7. Allows the use of funds for the Part C option.
In addition to using funds provided under Section 633 to maintain and implement the statewide system required by Section 633, a state may use such funds … with the written consent of the parents, to continue to provide early intervention services under Part C to children with disabilities from their third birthday until such children enter, or are eligible under state law to enter, kindergarten, in lieu of FAPE provided in accordance with Part B. [638(4)]

For any fiscal year for which the amount appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under Section 644 exceeds $460,000,000, the secretary shall reserve 15 percent of such appropriated amount to provide grants to states that are carrying out the policy described in Section 635(c) in order to facilitate the implementation of such policy. [643(e)(1)]

Each state shall use any funds the state reserves under Section 619(d) (reservation for state activities) and does not use for administration under Section 619(e) (state administration) … to conduct the specific activities authorized under Section 619(f) including: providing early intervention services (which shall include an educational component that promotes school readiness and incorporates preliteracy, language and numeracy skills) in accordance with Part C to children with disabilities who are eligible for services under Section 619 and who previously received services under Part C until such children enter, or are eligible under state law to enter, kindergarten; or at the state's discretion, to continue service coordination or case management for families who receive services under Part C. [619(f)(5)-(6)]

Any state eligible to receive a grant under Section 619 may use funds made available under Sections 611(e)(1)(A) (611 funds for state administration), 611(f)(3) (local education agency (LEA) funds available for reallocation) or 619(f)(5) (619 funds for state level activities) to develop and implement a state policy jointly with the lead agency under Part C and the SEA to provide early intervention services (which shall include an educational component that promotes school readiness and incorporates preliteracy, language and numeracy skills) in accordance with Part C to children with disabilities who are eligible for services under Section 619 and who previously received services under Part C, until such children enter, or are eligible under state law to enter, kindergarten, or elementary school as appropriate. [611(e)(7)]

1. Why do you think a $460 million federal funding baseline was established for Part C as the standard for triggering the15% reserve clause available for states to develop the Part C extended option?



2. What implications might exist for states should they choose to offer the Part C extended option without additional funding from the federal government?



3. What might be the benefits of using funding reerved under 619(d) to provide early intervention services or service coordination for families who opt to stay in Part C?



4. How might the provision for funding other state-level activities impact the quality of early intervention services provided to 3 and 4 year-olds who remain in Part C?



5. How might the flexible funding provision allow for a greater range and quality of services provided under the Part C extended option?



6. In what ways might the use of flexible funds increase collaboration among agencies?



7. How might the flexible funding option impact the formulation of the annual state plan?



8. How might the flexible funding option impact the development of the IFSP?

1. What type of analysis might be helpful for agencies to determine the cost differential between services provided under Part C and Part B?



2. What types of state data and resources could be used to determine whether it is feasible for the state to offer the Part C extended option to 3 and 4 year olds?



3. Should a state choose this option, how might agencies and organizations collaborate to align resources and services to meet the requirements under the Part C option?



4. How might the state determine which activities will be selected for inclusion under Part C and how will they be evaluated?



5. What is the role of the Inter-agency Coordinating Council in helping a state decide how 619(d) funding should be spent?



6. How might a state determine whether funds for activities under 619 (d) and 619(e) have been used appropriately and effectively managed to equitably serve all children in the 619 program prior to reallocating dollars to serve 3 and 4 year olds who remain under Part C?



7. What policies and procedures might assist the state in apportioning 619(d) funds to support services under Part C?



8. Who might participate in the determination of how 619(d) funds should be distributed?
   



9. In using the flexible funding option provision, what logistical challenges might need to be addressed if Part C and Part B are administered by different lead agencies?



10. What system capacity requirements will be necessary to foster and promote flexibility between SEAs, LEAs, and agencies at a child and family-serving level?
    
    
    These questions were developed by the following stakeholders working together:
    
    
    Role: National Health Organization
    Location: Ohio
    Role: Related Services Provider
    Location: Ohio
    Role: Researcher
    Location: Kentucky
    Role: National TA Provider
    Location: North Carolina
    Role: Early Childhood Provider
    Location: Kansas