Located in:
- Career and Technical Education Programs Authorized Under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006
- d. Accountability and Evaluation
In addition to the narrative information provided below, you must submit your measurement definitions (Items 3 and 11 below) and proposed performance levels (Items 5 and 11 below) for the upcoming program year using the link to the Perkins State Plan Portal below.
- d. Accountability and Evaluation
d. 1. I. You Must Describe How Your State Plans to Enter into an Agreement with Each Consortium Receiving a Grant Under Perkins Iv to Meet a Minimum Level of Performance for Each of the Performance Indicators Described in Section 113(b) and 203(e). (section 204(e)(1))
Current Narrative:
The state distributed data pertaining to performance on elements required for negotiation during the transition year and has stated its intent to use that as a baseline for negotiations with local recipients for the 2007–2008 year. Individual districts may accept the state’s proposal or propose a different performance level with stated rationale for the request. Negotiations, where necessary, will be conducted on a case–by–case basis.
The Minnesota Department of Education maintains a liaison relationship with the Minnesota
Association of Career and Technical Administrators (MACTA) and the Minnesota Association for Career and Technical Education (MnACTE). The elected boards of these two organizations are consulted in all phases of Perkins planning and implementation. Administrative representatives from small and large, rural and urban school districts will be consulted on Perkins indicators.
Postsecondary
The Office of the Chancellor will use the postsecondary entry–level cohort–based Perkins Brio data for negotiating individually with each college. Each Perkins eligible college will be provided access to baseline and trend data for the Perkins IV indicators through the Brio database and will be provided proposed targets for each indicator. The proposed targets will include the level below which the college would need to request technical assistance and develop an improvement plan and as well as a slightly higher a level at which only a written report addressing an improvement plan would be required. The proposed levels will be based on the institution’s trend data and trend data at the state level. Negotiations will be conducted when a college proposes a performance level other than that proposed by the Office of the Chancellor.
In negotiations with individual colleges and in the development of proposed state level targets for negotiation with the U.S. Department of Education, the Office of the Chancellor will continue to analyze state and local level data and continue to seek input from key research and policy staff within the colleges and within the Office of the Chancellor.