12. ND Community calls (including topical calls)
13. Webinars
14. State Coordinators meeting
15. Website
16. Products
Usefulness
17. Direct one-on-one TA calls/emails or written communication s
18. ND Community calls/emails or written communication s
19. Webinars
20. State Coordinators meeting
21. Website
22. Products
23. 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=27a School Climate Transformation Grant Program – State Department of Education ASK 1-8 BELOW
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:
1. Responsiveness and accuracy in responding to questions regarding School Climate Transformation Grant Program requirements
2. Responsiveness and accuracy in providing guidance related to Department of Education (EDGAR) grant administrative regulation, including budget issues, reporting, grant requirements, and other Federal regulations
3. Timeliness in responding to emails and returning phone calls
4. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
Think about your project’s technical assistance, including meetings, written guidance, webinars, and presentations that you receive from your technical assistance provider. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the following:
5. Quality of technical assistance received
6. Relevance and usefulness to your project and program activities
7. Frequency of communication
8. Use of technology to delivery training and technical assistance
ONLY IF Q1=27b School Climate Transformation Grant Program – Local Education Agency (P2) ASK 1-7 BELOW
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:
1. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding the development, revision and reporting of budgets, the collection of GPRA data, and the submission of annual performance
2. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information
Think about your project’s technical assistance, including meetings, written guidance, webinars, and presentations that you receive from your technical assistance provider. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is not very effective and “10” is very effective, please rate the following:
3. Relevance and usefulness to your project and program activities
4. Frequency of communication
5. Use of technology to deliver services
6. Overall helpfulness in building your organization’s capacity to do high-quality implementation and fidelity
7. Overall helpfulness with solving evaluation challenges and issues
ONLY IF Q1=28a Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Rural Low-Income School Program ASK 1-8 BELOW
1. How could we make the February 2016 REAP Web-X more beneficial to you? What additional information is needed? (Open end)
Please rate the following using a 10-point scale, where "1" means poor and "10" means excellent. (Q2 & Q3 only)
2. Accessibility and responsiveness of REAP program staff
3. Clarity of information provided by REAP program staff
4. How frequently would you like to have webinars or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)
5. What could the REAP team do to improve the content of technical assistance? (Open end)
6. Please check up to 3 topics for technical assistance that you will need in the future in order to improve the performance of your RLIS grant. (Check boxes with the maximum of 3 to be selected for the topics below) [PN: Multi-select with max of 3 choices. Randomize]
Use of grant funds
Use of G5 (i.e., grantee information, grant award notice (GAN), available funds, drawdown of funds, etc.)
Use of Max.gov
Consolidated grant application process
Grant eligibility data review & submission
Fiscal accounting procedures
Monitoring RLIS grantees
Use of grant funds for administrative costs
Reporting and use of data
Other (please specify)
7. How can we improve the content and navigation of our online resource, http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/index.html in order to make your experience more useful? (Open end)
8. What recommendations would you like to make to the REAP program staff to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open end)
ONLY IF Q1=28b Rural Education Achievement Program/Small, Rural School Achievement Program ASK 1-7 BELOW
Please rate the following using a 10-point scale, where “1” means poor and “10” means excellent. [Q1 & Q2 only]
1. Accessibility and responsiveness of REAP program staff
2. Clarity of information provided by REAP program staff
3. How frequently would you like to have webinars or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)
4. What could the REAP team do to improve the content of technical assistance? (Open end)
5. Please check up to 3 topics for technical assistance that you will need in the future in order to improve the performance of your SRSA grant. (Check boxes with the maximum of 3 to be selected for the topics below) [PN: Multi-select with max of 3 choices. Randomize]
a. Use of funds
b. Use of G5 (i.e., grantee information, grant award notice (GAN), available funds, drawdown of funds, etc.)
c. Grant application process
d. EDGAR
e. REAP flexibility
f. Reporting and use of data
g. Other: [Type in response]
Q6. How can we improve the content and navigation of our REAP online resource, http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/index.html in order to make your experience more useful? (Open end)
Q7. What recommendations would you like to make to the REAP program staff to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open end)
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 2021-01-25 |