South Dakota — State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
Summary
This is South Dakota's State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund. The cover page lists Mary Stadick Smith as SEA contact and Tiffany Sanderson as the printed name, with an initial submission date of 6/25/2021 and updates dated 11/12/2021, 10/03/2022, and 12/12/2022. The plan names its commitment to in-person instruction for school year 2020-21 as its most effective strategy. It reports preliminary results of a May 2021 COVID Impact Survey, in which 679 public schools completed the survey and 676 indicated they started school in August or September.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Department Of Education Pdf Www Ed Gov 288E7Ca521
- Case
- Department Of Education Pdf Www Ed Gov 288E7Ca521
Cite this document
“South Dakota — State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund.”
Original at www.ed.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/department-of-education-pdf-www-ed-gov-288e7ca521/
, SHA-256 13c248e313ac3926da387fbc16484c049ed85de7ee345c5cc734f44d7a4ff5c2.Full text
State Plan for the
American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
U.S. Department of Education
Issued: April 21, 2021
OMB Number: 1810-0754
Expiration Date: October 31, 2021
Paperwork Burden Statement According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to
respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB
control number for this information collection is 1810-0754. Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 100 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain benefit under Section 2001 of
the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP Act). If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time
estimate, suggestions for improving this individual collection, or if you have comments or concerns regarding the
status of your individual form, application or survey, please contact Britt Jung, Office of State and Grantee
Relations, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue,
SW, Washington, DC 20202-6450, email: SGR@ed.gov directly.
Introduction
The American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (“ARP
ESSER”) Fund, authorized under the American Rescue Plan (“ARP”) Act of 2021, provides
nearly $122 billion to States to support the Nation’s schools in safely reopening and sustaining
safe operations of schools while meeting the academic, social, emotional, and mental health
needs of students resulting from the coronavirus disease 2019 (“COVID-19”) pandemic. It is
particularly important that ARP ESSER funding will enable States and local educational
agencies (“LEAs”), and more directly schools, to support students who have been most severely
impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and are likely to have suffered the most because of
longstanding inequities in our communities and schools that have been exacerbated by the
COVID-19 pandemic.
The U.S. Department of Education (“Department”) is committed to working in partnership with
States so that these unprecedented resources are quickly put to work to ensure students have
sustained access to in-person instruction and that the resources are used to provide the effective
support students need as they persist through and recover from the impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic. The thoughtful and timely use of these funds will have a lasting impact on our
Nation’s schools and help to address the inequities in resources, services, and opportunities
available to our students.
This template presents an opportunity for States to share their plans for the use of ARP ESSER
funds with the public. The Department must approve a State educational agency’s (“SEA’s”)
plan in order to make the State’s remaining ARP ESSER allocation available for use. Please note
that the Department intends to issue ARP ESSER reporting requirements separately.
Instructions
Each SEA must provide descriptions and other information that address each requirement listed
below. An SEA may use this template or another format as long as every item and element is
addressed in the SEA’s response. Throughout this document, questions that refer to an SEA’s
ARP ESSER funding are referencing the total allocation to be received by the SEA, including
that which it allocates to its LEAs.
Each SEA must submit to the Department by June 7, 2021, either: (1) its ARP ESSER plan or
(2) the State requirements that preclude submission of the plan by that date and a date by which
it will be able to submit its complete ARP ESSER plan.
To submit the SEA’s plan, please email the plan to your Program Officer at
[State].OESE@ed.gov (e.g., Alabama.OESE@ed.gov).
In order to ensure transparency, the Department will post each plan on the Department’s website
when it is received and will indicate each plan’s approval status.
This template also allows States to fulfill the requirement of the Coronavirus Response and
Relief Supplemental Appropriations (“CRRSA”) Act ESSER II 6-month reporting requirement
in section 313(f) of the CRRSA Act.
2
Cover Page
Grantee and Contact Information
ARP ESSER PR Award Number (e.g., S425U2100XX):
SEA Contact: Mary Stadick Smith
Telephone: (605) 773-7228
Email address: mary.stadicksmith@state.sd.us
By signing this document, I agree to each of the assurances listed in Appendix C and
further assure that:
To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information and data included in this plan
are true and correct.
Chief State School Officer or Authorized Representative (Printed
Name)
Tiffany Sanderson
Signature of Authorized SEA Representative Date:
Initial
Submission:
6/25/2021
Updated:
11/12/2021
Updated:
10/03/2022
Updated:
12/12/2022
3
A. Describing the State’s Current Status and Needs
The Department recognizes the extraordinary efforts made by States, LEAs, and educators to
support students during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this section, SEAs will describe the
progress they have made, the priorities and student needs guiding their ARP ESSER funding
decisions, and their current and projected operating status.
1. Progress and Promising Practices: Provide your assessment of the top 2-3
strategies that have been most effective in supporting the needs of students in
your State during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for students most impacted
by the COVID-19 pandemic. Please include, if applicable, how your State will
submit and encourage its LEAs to submit lessons learned and best practices to the
Department’s Safer Schools and Campuses Best Practices Clearinghouse so that
they can be shared with other States and LEAs.
South Dakota’s most effective strategy for supporting the needs of students and families during
the pandemic was committing to provide in-person instruction, to the fullest extent possible, for
school year (SY) 2020-21. This commitment, coupled with appropriate mitigation strategies and
options for students unable to participate in in-person instruction, allowed South Dakota schools
to balance the equally important needs of keeping students and staff healthy (i.e., preventing
virus spread) and ensuring continued learning.
Identified as one of the leading principles in the South Dakota Department of Education’s (“the
department”) Starting Well 2020 guidance for schools, the commitment to safe, in-person
instruction honored not only the academic needs of students, but also their social-emotional
needs, and their overall mental health. This commitment manifested itself throughout the K-12
system, from policy makers at the school board and state legislature levels to front-line school
staff who interacted with students on a daily basis, including principals, teachers, counselors,
school secretaries, cafeteria staff, custodians, and bus drivers. As a result of this shared
commitment and joint efforts, South Dakota students were able to enjoy the benefits of
continuous learning throughout the pandemic.
A COVID Impact Survey administered by the department in May 2021 provides high-level detail
of the school year. Results are preliminary; however, it is remarkable to note that public schools
across the state were able to begin SY 2020-21 largely on time and in person. Of the 679 public
schools that completed the survey, 676 indicated they started school in August or September. Of
those, 92 percent reported that most or all of their students were learning in-person.
Notwithstanding these successes, some of the state’s most at-risk students were not able to
participate in in-person learning. For example, many schools on Indian reservations operated
virtually for much of the school year, in line with tribal ordinances. Further, the department
acknowledges that even where in-person instruction was the predominant mode of instruction,
there were still pockets of students who disengaged and will need support.
Partnerships with stakeholders were a second key to success for South Dakota’s safe return to
school in August 2020. These partnerships among state agencies (Departments of Education,
Health, Social Services, and the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications), local school
districts, and other education groups (School Administrators of South Dakota, Associated School
Boards of South Dakota, South Dakota Education Association, and South Dakota High School
4
Activities Association) were essential to a constant flow of communication that provided local
leaders with the data and information they needed to make decisions based on local conditions
and need. Some of these partner efforts are highlighted below.
• Throughout the pandemic, the Departments of Education and Health held regular
webinars for school superintendents and school nurses. These webinars connected school
leaders directly with the state’s chief health officials, including the State Epidemiologist
and Secretary of Health. The webinars focused on providing the most up-to-date
scientific information regarding the virus, CDC-recommended mitigation strategies,
procedures for contact tracing in schools, testing options available to schools, vaccination
of school personnel, as well as pertinent education questions. These webinars started in
March 2020 and have continued since that time – sometimes daily, sometimes twice
weekly, and now on a weekly and as-needed basis.
• The Departments of Education and Health established a process to track positive COVID
numbers in schools for both staff and students, which was in place at the start of SY
2020-21. These numbers were shared not only with school leaders, but also, in the
aggregate, with the general public (see weekly dashboard). Some school districts also
posted their local case numbers, in the aggregate, on their websites. This transparency,
along with community spread information posted on the Department of Health’s website,
allowed schools and families to make sound decisions based on local conditions.
• The Departments of Education and Health offered a sentinel testing program for K-12
school staff, designed to recognize potential virus spread in the school setting. Shortly
after the start of the school year, the agencies added a rapid testing program aimed at
identifying symptomatic students/staff members with COVID and isolating them from
the school setting as quickly as possible. Both programs involved on-site testing at the
schools, training for those involved in administering the tests, and free courier service
and lab processing.
• The department partnered with the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications to
establish the K-12 Connect program. This effort was aimed at providing broadband
connection to low-income families, so students could continue their learning in a distance
mode if that became necessary (either because of COVID isolation/quarantine or by
family choice).
• The Governor issued executive orders designed to temporarily remove certain
requirements that stood in the way of educators being able to focus on what mattered
most: attending to the needs of their students. For example, one of the executive orders
allowed individuals who were engaged in student-teaching experiences in spring of 2020
to have extra time to complete the experience and still move forward with applying for a
teaching license, in order to keep new teachers flowing into the workforce pipeline.
• Recognizing the tireless efforts of teachers to pivot to remote instruction during spring
2020, the department’s Certification Office allowed teachers to earn continuing education
credit for this work.
5
In sum, the commitment and collaborations exhibited during this unprecedented
year allowed South Dakota to provide continuous learning opportunities – primarily in an in-
person mode of instruction – while simultaneously providing a safe learning environment. On
behalf of students and their families, the department is deeply grateful for these efforts.
2. Overall Priorities: Provide your assessment of the top 2-3 issues currently facing
students and schools across your State as a result of or in response to the COVID-
19 pandemic including, to the extent possible, data illustrating why these are the
most critical and/or most widespread issues facing schools and students.
The most pressing issues facing South Dakota schools and students can be grouped into three
broad categories. These categories were developed based on limited quantitative data currently
available to the department, along with qualitative data gathered through extensive feedback
loops throughout the year, the year-end COVID Impact Survey, and public comment. The
department will continue to review pertinent data routinely and adjust accordingly in order to
support those students most significantly impacted by the pandemic. The three categories are: 1)
supporting strong pedagogy and educational opportunities; 2) addressing students’ social-
emotional and mental health needs; and 3) continuing to address issues of educator recruitment
and retention.
1-Supporting strong pedagogy and educational opportunities
Identifying, engaging with, or re-engaging with students that may have missed out on instruction
and educational opportunities – for a variety of reasons – will be critical in the months ahead.
The department expects these students to run the gamut from pre-school-age youngsters in need
of special supports as they prepare to enter the formal K-12 setting to high school students that
dropped off the radar at some point during the pandemic. State-level spending will focus on
strategies designed to engage and/or re-engage these students and provide strong instruction for
academic attainment for all students based on their individual needs.
At this time, the department has limited data to assist in identifying these students. Input received
via the SEA’s extensive feedback loops indicates stakeholders are concerned about lost
instructional and learning time. An analysis of fall enrollment data reveals several significant
differences between the fall 2020 enrollments and trend predictions: a drop in the number of
students enrolled in Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) schools; a drop in the number of students
with disabilities in public schools; and an increase in the number of students opting out of formal
instruction and receiving “alternative instruction” (i.e., homeschool). According to the data,
alternative instruction enrollments increased by approximately 25 percent, representing the
largest significant difference between enrollments and predictions. Whether this move to
alternative instruction becomes something more permanent has yet to be seen. All of these
differences will require ongoing attention and may be helpful in determining where to target
resources. State assessment data is not yet available.
2-Addressing students’ social-emotional and mental health needs
Experience tells us that the pandemic is having repercussions far beyond physical health. The
less tangible, but very real, social-emotional impacts of the pandemic – fear, isolation, stress –
have taken a toll on educators, school staff, students, and families. Student mental health and
6
well-being is an area where the department is partnering with other state agencies to impact
positive change. COVID funding available will allow South Dakota to make strides in supporting
students’ needs in a more holistic manner. One partnership between the SEA and the Department
of Social Services will focus on providing access to mental health services, via technology, to
youth in remote areas of the state where access would not otherwise be possible. Other
strategies will include training opportunities for school administrators and educators related
to trauma-informed care and youth mental health, making data more accessible (and therefore
actionable) for administrators, and providing South Dakota-specific toolkits and resources from
which school leaders can draw to meet their students’ needs.
3-Continuing to address issues of educator recruitment and retention
Within the last six years, South Dakota has taken proactive steps to address educator recruitment
and retention challenges. The pandemic likely will exacerbate some of those challenges;
therefore, understanding the pandemic’s true impact on the education workforce will be
paramount. That understanding will drive innovative strategies that will target both traditional
students coming out of teacher preparation programs and individuals interested in entering the
teaching field through an alternative pathway. The department expects strategies in this area to
build upon existing efforts established in 2016 with passage of historic legislation (i.e., Blue
Ribbon Task Force on Teachers and Students). That legislation resulted in a half-cent sales
tax with revenues going to the state’s school funding formula – specifically, to support raising
teacher salaries statewide. In related recruitment/retention efforts, the department developed a
statewide mentoring program for first- and second-year teachers; facilitated entry into the
teaching profession through alternative certification routes; partnered with School
Administrators of South Dakota to mentor new principals; and partnered with Black Hills State
University to offer two cohorts of paraprofessionals working in high-needs schools the
opportunity to earn a teaching degree and certification.
3. Identifying Needs of Underserved Students: Describe your State’s 2-3 highest
priority academic, social, emotional, and/or mental health needs for the remainder
of the 2020-2021 school year (if applicable) and for the 2021-2022 school year
related to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on each of the following student
groups:
i. Students from low-income families,
ii. Students from each racial or ethnic group (e.g., identifying
disparities and focusing on underserved student groups by race or
ethnicity),
iii. Gender (e.g., identifying disparities and focusing on underserved
student groups by gender),
iv. English learners,
v. Children with disabilities (including infants, toddlers, children, and
youth with disabilities eligible under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (“IDEA”)),
vi. Students experiencing homelessness,
vii. Children and youth in foster care,
viii. Migratory students, and
7
ix. Other groups disproportionately impacted by the pandemic that have
been identified by the SEA (e.g., youth involved in the criminal
justice system, students who have missed the most in-person
instruction during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years,
students who did not consistently participate in remote instruction
when offered during school building closures, and LGBTQ+
students).
To the extent possible, this description should include data on indicators such as
estimates of the academic impact of lost instructional time, 1 chronic
absenteeism, student engagement, and social-emotional well-being.
The department’s two highest priority needs related to the impact of the COVID pandemic on the
groups listed above are: (1) accessible mental health services and (2) targeted interventions to
address disengagement and lost instructional time. These needs have emerged through extensive
feedback loops referenced earlier and a focus group with stakeholders representing the student
groups detailed above. These needs also were echoed throughout the public comment leading up
to the development of the South Dakota ARP ESSER State Plan. As quantitative data becomes
available (e.g., state assessment results, NWEA MAP data), the SEA will use this information to
target strategies to support all students, especially those most impacted by the pandemic.
In the focus group discussion referenced above, participants noted increases in behavioral issues,
including increases in aggression and misbehavior among at-risk students returning to in-person
instruction after remote or virtual learning. They also expressed concern for certain students who
experienced abuse and other forms of trauma while learning from home. Finally, participants
expressed concern for English learners and students with disabilities, who they say have
struggled increasingly with feelings of isolation, anxiety and stress during the pandemic.
This regression will be paramount for the department to address moving forward, in particular
given the historical lack of school counselors, school psychologists and other school-based
mental health providers throughout the state.
In addition to mental health, there is concern among stakeholders that students in underserved
groups have exhibited a lack of student engagement and could be significantly impacted by lost
instructional time. Students that opted for online education, or who attended districts that did not
offer in-person instruction for the majority of the year, were often part of one or more of the
underserved student groups listed above and may not have had the support they needed to meet
standards. Students attending schools on Indian reservations have been particularly impacted.
Many of these schools were online-only during the pandemic, and many of these students did not
respond to online education. Disengagement is expected to be high among this group, including
among students learning in-person due to competing priorities for teachers.
On the year-end COVID Impact Survey, 50 percent of public schools indicated that less than half
of their English learner (EL) students stayed caught-up while virtual learning. More than 30
percent of schools with EL students learning remotely indicated that less than half of their
English learner students stayed caught-up while remote learning. Language barriers led to a lack
1
For the purposes of the plan, “academic impact of lost instructional time” refers to “learning loss” experienced by
students as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, as referenced in the ARP Act and the CRRSA Act.
8
of parental involvement for these students, further compounding learning gaps for English
learners. Of the schools that offered special education services virtually or remotely, 6 percent
said there were services they were unable to provide students with disabilities.
(For clarification, virtual learning, as referenced in the paragraph above, is a long-term distance
learning arrangement that utilizes either the South Dakota Virtual School or an online curriculum
purchased specifically for learners participating in this method. Remote learning is a short- or
long-term distance learning arrangement that utilizes a school district’s curriculum materials.)
4. Understanding the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Describe how the SEA
will support its LEAs in identifying the extent of the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic on student learning and student well-being, including identifying the
groups of students most impacted by the pandemic. Where possible, please
identify the data sources the SEA will suggest its LEAs use in thoughtfully
diagnosing areas of need, including data on the academic, social, emotional, and
mental health impacts of lost instructional time.
South Dakota school districts’ most effective strategy in mitigating the effects of COVID was
reopening schools for in-person instruction in August 2020. This commitment has allowed most
schools an entire school year of in-person learning to diagnose, identify needs and remedy lost
instruction time from spring 2020. Most schools have chosen to identify academic needs through
instructional tools, benchmark assessments, and data available to them both locally and through
the state’s longitudinal data system, SD-STARS. As of the writing of this State Plan, there is
limited state-level data available. As a clearer picture emerges through resources such as the
year-end COVID Impact Survey, public comment leading up to this plan, state assessment data
and other sources, the department will be able to make conclusions about COVID-related
impacts and the types of supports needed to address specific challenges.
The department also has key, comprehensive needs assessment tools in place to help districts
holistically examine their local operations, diagnose root causes of issues, and identify solutions.
These are the South Dakota Comprehensive Needs Assessment, the Career and Technical
Education Comprehensive Local Needs Assessment, and the IDEA Results Driven
Accountability. All three were designed to work in concert to help a school district pinpoint areas
of need. These tools will be invaluable to districts as they pursue strategies moving forward to
understand and meet the needs of their students.
Finally, the department will further aid districts in identifying COVID impacts by providing
increased access to mental health tools that allow education leaders to meet the needs of their
students effectively.
5. School Operating Status: It is essential to have data on how students are learning
in order to support the goals of access and equity, especially for student groups
that have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Describe
the current status of data collection on operational status and mode of instruction
of all schools in your State. This description must include:
9
i. A description of to what extent, and how frequently, the State
collects now and will collect in the future data for all schools in your
State on:
a. Mode of instruction: The number of schools in your State that are
offering fully remote or online-only instruction; both
remote/online and in-person instruction (hybrid model); and/or
full-time in-person instruction;
b. Enrollment: Student enrollment for all students and
disaggregated for each of the student groups described in A.3.i-
viii for each mode of instruction; and
c. Attendance: Student attendance for all students and
disaggregated for each of the student groups described in A.3.i-
viii for each mode of instruction.
The department purposefully chose not to collect mode of instruction data during the 2020-21
school year for two reasons. First, the SEA had asked schools to commit to providing in-person
instruction, to the fullest extent possible, and wanted school leaders, teachers and staff to
concentrate their time and efforts on that priority. Second, the state-provided student
management system was not set up to track mode of instruction. Therefore, the department chose
to issue one comprehensive survey to all accredited schools at the end of the school year. This
year-end COVID Impact Survey included questions on school participation in each mode of
instruction.
The department annually collects student enrollment data for all students and disaggregated by
subgroup on the last Friday in September. The department also conducts a December Child
Count, which is an unduplicated count of all children with disabilities receiving special education
and related services according to an individualized education program. These annual collections
will continue to occur moving forward.
The department collects student attendance data for all students and disaggregated by subgroup
through the state’s student information management system. LEAs have until the second Friday
of June each year to submit this data. This annual collection will continue to occur moving
forward.
At the state level, the student information system does not have the ability to disaggregate
student enrollment or attendance data by mode of instruction. The department is currently
exploring options for capturing the data described above by mode of instruction.
Moving forward, the department will continue to examine its data collections and what emerging
needs may arise and are practicable.
ii. The data described in A.5.i.a. and b. using the template in Appendix
A (and to the extent available, the data described in A.5.i.c.) for the
most recent time period available. Please note that this data can be
submitted separately within 14 calendar days after a State submits
this plan. The SEA must also make this data publicly available on its
10
website as soon as possible but no later than June 21, 2021, and
regularly provide updated available information on its website. The
Department will periodically review data listed in A.5.i on SEA
websites.
The data in Appendix A will be made publicly available on the department’s website in
accordance with the timeline above. As noted above, the department is currently exploring
options for updating this data. However, as noted elsewhere, the majority of South Dakota’s
schools were open for in-person instruction in August 2020 and remained so throughout the year.
Therefore, the extent to which continuing to collect this data in subsequent school years, and to
add a disaggregation by subgroup, is not practicable nor actionable.
iii. To the extent available, a description of the planned operational
status and mode of instruction for the State and its LEAs for Summer
2021 and for the 2021-2022 school year.
In South Dakota, most schools have been open the entire school year with students learning in-
person, and the department expects this to continue in school year 2021-22. As previously noted,
schools on Indian reservations were those that operated virtually for much of the school year, in
line with tribal ordinances. According to the year-end COVID Impact Survey described above,
54 percent of schools indicated they would operate in-person summer school during summer
2021. For a more extensive discussion of summer 2021 programming, please see below.
B. Safely Reopening Schools and Sustaining their Safe Operations
The Department recognizes that safely reopening schools and sustaining their safe operations
to maximize in-person instruction is essential for student learning and student well-being,
and especially for being able to address the educational inequities that have been worsened
by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this section, SEAs will describe how they will support their
LEAs in this vital area.
1. Support for LEAs: Describe how the SEA will support its LEAs in safely
returning to in-person instruction and sustaining the safe operation of schools.
This description must include:
i. How the SEA will support its LEAs implementing, to the greatest
extent practicable, prevention and mitigation policies in line with the
most up-to-date guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (“CDC”) for the reopening and operation of school
facilities to effectively maintain the health and safety of students,
educators, and other staff;
A vast majority of South Dakota schools opened their doors largely on time and in an in-person
learning mode for the 2020-21 school year. The SEA supported this effort through the
partnerships, resources and technical assistance described throughout this application. The
department’s efforts to support LEAs will continue into summer 2021, SY 2021-22 and beyond.
The department’s goal for SY 2021-22 is similar to last year: provide local leaders with the data,
11
resources and technical assistance they need to make sound decisions based on the needs of their
students, local conditions and the most up-to-date science.
NOTE: In the table below, DOE is the South Dakota Department of Education and DOH is the
South Dakota Department of Health.
Table B1.
Mitigation strategy SEA response
Universal and correct wearing of masks DOE and DOH provided
guidance in line with CDC
recommendations to all
schools regarding the use of
masks in school settings.
Physical distancing (e.g., including use DOE and DOH provided
of cohorts/podding) guidance in line with CDC
recommendations to all
schools regarding the use of
physical distancing in
school settings.
Handwashing and respiratory etiquette DOE and DOH provided
guidance in line with CDC
recommendations to all
schools regarding the use of
handwashing and
respiratory etiquette in
school settings.
Cleaning and maintaining healthy DOE and DOH provided
facilities, including improving guidance in line with
ventilation CDC recommendations to
all schools regarding proper
cleaning and healthy
facilities in school
settings. DOE also
provided school
administrators research on
air quality standards in
learning environment to
mitigate virus spread.
Contact tracing in combination with DOE and DOH provided
isolation and quarantine, in collaboration guidance in line with CDC
with the State, local, territorial, or Tribal recommendations to all
health departments schools regarding contact
tracing, isolation and
quarantine. Additionally,
DOE and DOH set up
protocols specific to
schools to get information
to school leaders faster, in
12
Mitigation strategy SEA response
order to facilitate timely
isolation and quarantine.
These protocols included a
special system for schools
to confirm positive cases
within the school setting
and support teams in both
agencies available to
quickly provide
information and answer
questions about current
guidance around isolation
and quarantine.
Diagnostic and screening testing DOE and DOH provided
guidance in line with CDC
recommendations related to
testing. DOE and DOH
operated and funded both a
voluntary sentinel/
screening testing program
and a voluntary diagnostic
testing program.
Efforts to provide vaccinations to DOE and DOH provided
educators, other staff, and students, if guidance in line with CDC
eligible recommendations and
prioritized school
nurses, educators and
school staff on the state’s
vaccination schedule.
Appropriate accommodations for DOE created specific
children with disabilities with respect to guidance for LEAs on the
the health and safety policies topic of addressing the
special needs of students
with disabilities.
ii. Any Statewide plans, policies, estimated timelines, and specific
milestones related to reopening and operation of school facilities,
including any mechanisms the SEA will use to track, monitor, or
enforce their implementation;
The department’s Starting Well 2020 guidance, created in conjunction with educators from
across the state, provided the guiding principles for the reopening and safe operation of school
facilities at the start of the 2020-21 school year. The commitment to safe, in-person
instruction outlined in that guidance was adopted by a great majority of schools.
Throughout the course of the year, the department had numerous touchpoints with school leaders
to understand, and monitor, local conditions and concerns. One of the primary monitoring tools
came in the form of a feedback loop established early in the school year. The department’s
13
Leadership Team divided all the state’s accredited schools into seven regions, with each
Leadership Team member assigned as a direct point of contact for school leaders. Leadership
Team members were available 24/7 and also had direct access to counterparts at the state
Department of Health (DOH). Together, the staff at the two agencies were able to quickly
provide technical assistance and answer school leaders’ pressing questions. The regular webinars
for school leaders and school nurses, described previously, served as another regular and
ongoing monitoring mechanism.
Additionally, the department posted relevant information from these webinars and kept a
continuously updated “Frequently Asked Questions” document, with answers sourced from the
department and DOH leaders, on the department’s COVID response page to ensure school
leaders had the answers they needed, whenever they needed them.
A final monitoring mechanism was a year-end COVID Impact Survey administered in May
2021. At the start of the 2020-21 school year, the department made a conscious decision not to
burden schools with additional reporting requirements this year. This decision allowed school
personnel to concentrate on teaching, learning, and supporting students and families in a holistic
way during the pandemic. Data from the year-end survey will be made available on the
department’s website.
iii. To what extent the SEA and its LEAs consult with Federal, State,
and local health officials. This description should include, if
available, whether the SEA and its LEAs have received support for
screening testing from their State or local health department based
on funding awarded by the CDC; and
As previously described, the department worked hand-in-hand with state health officials to
support school districts throughout the 2020-21 school year. That support included two voluntary
testing programs, operated and funded through the Department of Health (DOH) and its federal
funding. The testing programs included a sentinel testing program, which provided COVID
testing for asymptomatic adults in the school setting, and a diagnostic testing program, which
provided rapid testing for symptomatic students and staff in the school setting. These programs
were crucial to understanding, and reporting publicly, spread within school communities.
The two agencies are currently working on testing options for SY 2021-22 and plan to offer both
screening testing and diagnostic testing options, paid for through the state DOH’s funding.
iv. Any guidance, professional learning, and technical assistance
opportunities the SEA will make available to its LEAs.
Since March 2020, the department has regularly provided guidance, professional learning and
technical assistance to its LEAs. As described in A-1, the department partnered extensively with
the Department of Health to provide guidance and technical assistance specific to CDC
recommendations, appropriate mitigation strategies, etc. The two agencies provided extensive
training and near-daily technical assistance related to the state-provided sentinel testing and rapid
14
testing programs. In addition, the department provided specialized opportunities in summer 2020
and throughout the year for professional learning to specific groups of educators and school
personnel, including curriculum directors, special education directors, teachers, teachers of
English learners, school librarians, school counselors, and school food service directors. The
department produced numerous topic-specific guidance documents that are posted on the
Starting Well 2020 webpage.
2. Safe Return to In-Person Instruction and Continuity of Services Plans: Describe
how the SEA will ensure that its LEAs that receive ARP ESSER funds meet the
requirements in section 2001(i) of the ARP Act and the requirements relating to
the ARP ESSER funds published in the Federal Register and available at
https://oese.ed.gov/offices/american-rescue-plan/american-rescue-plan-
elementary-and-secondary-school-emergency-relief/ (ARP ESSER requirements)
to either: (a) within 30 days of receipt of the funds, develop and make publicly
available on the LEA’s website a plan for the safe return to in-person instruction
and continuity of services, or (b) have developed and made publicly available on
the LEA’s website such a plan that meets statutory requirements before the
enactment of the ARP Act, including:
i. How the SEA will ensure that each LEA plan includes, or will be
modified to include, the extent to which it has adopted policies and a
description of any such policies on each of the strategies listed in
table B1;
ii. How the SEA will ensure that each LEA plan describes how it will
ensure continuity of services including but not limited to services to
address the students’ academic needs, and students’ and staff social,
emotional, mental health, and other needs, which may include
student health and food services;
iii. How the SEA will ensure that the LEA periodically reviews, no less
frequently than every six months for the duration of the ARP ESSER
grant period (i.e., through September 30, 2023), 2 and revises as
appropriate, its plan, and how the SEA will ensure that the LEA
seeks public input, and takes such input into account on (1) whether
revisions are necessary and, if so, (2) the revisions to the plan; and
iv. Describe, to the extent the SEA collects it, information about LEA
implementation, to the greatest extent practicable, of each element of
the most up-to-date CDC guidance listed in table B1 and its LEAs’
needs for support and technical assistance to implement strategies
consistent, to the greatest extent practicable, with relevant CDC
guidance.
The department is ensuring compliance with the components above through a series of signed
assurances and compliance checks. The first assurance, which was due in May 2021, outlined
2
ARP ESSER funds are subject to the Tydings amendment in section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions
Act, 20 U.S.C. 1225(b), and are therefore available to SEAs and LEAs for obligation through September 30, 2024.
Review and revisions of these plans, if necessary, are not required during the Tydings period.
15
either: (1) that an LEA had a reopening plan that was subject to public comment and posted on
the LEA website, and that by the department’s required deadline of Aug. 20, 2021, the LEA
would revise its plan to come into compliance with the elements required by the interim final
rule; or (2) that if the LEA did not have a reopening plan prior to March 11, 2021, that was
subject to public comment and posted on the LEA’s website, that it would come into full
compliance with all elements required by the interim final rule by June 23, 2021.
In order to ensure that LEA plans include the information necessary (strategies listed in table B1
and the continuity of services as laid out in the interim final rule), the department provided a
checklist for LEAs outlining each component. That checklist also included items such as
required public comment and revision timelines, and how the department would ensure
compliance.
The department will collect LEA assurances at several checkpoints throughout the ARP
timeframe: August 2021, December 2021, June 2022, December 2022, and June 2023.
Department staff will check LEA plans periodically in accordance with these timeframes and/or
as LEA requests and amendments for ARP ESSER funding come to the department.
For 2020-21, the department purposefully chose to wait until the end of the school year to collect
data on LEA implementation of CDC-recommended mitigation strategies. As previously
mentioned, this decision was made to allow school leaders to focus on their most important
work: providing safe environments for student learning to occur and caring for kids. That said,
preliminary data from the year-end COVID Impact Survey indicates that schools implemented a
variety of mitigation strategies to prevent virus spread within their buildings. For example, more
than 60 percent implemented some manner of physical distancing; nearly 90 percent taught and
reinforced hand washing and use of hand sanitizer; 43 percent required masks; and 77 percent
worked with state, local, or tribal health departments to facilitate contact tracing and case
investigation. As it did throughout the 2020-21 school year, the department will keep in place
strategies for support of and technical assistance to LEAs in implementing CDC guidelines for
2021-22. This includes department staff dedicated as liaisons between LEAs and the state’s
Department of Health, statewide webinar and collaboration opportunities with senior state health
officials, and frequent dissemination of information and resources on current mitigation
strategies and recommendations.
C. Planning for the Use and Coordination of ARP ESSER Funds
The Department recognizes that seeking input from diverse stakeholders is essential to
developing plans for the use of ARP ESSER funds that are responsive to the needs of
students, families, and educators. In this section, SEAs will describe their plans for
consultation and for coordinating the use of ARP ESSER funds with other resources to meet
the needs of students.
1. SEA Consultation: Consistent with the ARP ESSER requirements, describe how
the SEA engaged in meaningful consultation with stakeholders, and incorporated
input into its plan, including, but not limited to:
i. students;
ii. families;
16
iii. Tribes (if applicable);
iv. civil rights organizations (including disability rights organizations);
v. school and district administrators (including special education
administrators);
vi. superintendents;
vii. charter school leaders (if applicable);
viii. teachers, principals, school leaders, other educators, school staff, and
their unions; and
ix. stakeholders representing the interests of children with disabilities,
English learners, children experiencing homelessness, children and
youth in foster care, migratory students, children who are
incarcerated, and other underserved students.
The description must include how the SEA provided the public the opportunity to
provide input in the development of the plan, a summary of the input (including
any letters of support), and how the SEA took such input into account.
When it comes to COVID-19 issues, the department has approached consultation as an ongoing
process of engagement with stakeholders.
The initial phase of engagement started in March 2020 and continued throughout the 2020-21
school year – encompassing continuous efforts to identify, understand and respond to the needs
of all students and their families, including underserved students. The department hosted regular
opportunities for information sharing and feedback, and in turn, staff participated in
opportunities hosted by stakeholder groups. Depending on the topic, events were attended by
superintendents, principals, school nurses, special education directors, teachers of English
learners, tribal educators, parents, and representatives of professional organizations such as the
South Dakota Education Association, School Administrators of South Dakota, and Associated
School Boards of South Dakota. Early on in the pandemic, the department also partnered with
Disability Rights South Dakota and South Dakota Parent Connection to take steps to ensure
students with disabilities would continue to receive services.
The conversations had through these feedback loops were foundational to development of the
ARP ESSER State Plan and will continue to inform the details of state spending priorities
moving forward.
Building on this foundation, the next phase of engagement was a formal opportunity to provide
input into the development of the ARP ESSER State Plan. To cast this wider net, the department
offered an official public comment period, May 6-24, 2021. A survey was developed and
disseminated to the stakeholder groups listed below.
Students
Jobs for America’s Graduates-South Dakota
Career and Technical Student Organizations
South Dakota Student Council Association
17
Transition Liaison Project (Youth Leadership Forum)
Justice-involved youth (through Department of Corrections)
Families
South Dakota Advisory Panel on Children with Disabilities
South Dakota Parent Connection
Statewide Family Engagement Center
South Dakota PTA
Tribes
Indian Education Advisory Council
Great Plains Tribal Education Directors
Civil Rights Organizations
Disability Rights South Dakota
School Personnel
Superintendents
Curriculum directors
Special education directors
Principals
Teachers (English learners, career and technical education, math, science, English language arts,
social studies, fine arts, music, award-winning)
Counselors
Other school staff, including paraprofessionals
Educational cooperative directors
Professional Organizations
South Dakota Education Association (teachers union)
School Administrators of South Dakota
Associated School Boards of South Dakota
South Dakota Association of School Psychologists
South Dakota Speech-Language-Hearing Association
21st Century Community Learning Centers
South Dakota Afterschool Network
South Dakota School Age Care Alliance
House and Senate Education Committee Chairs
Stakeholders Representing Underserved Students
Developmental Disabilities Council
South Dakota School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
South Dakota School for the Deaf
Title Programs contacts (representing foster care, homeless, migrant youth)
Department of Corrections (justice-involved youth)
Department of Tribal Relations
18
The survey asked respondents what they saw as the most pressing needs currently facing students
and schools in their area; what lessons could be learned from the experience of the COVID
pandemic to improve the K-12 education system; and what they saw as spending priorities for
the state’s ARP ESSER funds. In response, the department received 263 completed comments.
Respondents encompassed most of the groups noted above.
To better understand the needs of underserved populations, the department also hosted a focus
group with participants who work directly with some of the state’s most underserved students,
including English learners, students with disabilities and Native American students.
Finally, the public had opportunity to offer input into the development of the ARP ESSER State
Plan at the state Board of Education Standards meeting in May 2021.
The official public comment largely mirrored what the department had heard through the
ongoing conversations with stakeholders. Stakeholders identified several clear priorities for
moving forward: student mental health issues and the capacity to address them; student
disengagement and lost instructional time; and the impact of the pandemic on the educator
workforce. Many stakeholders also expressed interest in updating school facilities to create
healthier learning environments. These issues – minus school facilities – are reflected as state
priorities as outlined in this plan (see A-2 and A-3 in this document).
Consultation with stakeholders will continue as the department reviews data and makes decisions
about state-level ARP ESSER spending priorities. To that end, the next phase of engagement
includes plans for an August summit to dive deeply into the topics of student engagement and
learning loss; the role of summer school, afterschool and community-based organizations in
supporting students; and educator recruitment and retention. Critical to these conversations will
be stakeholders who represent the interests of underserved student populations such as educators
who work with underserved populations; those involved in the juvenile justice system; and
community- and faith-based organizations that serve these youth and their families.
19
2. Coordinating Funds: Describe to what extent the SEA has and will coordinate
Federal COVID-19 pandemic funding and other Federal funding. This description
must include:
i. How the SEA and its LEAs 1) are using or have used prior to the
submission of this plan and 2) plan to use following submission of
this plan, Federal COVID-19 funding under the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act and the CRRSA Act
to support a safe return to and safely maximize in-person instruction,
sustain these operations safely, and address the disproportionate
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individual student groups
(including students from low-income families, children with
disabilities, English learners, racial or ethnic minorities, students
experiencing homelessness, children and youth in foster care, and
migratory students);
As previously indicated, a vast majority of South Dakota schools were able to provide safe, in-
person instruction throughout the 2020-21 school year. Dollars provided through federal COVID
funding supported LEAs in their re-opening efforts this year and will be used to support
continuous operation during the 2021-22 school year and beyond.
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, Economic Security (CARES) Act
Under the CARES Act, the department awarded $41.3 million to public school districts for
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER I). Schools used these funds to
address the impact of coronavirus on their students, staff and daily operations, including
implementing mitigation strategies, providing for continuous learning opportunities, and
developing and implementing plans for return to school in August 2020. Also, under CARES Act
funding, the State of South of Dakota, via the department, distributed an additional $72 million,
or $500 per student, of Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) to public, private and non-accredited
schools. These funds were used as an administrative convenience for schools responding to
COVID. Some of these funds also went to educational cooperatives in the state that serve public
school districts.
In the technology realm, the department used CRF dollars to establish the K-12 Connect
program in partnership with the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications and local
telecommunication providers around the state. Through this program, the state was able to give
internet access to families who qualified for the free and reduced-price meals program under the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. With this service, students were able to participate in online
instruction and coursework when they were at learning at home. In addition, CRF funds were
used to purchase Zoom licenses, at a highly discounted rate, for teachers and administrators. This
opportunity was made available to all public schools in the state and facilitated continuous
instruction and communication between educators and their students.
GEER I funds have been dedicated to the UpSkill Program, a collaboration between the state’s
Board of Technical Education and the Department of Labor. This program allows
impacted South Dakotans the opportunity to earn certificates from the state’s technical colleges
20
at little or no cost. Additionally, GEER I funds have been obligated to educational cooperatives
to provide Birth to 5 services and to afterschool programs to enhance learning opportunities
for youngsters that have experienced learning loss due to the pandemic. These programs all
combine under the theme of addressing the needs of some of the state’s most vulnerable and
most impacted citizens.
Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act
Under the CRRSA Act, the department has awarded more than $169 million ESSER II funds to
all public schools in the state. LEAs are using this second round of ESSER funding for a variety
of activities, including benchmark assessments to determine where students are at in their
learning; strategies to address learning loss; technology purchases; purchases to address
mitigation; and upgrades to improve air quality in school buildings.
More than $7.5 million of Emergency Assistance to Non-Public Schools (EANS) funds will be
provided to non-public schools to provide services or assistance designed to address educational
disruptions cause by COVID.
Planning for GEER II funds is under way.
ii. To what extent ESSER I and ESSER II funds have been awarded to
LEAs and, if funds have not yet been made available to LEAs, when
they will be. In addition, please provide any available information on
the total dollar amounts of ESSER I and ESSER II funds that have
been obligated but not expended by the SEA and its LEAs, including
whether the SEA is able to track LEA obligations.
The department has awarded 99.5 percent of both ESSER I and ESSER II to LEAs in the state.
The LEAs have obligated $41,088,754 and expended $24,447,798 in ESSER I funds. The LEAs
have obligated $153,089,516 and expended $157,980 in ESSER II funds. The department tracks
the LEA obligations in monthly financial reports.
iii. In supporting LEAs as they plan for the safe return to and continuity
of in-person instruction and for meeting the academic, social,
emotional, and mental health needs of students resulting from the
COVID-19 pandemic, the extent to which the SEA is also using
other Federal funding sources including but not limited to under the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (“ESEA”), IDEA,
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (“WIOA”), funding for
child nutrition services, and McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance
Act, and the funds to support the needs of students experiencing
homelessness provided by section 2001(b)(1) of the ARP Act. 3
3
Please note that the needs of students experiencing homelessness must be addressed (along with the other groups
disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic) through the use of the ARP ESSER SEA reservations and
the required LEA reservation for the academic impact of lost instructional time; the funding provided to support the
needs of students experiencing homelessness by section 2001(b)(1) of the ARP Act is in addition to the supports and
services provided with ARP ESSER funds.
21
The department has relied on strong partnerships with other state agencies throughout the
COVID pandemic to provide support and technical assistance to schools. The partnership with
the Department of Health (DOH) is a prime example. During the 2020-21 school year, DOH
provided rapid and sentinel testing at no cost, including testing materials, courier services and lab
processing, to all interested schools. Those efforts will continue into the 2021-22 school year
with support to provide rapid testing and screening testing in schools. Funding provided via the
U.S. Department of Agriculture was critical in keeping school meal programs operating – and
serving entire families, not just students – throughout the pandemic. From March of 2020 to
March of 2021, nearly 12.9 million lunches were served by public, non-public and Bureau of
Indian Education schools across the state. And in the months ahead, the department will partner
with the Department of Social Services, with its various resources, to address challenges around
providing mental health services to students in rural and isolated areas.
Regarding education-specific funding, the department is coordinating existing Title II funds to
provide professional development opportunities to assist teachers in identifying supports for
students that are not on track to be proficient in accordance with our statewide aspirations.
Additionally, the department will use some of its state assessment funds to provide supports for
assessment literacy – specifically formative assessments and how they can be used to understand
student progress towards standards mastery. In the area of special education, the department will
continue to support multi-tiered systems of support and improved literacy through the State
Systematic Improvement Plan (SSIP).
D. Maximizing State-Level Funds to Support Students
The Department recognizes that States have an extraordinary opportunity to address the
disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on underserved students through the
ARP Act’s required State set-asides to address the academic impact of lost instructional time,
provide summer learning and enrichment programs, and provide comprehensive afterschool
programs. In this section, SEAs will describe their evidence-based strategies for these
resources.
1. Academic Impact of Lost Instructional Time: Describe how the SEA will use the
funds it reserves under section 2001(f)(1) of the ARP Act (totaling not less than 5
percent of the State’s total allocation of ARP ESSER funds) on evidence-based
interventions to address the academic impact of lost instructional time by
supporting the implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as summer
learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive afterschool
programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that such interventions
respond to students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs. The
description must include:
i. A description of the evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing
intensive or high-dosage tutoring, accelerating learning) the SEA has
selected, and the extent to which the SEA will evaluate the impact of
those interventions on an ongoing basis to understand if they are
working;
22
Because South Dakota was primarily open for in-person instruction throughout the 2020-21
school year, the pandemic’s impact through lost instructional time was dampened in comparison
with other states. Interim assessment data, summative accountability results, ACT participation
and scores, and anecdotal information collected from extensive district-level input all support
that conclusion – that the impacts, while real, were less severe than other states experienced.
Also, because most schools were open for instruction, schools began addressing any impact of
two months of remote instruction in the spring of 2020 when they reopened in fall 2020. Even
so, the department is fully aware that the full impact of COVID’s educational disruption will take
years to emerge and thus to mitigate. Some of those longer-term effects, if left unattended, could
include lower readiness for postsecondary education and for meaningful contributions to the
state’s workforce. As a state, we may face the reality of a less-qualified workforce in ten years
and beyond if we do not act with effective and proven strategies now. The department is fully
cognizant of the challenge before us and has worked diligently to reverse this trend.
Throughout the department’s analysis, a particular concern is those students, or pockets of
students, that were not engaged in instruction either in spring 2020 or into the subsequent school
years, in addition to students attending schools that remained closed through the majority of the
2020-21 school year. Because of those extended closures, little reliable data, other than the
absence of informative data, is available regarding these vulnerable students.
During the summer of 2021, school districts and community-based organizations led the effort at
the local level to provide summer programming, since they have first-hand knowledge of student
needs. Ninety public school districts – 60% – offered summer school, a significant strategy to
close any COVID gaps. Additionally, over the summer, the department took the necessary steps
to build a data collection around both summer and afterschool programming, a feature that was
not part of the existing data collection. All public school districts are currently reporting student
enrollment in afterschool programs, which began with the 2021-22 school year and continued
with the same data for summer school in summer 2022, and moving forward. This will provide a
more reliable data set for analysis than was previously available.
As it considered use of its reserve funds, the department focused on selecting meaningful,
evidence-based interventions that have positive, long-term impact on students’ academic, social,
emotional, and mental health needs. In concert with the priorities identified at the beginning of
this plan, the department has identified more specific categories of funding for interventions to
address learning loss and re-engage students. Additionally, the department’s strategy for state-
level efforts is to come along side and either complement district-level work or provide
programming and services districts are unable to provide. This strategy keeps the state’s efforts
rooted at the local level, where educators are best able to identify those individual students most
impacted by the pandemic and lost instructional times.
• Promoting the importance of regular school attendance. As identified in the
department’s 2021 COVID Impact Report, the percent of students chronically absent
(missing 30 or more days of instruction) jumped from 3.8% in 2018-19SY to 6.4% in
2020-21SY. Numerous studies identify connections between chronic absenteeism and its
adverse effects on student learning. Given the increase in chronic absenteeism, the
23
department created a public awareness campaign aimed at promoting consistent school
attendance. The campaign targets certain geographic areas as well as specific
populations, in line with the trends identified in the absenteeism data from school year
2020-21. These targeted efforts are ensuring reach among those most impacted by lost
instructional time – both geographically and within certain identified subgroups. The
message of the campaign, both in English and Spanish, reminds students that they skip
their future (and potential lifetime earnings) when they skip school. The campaign
debuted in the fall of 2021 as schools were starting up for the year. Future iterations of
the awareness campaign will build on the messaging of the importance of regular school
attendance to a student’s future.
• Building literacy statewide. The department is developing a comprehensive literacy
plan to bring clarity and consistency to South Dakota’s literacy instruction and related
interventions for reading, writing, listening, and speaking. The plan will include a state
definition and shared approach to literacy; outline evidence and research-based strategies,
including current successful initiatives; and a process for the state to flexibly engage with
districts on their implementation. To develop the literacy plan, the department is
engaging stakeholders to advise on key components, especially on structuring literacy
supports to meet the needs of learners across all grades and districts. The department
understands that students receiving special education services, as well as our youngest
learners, high school students, and those students from low-income backgrounds, are
among the groups most affected by the pandemic. Therefore, this strategy targets efforts
for participation by students identified in these groups, ensures implementation remains
rooted at the individual level, and will provide robust educator training for quality
instructional practices.
• Engaging middle and high school students. Using absenteeism rates as a measure of
the pandemic’s effects, high school students were disproportionately impacted. Through
its partner agencies, the department also has evidence of increased demand for high
school equivalency testing, which also points to lost instructional time and
disengagement with the school system. Additionally, district-level information (based on
stakeholder conversations and interventions in LEA-level ESSER spending plans)
indicates middle school students disengaged at high rates during the pandemic.
Engagement in their learning and connection to the world outside of the school building
are effective means of getting students excited about learning and preparing for their
futures. This work will provide more access for middle and high school students to high
quality career and technical education as well as provide quality Career and Technical
Student Organization (CTSO) experiences for students. The department is contracting
with experts to improve work-based learning experiences and materials – for educators,
students, and industry – that will enhance the ability of students, in particular those
belonging to underserved populations most acutely affected by the pandemic, to explore
the world of work through laddered work-based learning. In these efforts, the state will
also expand the proven engagement and drop-out prevention program, Jobs for America’s
Graduates, through contracted work to expand state capacity to support the program and
start-up grants directly to schools. This program has been especially effective for students
identifying as Native American, one of the subgroups most impacted by the pandemic
24
and related school closures. Targeted supports for FAFSA completion and postsecondary
enrollment are being developed, including a renewed campaign about postsecondary
options within the state. As a result, students will have increased access to work-based
learning opportunities, programs that encourage student engagement, and tools to help
them make decisions about their future – all of which are proven to support students in
successfully completing high school and transitioning into adulthood. Finally, the
department is working with experts in the field to survey the extent of and reasons for
student disengagement, particular among 16- and 17-year old learners. This study will
better inform state-level efforts to employ practices targeting this very specific population
experiencing lost instructional time and disengagement from their learning.
• Mitigating learning loss. Knowing that educators, and parents and guardians, may need
support in meeting students’ individualized learning needs, the department is launching a
statewide, online tutoring service. This effort is a partnership with the state’s university
system. It will be aimed at specific geographic areas of high absenteeism, as well as
student groups that experienced high absenteeism and therefore significant lost
instructional time. The department will also consider the state’s summative assessment
data to determine those districts low in growth and academic performance as possible
additional options for geographic targeting for academic supports outside the school day.
Additionally, the department is partnering with education professionals in the state to
launch a K-5 STEM education initiative including statewide efforts to increase the
capacity for computer science instruction in schools. The department knows that STEM
education engages students and prepares them for future career paths. This initiative also
dovetails with the state’s workforce needs as it positions itself as a leader in cyber and IT
fields. Together with the state’s university partners, this programming will set the state
up to better equip students with the vital STEM skills they will need in today’s (and
tomorrow’s) workforce.
• Recruiting, retaining and supporting educators. After extensive stakeholder
consultation, the department is kicking off a multi-pronged effort in this area. First, the
department is investing in two new programs built to support and retain educators
throughout their career. The first program, created in collaboration with statewide
education leaders, directs support and professional development for early-career
educators and builds on the state’s foundational mentoring program for all first-and
second-year teachers. Good to Great Teachers empowers teachers in their third through
fifth years in the profession by increasing teacher effectiveness and fostering self-efficacy
through reflective practices in a community of educators. Through a partnership with the
state’s university system, the department is investing in a Leadership Academy for K-12
mid-career professionals. Targeted at teacher-leaders with at least five years of
experience, the academy is a three-graduate credit, 45-contact hour academy that will
prepare teachers for future educational leadership opportunities. In the area of recruiting
educators, the department is investing in grants to help chapters of the Career and
Technical Student Organization, Educators Rising, to introduce more high school
students to the field of education and support them in that journey. The department is
bringing in capacity to augment efforts in recruiting and retaining educators, which will
aid in the establishment of new pathways for first and mid-career adults seeking to make
25
a difference in the classroom. Strategies in this area include expanding options for
alternative certification and exploring nontraditional routes to licensure, such as
apprenticeship and stackable pathways. Finally, the department is contracting to develop
a professional development platform that will provide a one-stop shop for department-
sponsored, virtual training for educators. This innovative learning management system
for education professionals will store content and allow for the creation of new content as
well as easy access to timely and relevant professional development ongoing.
• Developing the foundation for quality early learning opportunities. School leaders
have expressed since school started in August 2021 that the percent of kindergarten
students who are ready for school is noticeably less than in past years. Fall 2021 also
brought the state’s largest kindergarten class on record, indicating that many parents held
their children back during the uncertainty of the 2020-21 school year. There is a large
body of evidence that points to the positive impact preschool programs have on preparing
children for school and offering them benefits that last a lifetime. As a state with a high
percentage of residents in the labor force (South Dakota ranks near the top nationally in
both the male and female categories, according to the 2019 South Dakota Workforce
Report), the department recognizes that many children are in settings outside the home
during the traditional work week. Efforts to address availability of and access to quality
opportunities will begin with conducting a statewide study. The study will help the state
better understand the existing state of preschool opportunities across the state and the
gaps in available services and other factors such as affordability, educator qualifications,
and implementation of quality education programs. From the study’s results, the state will
determine future efforts to improve educational programming for 3- and 4-year-olds, the
preparation and on-going training of preschool providers, and the data and technical
support needed to help young learners transition into K-12.
• Tending to student wellness. In order to engage fully in their learning, students need to
feel safe and supported at school. This area is also of particular importance, given the
extent to which mental health has been identified by stakeholders as a key area of need.
Funding directed to this category will expand educators’ access to tools and training that
address creation of positive school environments – those where behavioral issues are
limited; educators are adept at identifying students who may be struggling and connecting
them to appropriate resources; and students experience improved academic outcomes.
Further, the department is partnering with other state agencies to support the overall well-
being of the state’s youth. Examples include supporting the Department of Social
Services’ efforts around providing tele-mental health services for students in remote areas
and collaboration with several state agencies around youth suicide prevention. The
department is also ensuring school counselors have the tools they need by providing
training and resources to the field throughout the life of the grant. Knowing that all
educators have a role in student wellness, educators statewide will be able to participate
in training programs that help them ensure every student has a daily touchpoint with an
adult – thereby ensuring no child slips through the cracks. Finally, smaller touchpoints
such as wellness marketing materials and prevention resources for schools, developed in-
house or with other state agencies, will equip districts to help their student populations.
These efforts will increase the abilities of counselors and other educators to understand
26
and support their student populations and reach those students most affected by the
pandemic on an individual level.
• Improving Data System. As is evident throughout, the department’s strategies in
addressing the impact of lost instructional time resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic is
rooted in our data. However, it is also apparent that the department does not have
sufficiently robust data systems and practices to meet long-term needs in this area. The
department will determine specific avenues to pursue to enhance and integrate statewide
data systems with the intention of increasing the sustainability and usability of the
department’s longitudinal data system. This will allow for improved long-term analysis,
build the skills of educators in the field in accessing and working with data, centralize
district accounts and validation processes, and remove current barriers in our systems.
Investing in this critical ability to analyze the progress of our students will make us more
nimble in analysis and identifying areas of both need and bright spots.
ii. How the evidence-based interventions will specifically address the
disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on certain groups of students,
including each of the student groups listed in question A.3.i.-viii.
When possible, please indicate which data sources the SEA will use
to determine the impact of lost instructional time; and
Most students in South Dakota were fortunate to be able to elect to participate in in-person
instruction, which the majority of families did choose. However, the department recognizes the
needs that still persist for students in schools that remained shuttered for the majority of the
2020-21 school year – namely, public schools and tribally funded schools located on Indian
reservations that were subject to closure by tribal ordinance.
South Dakota has used the data sources noted throughout this plan to understand the impact of
lost instructional time. To gain a more sophisticated understanding, the state is looking at
engaging a partner to help us develop more robust data capabilities. These will help provide
insight with greater precision the extent of learning loss in the state.
Data sources that already show a picture of the level of need include summative and benchmark
test scores, attendance measures, chronic absenteeism, graduation rates, and teacher retention.
Notable in the data is the participation rate on the state’s summative assessments. While overall
the state reached a 95% participation rate in spring 2021, students identified as economically
disadvantaged only participated at a 90% rate and Native American students at 74%. This shows
us that while the proficiency rates themselves may be similar to years past, we are clearly
missing students. Those students are likely among those with the most acute learning loss needs.
Attendance patterns during 2021-22 show 6.3% of public school students missed 30 or more
days of school, compared with 3.4% in 2018-19. Certain subgroups of students were
disproportionately represented within that 6.3%. These subgroups included: Economically
Disadvantaged, Grades 9-12, Native American, Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic.
27
Additionally, there were 41 public school districts with more than 5% of their student population
missing six weeks or more of school.
DOE will implement its evidence-based interventions in a two-tiered approach: interventions that
serve all students and targeted interventions for those most impacted by the pandemic and the
subsequent lost instructional time. Any strategy employed at the state level will broadly help the
state’s students recover academically. Within that effort, the state will hone in on particular
subgroups that will most benefit from the strategy employed. For example, attendance
awareness campaign ads will appeal to a broad audience but will also include targeted ads that
will run in geographic areas most heavily impacted. Online tutoring will be available to any
student, but marketing efforts will focus on geographic areas and subgroups of students who are
most in need of that service. Finally, the department’s overall approach in employing this
strategy will be to both complement districts’ ability to serve their students most impacted, and
to provide programming and services statewide that districts are unable to do on their own. This
programming and services will target student groups most disproportionately impacted by the
pandemic while ensuring that each student’s individual needs are met.
Specifically:
• Promoting the importance of regular school attendance. This intervention, as
described above, is rooted in the state’s absenteeism data. For example, messaging for
social media platforms included both English and Spanish versions, and radio ad buys
included geographic areas near Indian reservations. Both Hispanic and Native American
subgroups experienced disproportionately higher chronic absenteeism rates. The
campaign has and will impact geographic areas showing the largest gaps and target
English learner, low-income, American Indian, and high school learners.
• Building literacy statewide. This initiative will aid all learners in gaining vital literacy
skills with a particular emphasis on students with disabilities, English learners, and those
in the economically disadvantaged subgroup. The data sources driving this area include
the summative South Dakota English Language Arts assessment and the State Personnel
Development Grant (SPDG). SPDG is a leading driver of literacy initiatives in the state
focusing on improving literacy for all students, especially students with disabilities.
Building early literacy skills is proven to lead to students’ long-term success, making this
program vital to the state’s recovery efforts. In addition other programs, such as the
State’s IDEA Part C program are collaborating to support early language development
and literacy training to professionals working with families of infants and toddlers.
• Engaging middle and high school students. The department has incorporated an array
of efforts in this category, signaling its importance to achieving the goal of mitigating the
pandemic’s impacts and making up for lost instructional time. Students who will
specifically be served by and benefit from the efforts include students belonging to the
Native American subgroup, low-income students, and high school students. To
determine the specific areas of focus, the department used absenteeism data, stakeholder
input from districts, and local evidence that both JAG and CTE course-taking patterns
increase graduation rates.
28
• Mitigating learning loss. The online tutoring services will impact those in particular
geographic areas, middle and high school students (who evidence points to having had
high negative impacts from the pandemic), economically disadvantaged students, and
English learner students. This is also a specific area that will augment district efforts to
provide tutoring and academic supports to students most impacted. The STEM initiative
will aid all learners in gaining skills necessary to support future learning. Data consulted
include participation rates and stakeholder input. The department will consider data from
the state’s summative assessments to target areas with low growth and academic
performance rates.
• Recruiting, retaining and supporting educators. Well-prepared and trained teachers
are the lynchpin to helping students overcome learning loss. The state’s historical
educator shortage has been exacerbated by the impacts of COVID-19, as seen through the
state’s own educator data as well as that of partner organizations. High-quality educators
will help all students achieve; these efforts will have the greatest impact in
geographically remote areas and with educators serving students historically underserved
(including Native American and economically disadvantaged).
• Developing the foundation for quality early learning preschool opportunities. The
crux of this strategy is rooted in a statewide study which will inform the state of
opportunities to leverage federal, state, and local early education investments. This will
benefit all early childhood learners, particularly those who are economically
disadvantaged, receive special education services, and/or reside in areas without access to
high quality early-learning opportunities – all of which were particularly impacted by
COVID-19 and the resulting lost instructional time.
• Tending to student wellness. Efforts aimed at tending to student wellness will support
all students, and even more so those most directly impacted by the effects of the
pandemic. Students of color, economically disadvantaged students, migratory students,
and students who are experiencing homelessness have been more likely to experience
family stress, uncertainty, interrupted learning, and trauma. Investments in strategies to
address students’ individual social, emotional, and mental health, including strategies
such as school-based tele-mental health opportunities and better cross-agency
collaboration, will help schools address whole child needs of those most impacted by the
pandemic.
As previously noted, the department will continue to work in concert with districts and, where
appropriate, community organizations to identify strategies and interventions to meet the needs
effectively of vulnerable students, using local and state set-aside funding, throughout the life of
the grant. The department also notes the above-described efforts fill gaps that districts may not
otherwise able to, a strategy more fully explained below.
iii. The extent to which the SEA will use funds it reserves to identify
and engage 1) students who have missed the most in-person
instruction during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years; and 2)
29
students who did not consistently participate in remote instruction
when offered during school building closures.
The department has a high-level picture of disengaged students due to COVID from its robust
collaboration with districts and local stakeholder networks – at its core, the percent of students
chronically absent (missing 30 or more days of instruction) jumped from 3.4% in 2018-19SY to
6.3% in 2021-22SY. A fuller picture of the level of statewide need in this area continues to
emerge through LEA ARP ESSER plans. As referenced below, districts must identify how, at the
local level, they are using ESSER funding to identify, re-engage, and support students most
likely to have experienced the impact of lost instructional time, including but not limited to
students who have missed the most in-person instruction, students who did not participate or
participated inconsistently in remote instruction, and students most at-risk of dropping out of
school. What has emerged is that in areas mostly open for in-person instruction, the academic
gaps have widened for those who were behind traditionally, even before the pandemic.
The strategies outlined previously – which focus on meeting students where they are, equipping
teachers and school leaders, and supporting strong pedagogy – and further broken down into
specific interventions such as middle and high school engagement, student wellness, and literacy,
will work to specifically engage the students who missed critical instruction and the support
system of their school in the last two years.
At the state level, the department’s efforts have also focused on coming alongside districts to
provide services not otherwise possible at the local level. This includes efforts such as statewide
tutoring, which fills a gap districts have noted they cannot fill with available personnel. Student
wellness efforts (including tele-mental health and more professional development for school
counselors and educators in this area) are most effectively coordinated at the state level, which
then allows educators to put those strategies into practice locally. The department’s effort
around providing more robust data analysis tools also exemplify this strategy. Local districts are
best equipped to identify and serve students most impacted and most disengaged by the
pandemic and its aftermath, including lost instructional time. The department, therefore, has
included in its strategies empowering local leaders to do just that.
2. Evidence-Based Summer Learning and Enrichment Programs: Describe how the
SEA will use the funds it reserves under section 2001(f)(2) of the ARP Act
(totaling not less than 1 percent of the State’s total allocation of ARP ESSER
funds) for evidence-based summer learning and enrichment programs, including
those that begin in Summer 2021, and ensure such programs respond to students’
academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs. The description must
include:
i. A description of the evidence-based programs that address the
academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of students
(e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring, accelerating
learning) the SEA has selected, and the extent to which the SEA will
evaluate the impact of those programs;
30
The department, along with key partners, supported districts in starting school in person, to the
greatest extent possible, in August 2020. After being open for the full school year, 90 public
school districts – 60% – offered summer school in 2021. Data that has emerged, including from
statewide summative assessments, ACT results, attendance, and graduation rates, indicate that
while the impact on South Dakota’s students was not at the rate seen in other states, an impact
nevertheless is there. Most notably in the areas of the state that remained closed through the
majority or the entirety of the 2020-21 school year, a fuller picture will take longer to emerge as
districts and the state collect reliable data. And indeed, the full impact of the pandemic itself is
not confined to a single school year or two but will require long-term monitoring and analysis.
As noted initially, in making decisions about programming, the department’s aim is to leverage
partnerships to provide supports to highly impacted student groups and areas, and to ensure such
programs respond to students’ individual academic, social, emotional and mental health needs.
The department embarked on this strategy in August 2021 with an education summit aimed at
gathering key stakeholders’ best advice and input for, among other areas, summer school
programs. As a result of that summit and other collaborations, priorities emerged that the
department is now making actionable.
In summer 2022 and continuing through summer 2023 and 2024, the department is partnering
with the South Dakota Board of Regents (SD BOR), along with the state’s technical colleges and
businesses and employers, to offer middle school students the opportunity to spend a week on a
college campus engaging with hands-on career pathways experiences. These enrichment
opportunities are available free of charge to students and allow them to be immersed in the
college experience – dorm life, campus food, activities, and camaraderie, all the while getting to
“try on” education and career pathways available to them post-graduation. The outcomes of the
camps will be to expose students early to opportunities available, allow them to connect both to
their education and peers across the state, and begin putting together pieces for what comes next
(i.e., what education they need in order to get to their desired career field).
Campers are selected on an application basis that prioritize students most heavily impacted by
the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent lost instructional time – namely, low-income,
under-represented subgroups, parents’/guardians’ education level, and geographic areas of the
state.
Applications for the first round of summer camps far outstripped initial capacity – more than
quadruple the number of spots initially available. The department worked with the SD BOR and
campuses to double capacity for summer 2022 and will work to increase capacity further for
subsequent summers.
These camps fill a need in the state for high-quality summer programming to mitigate the impact
of learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the summer of 2021, as the department
convened stakeholders to discuss priority areas for funding, lack of options for middle schoolers
in particular emerged as a theme. Also, districts have reported that summer school at the local
level is an important tool to address learning loss, but planned programming has not always been
possible due to lack of staff. Because the state is able to arrange for programming and staffing,
31
this alleviates some of that burden at the local level and provides a key demographic of students
with high-quality, evidence-based programming.
The department also recognizes that there is need for local-level programming, as was clear
through stakeholder input. To supplement local entities’ ability to meet instructional, material,
and programming needs to mitigate the impact of learning loss due to the pandemic’s effect of
lost instructional time, the department is providing assistance through two avenues:
• Competitive grants. Grants to local agencies assist in providing high quality, academic
rich support when they are not in school. Local providers identify needs such as
expanding hours, hiring certified teachers at out-of-contract rates, providing field-trip
opportunities, expanding experiences in the classroom through materials such as
makerspaces, providing high-quality, evidence-based professional development for staff
in meeting the learning loss and mental and behavioral health needs of their learners, and
beyond. Grant awards made to entities based on the statement of need, impact, and
sustainability of the proposal.
• Mobile programming. Contracting with one of the state’s education service providers,
the department will identify the statewide needs of summer school providers to most
effectively mitigate the disproportionate effects of the pandemic on certain learners. As a
result of this effort, the contractor will develop hands on programming aligned to
academic content standards to meet those needs. This mobile programming (which will
range from physical materials deployed to the field or virtual opportunities) will allow
summer school providers to tap into resources not otherwise available. The materials will
be designed to address learning loss gaps in particular for student populations most
impacted by the pandemic, as described elsewhere. As an additional targeting measure,
in the event that the materials are oversubscribed, preference will be given to providers
serving students and geographic areas most heavily impacted by the COVID-19
pandemic’s result of lost instructional time. Once developed, these resources will far
outlive the lifecycle of the grant itself, benefitting students for years to come.
Given the overlapping nature of out-of-school-time programming (encompassing both
afterschool and summer school), several of the activities and the grantees for the funds between
these two categories are similar or the same. The department embraces the need to ensure that
each respective set aside (afterschool and summer school) are obligated and expended to their
full extent in each respective category. As such, the department has implemented and will
continue to implement agreement language, budget coding, and technical assistant to grantees to
ensure that funds intended for each category remain separate and distinct.
ii. How the evidence-based programs will specifically address the
disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on certain groups of students,
including each of the student groups listed in question A.3. i.--viii.
When possible, please indicate which data sources the SEA will use
to identify students most in need of summer learning and enrichment
programs; and
32
Similar to the department’s approach with the learning loss set-aside, the department is making
efforts available to all students with particular targeting towards those most significantly
impacted by COVID-19. That targeting statewide is based on information previously discussed;
similar to learning loss, the department is making resources available for districts to target their
own student groups most significantly impacted by lost instructional time.
Specifically:
• Middle school career camps. This effort inherently seeks to engage a student
population heavily impacted by the pandemic. Students eligible each summer are those
entering seventh and eighth grade. Additionally, as noted previously, campers are
selected on an application basis that prioritizes low-income, under-represented
subgroups, parents’/guardians’ education level, and geographic areas of the state – key
factors that allow the state to prioritize those most heavily impacted by the pandemic’s
effect of lost instructional time.
• Competitive Grants. The grants, by design, expand access to student populations most
heavily affected by lost instructional time. Applicants describe the academic
interventions and enrichment offered to these students. Applications are then selected
through a rubric that prioritizes low-income, under-represented subgroups, and
geographic areas of the state most impacted by the pandemic’s effect of lost instructional
times.
• Mobile programming. This resource will allow providers in underserved areas to access
resources and programming not otherwise available – which also overlaps in part with
those geographic areas most heavily affected by lost instructional time. In the event that
the materials are oversubscribed, preference will be given to providers serving students
and geographic areas that are known to the department to be most heavily impacted.
Data indicating the impact of these efforts will be participation rates in programming,
triangulated with attendance, academic proficiency, and, later, students’ graduation rates.
iii. The extent to which the SEA will use funds it reserves to identify
and engage 1) students who have missed the most in-person
instruction during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years; and 2)
students who did not consistently participate in remote instruction
when offered during school building closures.
The department has a high-level picture of the extent of disengaged students due to COVID from
its robust collaboration with districts and local stakeholder networks, as well as from the LEA
ARP ESSER plans. As referenced below, districts are required to identify how, at the local level,
they are using ESSER funding to identify, re-engage, and support students most likely to have
experienced the impact of lost instructional time, including but not limited to students who have
missed the most in-person instruction, students who did not participate or participated
inconsistently in remote instruction, and students most at-risk of dropping out of school.
33
As previously described, the department’s efforts in this area have also focused on coming
alongside districts to provide services not otherwise possible at the local level – where districts
leaders are best placed to identify and re-engage students most impacted, including those who
may not have engaged in remote instruction when buildings were closed. The middle school
career camps and building mobile programming toolkits embrace this strategy, while also
targeting at the state level those populations known to be most highly impacted.
Data indicating the impact of these efforts will be participation rates in programming
triangulated with attendance, academic proficiency, and graduation rates.
3. Evidence-Based Comprehensive Afterschool Programs: Describe how the SEA
will use the funds it reserves under section 2001(f)(3) of the ARP Act (totaling
not less than 1 percent of the State’s total allocation of ARP ESSER funds) for
evidence-based comprehensive afterschool programs (including, for example,
before-school programming), and ensure such programs respond to students’
academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs. The description must
include:
i. A description of the evidence-based programs (e.g., including
partnerships with community-based organizations) the SEA has
selected, and the extent to which the SEA will evaluate the impact of
those programs;
The department, along with key partners, supported districts in starting school in person, to the
greatest extent possible, in August 2020 and again in Fall 2021. Initial data from the COVID
Impact Survey indicates nearly half offered before- or afterschool in-person programming during
the 2020-21 school year, with some offering remote options. Results also show that 23 percent of
schools offered supplemental educational experiences (for example, weekend opportunities).
Data that has emerged, including from statewide summative assessments, ACT results,
attendance, and graduation rates, indicate that while the impact on South Dakota’s students was
not at the rate seen in other states, an impact from the pandemic nevertheless is visible through
lower overall academic proficiency rates, lower graduation rates, and a spike of chronic
absenteeism (from 3.8% in 2018-19 to 6.4% in 2020-21). Most notably in the areas of the state
that remained closed through the majority or the entirety of the 2020-21SY, a fuller picture will
take longer to see as districts and the state collect reliable data. And indeed, the full impact of
the pandemic itself is not confined to a single school year or two but will require long-term
monitoring and analysis.
As noted initially, in making decisions about programming, the department’s aim is to leverage
partnerships to provide supports to highly impacted student groups and areas, and to ensure such
programs respond to students’ academic, social, emotional and mental health needs.
The department sought considered stakeholder engagement on this strategy in August 2021 with
an education summit aimed at gathering key stakeholders’ best advice and input for, among other
areas, afterschool programs. The specific evidence-based programming described below is a
34
result of that engagement, in addition to ongoing collaboration the department maintains with
afterschool programming providers.
Specifically, under contract with one of the state’s educational cooperatives, the department will
focus on these avenues:
• Out-of-school-time leadership professional learning community. This effort will
develop leadership curriculum to provide support to directors, site coordinators, lead
teachers, and others in areas of afterschool leadership to build and grow high-quality out-
of-school-time (OST) programs statewide. Applications will be specifically targeted
towards those communities most impacted by the pandemic. Two cohorts will run each
of the two remaining years of the grant and will result in graduate credit or continuing
education hours. Topics covered will include student development, project-based
learning, engaging families, building relationships, and more. In between class time, the
contractor will provide technical assistance to participants to build on and extend their
learning.
• Onboarding and training toolkit. Ensuring that program staff have the skills necessary
is a vital component of high-quality OST programs. This project will build and provide
resources to programs to get staff onboarded and trained quickly. In conjunction with a
project described above, the materials themselves will be hosted on the department’s new
learning management system.
• Resources and curriculum toolkit. Overlapping between summer school and
afterschool, this OST-specific toolkit will house lessons, units, and other resources for
programs to utilize statewide. A particular focus will be on family engagement and the
materials will align with South Dakota content standards, further maximizing their utility
in addressing learning loss during the pandemic.
Additionally, the mobile programming and competitive grants initiatives described previously
for summer school programming will also be available to afterschool providers. Given the
state’s size and sparsity, many providers offer both afterschool and summer school programs
(combined under the framework of “Out of School Time”) and therefore the state is maximizing
the impact of these dollars by allowing programs to use the resources under both settings.
• Competitive grants. Grants to local agencies assist in providing high quality, academic
rich support when they are not in school. Local providers identify needs such as
expanding hours, hiring certified teachers at out-of-contract rates, providing field-trip
opportunities, expanding experiences in the classroom through materials such as
makerspaces, providing high-quality, evidence-based professional development for staff
in meeting the learning loss and mental and behavioral health needs of their learners, and
beyond. Grant awards made to entities based on the statement of need, impact, and
sustainability of the proposal.
• Mobile programming. Contracting with one of the state’s education service providers,
the department will identify the statewide needs of summer school providers to most
35
effectively mitigate the disproportionate effects of the pandemic on certain learners. As a
result of this effort, the contractor will develop hands on programming aligned to content
area standards to meet those needs. This mobile programming (which will range from
physical materials deployed to the field or virtual opportunities) will allow after school
providers to tap into resources not otherwise available. The materials will be designed to
address learning loss gaps in particular for student populations most impacted by the
pandemic, as described elsewhere. As an additional targeting measure, in the event that
the materials are oversubscribed, preference will be given to providers serving students
and geographic areas most heavily impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic’s result of lost
instructional time. Once developed, these resources will far outlive the lifecycle of the
grant itself, benefitting students for years to come.
Given the overlapping nature of out-of-school-time programming (encompassing both
afterschool and summer school), several of the activities and the grantees for the funds between
these two categories are similar or the same. The department embraces the need to ensure that
each respective set aside (afterschool and summer school) are obligated and expended to their
full extent in each respective category. As such, the department has implemented and will
continue to implement agreement language, budget coding, and technical assistant to grantees to
ensure that funds intended for each category remain separate and distinct.
ii. How the evidence-based programs will specifically address the
disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on certain groups of students,
including each of the student groups listed in question A.3.i.-viii.
When possible, please indicate which data sources the SEA will use
to identify students most in need of comprehensive afterschool
programming; and
Making necessary educational programming and technical supports available statewide in
afterschool programming to elevate quality and access remains an emerging area for the
department. Therefore, the department relies heavily on the expertise in the field with districts
and with community-based organizations to help determine the most effective way to support
partners in providing evidence-based afterschool programming, including targeted supports for
students who have not yet met grade-level learning or age-appropriate social emotional targets.
Similar to the department’s approach with the learning loss and summer school set-asides, the
department is making efforts available that will support all students, with particular targeting to
more effectively serve those most significantly impacted by COVID-19. That targeting
statewide is based on information previously discussed; similar to learning loss, the department
is also making resources available for districts to support their own students most significantly
impacted by the pandemic.
Data indicating the impact of these efforts will be participation rates in programming
triangulated with attendance, academic proficiency, and graduation rates.
iii. the extent to which the SEA will use funds it reserves to identify and
engage 1) students who have missed the most in-person instruction
36
during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years; and 2) students
who did not consistently participate in remote instruction when
offered during school building closures.
The department has a high-level picture of the extent of disengaged students due to COVID from
its robust collaboration with districts and local stakeholder networks, as well as from the LEA
ARP ESSER plans. As referenced below, districts are required to identify how, at the local level,
they are using ESSER funding to identify, re-engage, and support students most likely to have
experienced the impact of lost instructional time, including but not limited to students who have
missed the most in-person instruction, students who did not participate or participated
inconsistently in remote instruction, and students most at-risk of dropping out of school.
As noted above, the department’s efforts in this area have focused on coming alongside local
professionals to provide services not otherwise possible at the local level – where education
leaders are best placed to both identify and re-engage students most impacted, including those
who may not have engaged in remote instruction when buildings were closed. Building the
professional and educational skills of staff, providing competitive grants to afterschool providers,
and building resources all embrace this strategy, while also targeting at the state level those
populations known to be most highly impacted.
Data indicating the impact of these efforts will be participation rates in programming
triangulated with attendance, academic proficiency, and graduation rates.
4. Emergency Needs: If the SEA plans to reserve funds for emergency needs under
section 2001(f)(4) of the ARP Act to address issues responding to the COVID-19
pandemic, describe the anticipated use of those funds, including the extent to
which these funds will build SEA and LEA capacity to ensure students’ and
staff’s health and safety; to meet students’ academic, social, emotional, and
mental health needs; and to use ARP ESSER funds to implement evidence-based
interventions.
Not applicable to South Dakota
E. Supporting LEAs in Planning for and Meeting Students’ Needs
The Department recognizes that the safe return to in-person instruction must be accompanied
by a focus on meeting students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs, and by
addressing the opportunity gaps that existed before – and were exacerbated by – the
pandemic. In this section, SEAs will describe how they will support their LEAs in
developing high-quality plans for LEAs’ use of ARP ESSER funds to achieve these
objectives.
1. LEA Plans for the Use of ARP ESSER Funds: Describe what the SEA will
require its LEAs to include in LEA plans consistent with the ARP ESSER
requirements for the use of ARP ESSER funds, how the SEA will require such
37
plans to be made available to the public, and the deadline by which the LEA must
submit its ARP ESSER plan (which must be a reasonable timeline and should be
within no later than 90 days after receiving its ARP ESSER allocation). The LEA
plans must include, at a minimum:
i. The extent to which and how the funds will be used to implement
prevention and mitigation strategies that are, to the greatest extent
practicable, in line with the most recent CDC guidance, in order to
continuously and safely operate schools for in-person learning;
ii. How the LEA will use the funds it reserves under section 2001(e)(1)
of the ARP Act (totaling not less than 20 percent of the LEA’s total
allocation of ARP ESSER funds) to address the academic impact of
lost instructional time through the implementation of evidence-based
interventions, such as summer learning or summer enrichment,
extended day, comprehensive afterschool programs, or extended
school year programs;
iii. How the LEA will spend its remaining ARP ESSER funds consistent
with section 2001(e)(2) of the ARP Act; and
iv. How the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements,
including but not limited to the interventions under section
2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost
instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional,
and mental health needs of all students, and particularly those
students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic,
including students from low-income families, students of color,
English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing
homelessness, children and youth in foster care, and migratory
students.
The department collected assurances from LEAs that in receiving the funds, they would meet the
ARP ESSER plan submission deadline set out by the department (i.e., Aug. 20, 2021) and that
they would comply with the requirements as set out in the law and the interim final rule.
The department provided a template for LEAs to use in completing ARP ESSER Plans. LEAs
receiving ARP ESSER funds must submit their ARP ESSER Plans on the template to the
department no later than Aug. 20, 2021. In the template, the department outlined instructions for
the development of plans, public comment and posting requirements, and requirements to update
the LEA’s ARP ESSER Plan should the LEA change priorities or submit substantial
amendments to its funds request.
The department’s template asks an LEA to record its ARP ESSER funding available, date of
approval of the plan, and the link where the plan is publicly accessible. The template further asks
the LEA to outline its spending plan to address the following priorities: Prevention and
Mitigation Strategies, Academic Impact of Lost Instructional Time, Investments Aligned with
Student Needs, and Investments in Other Allowed Activities. Each of those priorities aligns with
the categories noted above and as outlined in the interim final rule. Further, the template requires
LEAs to describe how they will use ARP ESSER funds to engage at-risk students (i.e., those
38
who missed the most in-person instruction, those who did not participate or participated
inconsistently in remote instruction, and students most at risk of dropping out of school). Finally,
the template requires LEAs to outline how they did and will continue to meaningfully engage in
stakeholder consultation with each of the required stakeholder groups as listed in the interim
final rule.
2. LEA Consultation: Describe how the SEA will, in planning for the use of ARP
ESSER funds, ensure that, consistent with the ARP ESSER requirements], its
LEAs engage in meaningful consultation with stakeholders, including, but not
limited to:
i. students;
ii. families;
iii. school and district administrators (including special education
administrators); and
iv. teachers, principals, school leaders, other educators, school staff, and
their unions.
The LEA must also engage in meaningful consultation with each of the following
to the extent present in or served by the LEA:
i. Tribes;
ii. civil rights organizations (including disability rights organizations);
and
iii. stakeholders representing the interests of children with disabilities,
English learners, children experiencing homelessness, children and
youth in foster care, migratory students, children who are
incarcerated, and other underserved students.
The description must also include how the SEA will ensure that LEAs provide the
public the opportunity to provide input in the development of the LEA’s plan for
the use of ARP ESSER funds and take such input into account.
At the department level, ensuring that LEAs involve key stakeholders in meaningful consultation
starts with clear communication. In regular webinars with superintendents, as previously
described, the department has clearly communicated federal expectations regarding the
requirement for meaningful consultation with stakeholders as LEAs build their plans for using
ARP ESSER funds. It is important to note that, similar to at the SEA level, LEAs already have
been coordinating with stakeholders throughout the 2020-21 school year to ensure the
safe operation of schools.
The department’s expectations are reinforced in an assurance within the ARP ESSER grant
award notification that must be signed by LEA superintendents. They are also reinforced in the
template that the department created for its LEAs to use when developing their local ARP
ESSER plans. The template specifically includes a section asking the LEA to describe
its engagement with each stakeholder group separately, and how it took that input into account in
building its plan. LEAs must then submit their completed ARP ESSER plans as a requirement to
receive ARP ESSER funds. Through this process, the department will ensure compliance with
this important component of plan development.
39
3. Describe how the SEA will support and monitor its LEAs in using ARP ESSER
funds. The description must include:
i. How the SEA will support and monitor its LEAs’ implementation of
evidence-based interventions that respond to students’ academic,
social, emotional, and mental health needs, such as through summer
learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive
afterschool programs, or extended school year programs – including
the extent to which the SEA will collect evidence of the
effectiveness of interventions employed;
The department will require LEAs to submit annual performance reports on the use of ARP
ESSER funds that will detail the outcomes achieved based on the uses of funding. This
performance report will be a direct line of sight in how effective LEA strategies were in meeting
the needs of their students in this area. Additionally, the department has deployed programmatic
staff from across the department, including senior leadership, to review ARP ESSER Plans and
applications, including allowable uses of funds and budget line items, to ensure that the
objectives of the ARP ESSER funds are met.
Given the strong networks the department has developed with districts throughout the pandemic,
the department will continue to make available statewide initiatives, training opportunities, and
best practices for districts to participate in and adopt to meet the individual needs of their local
students.
ii. How the SEA will support and monitor its LEAs in specifically
addressing the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic
on certain groups of students, including each of the student groups
listed in question A.3.i.-viii; and
The department will require LEAs to submit annual performance reports on the use of ARP
ESSER funds that will detail the outcomes achieved based on the uses of funding. This
performance report will be a direct line of sight in how effective LEA strategies were in meeting
the needs of their students in this area. Additionally, the department has deployed programmatic
staff from across the department, including senior leadership, to review ARP ESSER Plans and
applications, including allowable uses of funds and budget line items, to ensure that the
objectives of the ARP ESSER funds are met.
Additionally, the department’s required template to access these funds requires the LEA to detail
its plan on addressing the needs of each subgroup through the ARP ESSER funding. This plan is
subject to stakeholder consultation, public comment, and must remain posted, including in
accessible formats, on the LEA’s website.
Given the strong networks the department has developed with districts throughout the pandemic,
the department will continue to make available statewide initiatives, training opportunities, and
best practices for districts to participate in and adopt to meet the individual needs of their local
students.
40
iii. How the SEA will support and monitor its LEAs in using ARP
ESSER funds to identify, reengage, and support students most likely
to have experienced the impact of lost instructional time on student
learning, such as:
a. Students who have missed the most in-person instruction during
the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years;
b. Students who did not consistently participate in remote
instruction when offered during school building closures; and
c. Students most at-risk of dropping out of school.
Identifying, engaging with, or re-engaging with students that may have missed out on instruction
and educational opportunities – for a variety of reasons – will be critical in the months ahead.
The department expects these students to run the gamut from pre-school-age youngsters in need
of special supports as they prepare to enter the formal K-12 setting to high school students that
dropped off the radar at some point during the pandemic. State-level spending will focus on
strategies designed to engage and/or re-engage these students and provide strong instruction for
academic attainment for all students based on their individual needs.
The department will require LEAs to submit annual performance reports on the use of ARP
ESSER funds that will detail the outcomes achieved based on the uses of funding. This
performance report will be a direct line of sight in how effective LEA strategies were in meeting
the needs of their students in this area. Additionally, the department has deployed programmatic
staff from across the department, including senior leadership, to review ARP ESSER Plans and
applications, including allowable uses of funds and budget line items, to ensure that the
objectives of the ARP ESSER funds are met.
Additionally, the department’s required template to access these funds requires the LEA to detail
its plan on addressing the needs of each of these groups of students through the ARP ESSER
funding. This plan is subject to stakeholder consultation, public comment, and must remain
posted, including in accessible formats, on the LEA’s website.
Given the strong networks the department has developed with districts throughout the pandemic,
the department will continue to make available statewide initiatives, training opportunities, and
best practices for districts to participate in and adopt to meet the individual needs of their local
students.
4. Describe the extent to which the SEA will support its LEAs in implementing
additional strategies for taking educational equity into account in expending ARP
ESSER funds, including but not limited to:
i. Allocating funding both to schools and for districtwide activities
based on student need, and
ii. Implementing an equitable and inclusive return to in-person
instruction. An inclusive return to in-person instruction includes, but
is not limited to, establishing policies and practices that avoid the
over-use of exclusionary discipline measures (including in- and out-
41
of-school suspensions) and creating a positive and supportive
learning environment for all students.
South Dakota school districts’ most effective strategy in mitigating the effects of COVID and
addressing educational equity was reopening schools for in-person instruction in August 2020.
This commitment has allowed most schools an entire school year of in-person learning to create
an environment for equitable return and a positive, supportive learning environment for all
students. However, the department recognizes that some of the state’s most vulnerable students –
many of them subject to tribal shelter-in-place orders – did not have access to in-person
instruction through a majority of the school year. As noted above, once the department is better
able to analyze the data, it will be paramount to target technical assistance and support to these
districts.
The department facilitated return in a wide array of areas. Specific support included:
• Regular calls with school leaders during the spring and summer 2020, and throughout the
2020-21 school year
• A Starting Well guide crafted in summer 2020 with the input of stakeholders to meet
administrators’ needs in reopening school buildings (available here)
• A Starting Well guide specific to special education (available here)
• Calls with administrators regarding participation expectation and reinforcing policies and
procedures on student discipline, including students in virtual environment.
• Calls with administrators on summer programming and enhanced learning, reinforcing
that these opportunities should include all students, and not exclude groups of students
based on subgroup status
• Supporting programs that create positive and supportive environments
The department also has key, comprehensive needs assessment tools in place to help districts
holistically examine their operations, diagnose root causes of issues, and identify solutions,
which lead to greater educational equity. These are the South Dakota Comprehensive Needs
Assessment, the Career and Technical Education Comprehensive Local Needs Assessment, and
the IDEA Results Driven Accountability (RDA). All three were designed to work in concert to
help a school district pinpoint areas of need. Specific to the RDA, through the data retreat
process, districts review academic and social-emotional areas through multiple lenses, including
disaggregating multiple subgroup options. Coaches then help districts focus on areas of greatest
need and strategies to impact greatest change in order to develop a plan to address their focus
area.
As districts allocate ARP ESSER funds, the department has provided guidance to districts to
make spending decisions in line with creating positive long-term impacts and addressing student
needs. The department provided guidance in March 2021 (available here) that provided
administrators a lengthy list of ideas to consider for using federal stimulus funding. Given the
strong relationship the department has forged with district leaders, the department will continue
to serve as a resource to districts in equitably investing these dollars.
42
F. Supporting the Educator Workforce
The Department recognizes the toll that the COVID-19 pandemic has taken on the Nation’s
educators as well as students. In this section, SEAs will describe strategies for supporting and
stabilizing the educator workforce and for making staffing decisions that will support
students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs.
1. Supporting and Stabilizing the Educator Workforce:
i. Describe the extent to which the State is facing shortages of
educators, education administration personnel, and other school
personnel involved in safely reopening schools, and the extent to
which they vary by region/type of school district and/or groups of
educators (e.g., special educators and related services personnel and
paraprofessionals; bilingual or English as a second language
educators; science, technology, engineering, and math (“STEM”)
educators; career and technical education (“CTE”) educators; early
childhood educators). Cite specific data on shortages and needs
where available.
Long before the pandemic, South Dakota has struggled with teacher shortages. In 2015, South
Dakota created the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Teachers and Students to address the challenge
comprehensively as a state. A 26-member panel studied related issues and brought forward
recommendations during the 2016 legislative session. The result was $75 million in ongoing
funding for teacher salaries (thanks to a new half-penny sales tax); a new funding formula; a new
statewide teacher mentoring program; restored funding for National Board Certification; and
updated certification rules to grant full reciprocity to teachers who are certified to teach in
another state. The legislation also established a Teacher Compensation Review Board, which is
to meet every three years to review the state’s progress as it relates to educator salaries,
recruitment and retention. That board is set to meet summer 2021 and provide recommendations
for next steps.
As the department prepares information for the board’s review, initial data indicates the number
of unfilled vacancies on the first day of school increased by 24.93 FTE, or .25 percent of the
workforce, from school year 2019-20 to 2020-21. (For context, South Dakota public schools
reported 9,624 total teacher FTE in 2019-20.) See Tables F.1 and F.2.
Generally, the initial data shows minimal increase in staffing turnover during school year 2020-
2021; however, there are early indicators that staff turnover will be higher in school year 2021-
2022. According to the Associated School Boards of South Dakota, which operates an online Job
Placement Center used by school districts across the state, the number of job openings
for educators has sharply increased for the upcoming school year. The positions with the highest
number of job openings continue to be special education/early childhood and elementary teacher
positions, followed by math and English language arts positions. Table F.3 identifies the top
four categories with the highest postings on the Job Placement Center from 2018 to 2021.
Table F1.
43
UNFILLED VACANCIES – FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL
Vacancy Type FTE Courses
(Public School Districts) SY20 SY21 Difference SY20 SY21 Difference
Administrators 3.62 0.62 -3 4 1 -3
Education Specialists (not including 3.20 4.94 4 8
1.74 4
counselors)
School Counselors .58 2.50 1.92 1 3 2
Career and Technical Education 4.86 4.36 -0.5 35 24 -11
Computers 0 0.5 0.5 0 1 1
English Language Learner 0 .12 0.12 0 1 1
Fine Arts 1.3 4.51 3.21 2 22 20
Language Arts 4.52 6.37 1.85 28 20 -8
Math 3.07 5.90 2.83 8 29 21
Miscellaneous 6.16 14.77 8.61 17 32 15
Music 6.44 4.80 -1.64 40 31 -9
Non-Credit 7.23 11.92 4.69 42 66 24
PE-Health 0.43 1.97 1.54 4 5 1
Science 3.05 6.43 3.38 13 36 23
Elementary 12.8 12.15 -0.65 17 18 1
Social Science 1.74 2.72 0.98 8 15 7
Special Education 8.25 10.74 2.49 10 14 4
World Language 5.18 2.04 -3.14 20 8 -12
TOTAL FTE 72.43 97.36 24.93 253 334 81
SOURCE: SD DOE Personnel Record Form database
Table F2.
44
PARAPROFESSIONALS AND CLASSIFIED STAFFING
Number of Staff Employed FTE
(Public School Districts) SY2019-20 SY2020-21 Difference
Paraprofessionals 2,111.83 2,177.47 65.64
Social Workers 32 29 -3
School Nurses 134.96 145.05 10.09
SOURCE: SD DOE Personnel Record Form database
Table F3.
SOUTH DAKOTA EDUCATOR JOB OPENINGS
Top Four Openings Posted on the Teacher Placement Center
2018 2019 2020 2021
April
SPED/Early 62 SPED/Early Childhood 39 SPED/Early Childhood 53 SPED/Early Childhood 71
Childhood
Elementary 61 Elementary 37 Elementary 52 Elementary 69
Math 27 Art/Music/Health/PE 26 CTE 35 Math 52
Administrators 26 Language Arts 24 Art/Music/Health/PE 28 Language Arts 52
August
SPED/Early 10 SPED/Early Childhood 8 SPED/Early Childhood 8 NA
Childhood
Elementary 7 Elementary 5 Elementary 4 NA
Language Arts 5 Art/Music/Health/PE 5 Math 4 NA
Administrators 4 Technology Education 4 Speech Pathologist 4 NA
SOURCE: Associated School Boards of South Dakota – Teacher Placement Center
ii. Describe how the SEA will assist its LEAs in identifying the most
urgent areas of shortages or potential shortages, with particular plans
for individual LEAs facing the most significant needs (e.g., by
avoiding layoffs, providing high-quality professional learning
opportunities, and addressing the impact of stress or trauma on
educators). Include a description of how other Federal COVID-19
funding (e.g., ESSER and GEER funds under the CARES Act and
CRRSA Act) have already been used to avoid layoffs during the
COVID-19 pandemic.
The collection of data used for the Teacher Compensation Review Board will help the
department identify urgent areas of shortages or potential shortages. This information will be
shared widely with school districts and the state’s educator preparation programs. The
department currently works closely with LEAs experiencing staffing shortages – providing
appropriate flexibilities that have been developed and vetted through the state’s administrative
rules process. The department also will work with districts if an administrative rule needs to be
waived for good cause.
45
The department supported educators throughout the year by providing open lines of
communication and up-to-date, relevant information regarding the pandemic. These venues
allowed school leaders to share common challenges and gain support from one another as well as
the state. For example, in partnership with the Department of Social Services, educators,
administrators, and school counselors had opportunities to attend sessions separately – all
focused on COVID stress and coping mechanisms.
Generally, federal COVID funding has not been used for the purpose of avoiding layoffs during
SY 2020-21, since South Dakota schools were mostly open. Of those LEAs that did use funds to
avoid layoffs, they typically indicated paying classified staff with ESSER funding in the spring
of 2020 when school buildings were physically closed.
iii. Describe the actions the SEA will take to fill anticipated gaps in
certified teachers for the start of the 2021-2022 school year and to
what extent the SEA will further support its LEAs in expanding the
educator pipeline and educator diversity while addressing the
immediate needs of students disproportionately impacted by the
pandemic (e.g., recruiting teaching candidates to provide high-
dosage tutoring or implementing residencies for teacher candidates).
The department will continue to work closely with LEAs to utilize flexibilities offered through
state-implemented strategies such as alternative certification and educator permits. As is standard
practice, the department will work closely with educators to identify and remove unnecessary
barriers, while prioritizing what is best for students. During this past year, university preparation
programs have encouraged students to become substitute teachers for districts. This has been an
effective strategy to assist LEAs in an unusual year, and it provides an opportunity for
preparation candidates to gain additional experience. In turn, student-teachers have assisted their
LEAs by supporting their supervising teachers with competencies related to online learning.
Documentation from universities reflects this has been a positive result of the COVID pandemic.
The department anticipates additional recruitment/retention strategies to be recommended by the
Teacher Compensation Review Board, which is meeting this summer. Strategies will likely build
upon programs implemented successfully through the 2016 Blue Ribbon legislation mentioned
previously (e.g., statewide mentoring program for 1st year teachers; partnership with School
Administrators of South Dakota for new administrator mentoring; National Board Certification
cohorts). The department expects to work with educator preparation programs and professional
education organizations to establish an updated, multi-dimensional approach to educator
workforce needs.
2. Staffing to Support Student Needs: Describe the extent to which the SEA has
developed or will develop strategies and will support its LEAs in increasing
student access to key support staff within school buildings, including school
counselors, special education personnel, nurses, social workers, and psychologists
46
(e.g. hiring additional personnel or freeing up these staff to focus on providing
services to students).
Access to wraparound student supports is critical for academic success. The challenges brought
on by the COVID pandemic have shone a bright light on the need to ensure students have access
to those services. The department has supported activities throughout the school year to allow
students more access to these services and will continue to find ways to partner with relevant
organizations to increase access.
Throughout the 2020-21 school year, the department focused on:
Better Equipping Counselors and School Building Staff
• Equipped school counselors with professional development tools (including collaboration
opportunities, specific resources, and virtual trainings) to allow them to be more efficient,
effective and equitable in their comprehensive school counseling programs
• Promoted Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACES) and trauma-informed professional
development opportunities statewide to educators of all disciplines, which results in
educators better able to meet students’ needs
• Offered PREPaRE School Crisis and Intervention Training to administrators, special
services directors, school psychologists, school counselors, at-risk coordinators,
administrative and support staff, school resource officers, etc. This training better equips
those within schools to respond to students’ critical mental health needs in a crisis.
• Supported teachers in Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG-SD) programs throughout the
state, which take a whole child approach to help students succeed by addressing social-
emotional in addition to academic needs
Increasing Staff
• Supported district-led initiatives to add school nurses, counselors and special education
paraprofessionals using federal ESSER funding
Increasing Community Connections to Serve Students
• Project AWARE continued in several districts in the state. This program bridges the
worlds of educators, school-based mental health providers, and community-based mental
health clinicians. Using tiered systems of support, including moving students up in tiers
and getting them additional support, has allowed participating schools to better meet the
mental health needs of all students.
• Encouraged school partnerships with local health care providers for easier access to
health professionals, including but not limited to COVID care
• Deepened partnerships and collaborations with school-based mental health professional
associations on ways to meet students’ needs
Knowing the need in the field, the department will build upon the above and embark
on additional strategies for subsequent school years, including support to school-based mental
health providers, support to administrators and educators through training and resources, and
47
state-led community supports that maximize the resources of state agencies to provide support to
school districts and their students.
G. Monitoring and Measuring Progress
The Department recognizes that transparency on how ARP ESSER funds are used and their
impact on the Nation’s education system is a fundamental responsibility of Federal, State,
and local government. In this section, SEAs will describe how they are building capacity at
the SEA and LEA levels to ensure high-quality data collection and reporting and to safeguard
funds for their intended purposes.
1. Capacity for Data Collection and Reporting: It is important for an SEA to
continuously monitor progress and make adjustments to its strategies, as well as
to support its LEAs in making adjustments to LEA strategies, based on impact.
Describe how the SEA will ensure its capacity and the capacity of its LEAs to
collect data on reporting requirements, including but not limited to the examples
of reporting requirements described in the SEA’s Grant Award Notification (listed
in Appendix B). Describe the SEA’s capacity and strategy to collect data from its
LEAs (disaggregated by student group, where applicable), to the greatest extent
practicable, including any steps the SEA will take to build its capacity in the
future (which may include the use of ARP ESSER and other Federal COVID-19
pandemic funds at the SEA and LEA levels), on issues that may include the
following:
i. Student learning, including the academic impact of lost instructional
time during the COVID-19 pandemic;
ii. Opportunity to learn measures (e.g., chronic absenteeism; student
engagement; use of exclusionary discipline; access to and
participation in advanced coursework; access to technology,
including educator access to professional development on the
effective use of technology; access to high-quality educators; access
to school counselors, social workers, nurses, and school
psychologists; and results from student, parent, and/or educator
surveys);
iii. Fiscal data that is comparable across the State (e.g., per-pupil
expenditures at the LEA and school levels);
iv. Jobs created and retained (by position type);
v. Participation in programs funded by ARP ESSER resources (e.g.,
summer and afterschool programs); and
vi. Other reporting requirements reasonably required by the Secretary
(please refer to Appendix B of this template; final requirements will
be issued separately).
The department values the role of data collection and analysis in determining effective strategies.
Therefore, the department is placing a renewed emphasis on data collection and analysis, as
demonstrated through a reorganization that will bring disparate data collections and systems
48
under one umbrella to maximize the modest SEA resources available in this area. Further, as part
of the department’s investment of state set-aside dollars, the SEA will pursue initiatives to
enhance data collection, quality and use at the school, LEA and SEA levels.
The department and LEAs already have access to certain data collections and reporting that
identify the broader impacts of the pandemic and its effect on students learning. Information
available through state systems includes summative assessments, graduation rates, advanced
coursework patterns, “at-risk” warning reports including chronic absenteeism, dropout rates, and
more. Districts use these state tools in combination with local-level tools such as screening,
diagnostic, formative, and benchmarking assessments, as well as behavior and other local data to
affect outcomes. In addition, as noted above, the department’s year-end survey gathered data that
included measures of student engagement and access to technology. Finally, the department will
explore incorporation of other collections and reporting to provide LEAs with a better picture of
learning opportunities that will benefit educational leaders for the foreseeable future.
Access to data is only half of the story. The other half is using data to impact outcomes for
students. The department will continue training opportunities for educators and school leaders to
utilize the data collections and reporting available to them. The department will also explore the
use of ARP ESSER funds to expand data trainings and usability.
Fiscal data that is comparable across the state is already publicly accessible on the department’s
accountability report card. This includes per pupil expenditures at the state and district levels,
broken out by federal funding sources and state and local funding sources.
Students’ access to high quality educators by poverty and minority status is also reported on the
accountability report card.
The department’s staffing database includes a position vacancy collection. This collection
identifies all open positions on the first day of school and requires the district to respond to how
the course(s) will be offered – for example, by eliminating the program, contracting with another
schools, etc. The staffing database separately also requires districts to identify why a staff person
is no longer employed. The department currently does not have the capacity, nor is it practicable,
to identify positions created directly tied to the pandemic.
With reference to Appendix B, as noted elsewhere, South Dakota’s schools were largely open for
in-person instruction for the entirety of the 2020-21 school year. Therefore, the department will
continue to use the effective model developed during that school year of providing school leaders
with resources, information, and access to the state’s leading health officials to maintain health in
schools and inherently, ensure equity and inclusivity by maximizing in-person instruction.
The department will use data collected throughout the school year and on summer 2021
initiatives to set the parameters for additional investments in extended learning opportunities for
the 2021-22 school year and beyond. This is with the intention of gaining the most significant
long-term impact and investment of these one-time funds possible for the benefit of South
Dakota’s students, including and primarily those in underserved and historically marginalized
groups.
49
2. Monitoring and Internal Controls: Describe how the SEA will implement
appropriate fiscal monitoring of and internal controls for the ARP ESSER funds
(e.g., by updating the SEA’s plan for monitoring funds and internal controls under
the CARES and CRRSA Acts; addressing potential sources of waste, fraud, and
abuse; conducting random audits; or other tools). In this response, please describe
the SEA’s current capacity to monitor ARP ESSER; steps, if needed, to increase
capacity; and any foreseeable gaps in capacity, including how the SEA will
provide its LEAs with technical assistance in the anticipated areas of greatest
need.
The department’s monitoring of and internal controls for ARP ESSER funds will be similar to its
practices for CARES and CRRSA funding. The department’s Office of Grants Management will
oversee the application for funding and payment processes, as well as subrecipient monitoring.
In conjunction with these activities, program staff from throughout the SEA will review LEA
ARP ESSER Plans.
The department will use its online Grants Management System (GMS) that includes grant
application and payment process functions, based on approved program budgets. LEAs will be
required to submit their local ARP ESSER Plans via this system as well. The department uses a
risk analysis to evaluate LEAs and to conduct risk-based monitoring. These processes are used to
verify that LEAs receiving federal education program funds are spending their grant awards in
compliance with the rules and regulations governing the programs. The department regularly
provides LEAs with training and technical assistance and will continue to do so specific to ARP
ESSER funding.
Application Review and Internal Control
The GMS grant application function has been designed with business rules that ensure many
basic program and fiscal requirements are met and followed prior to allowing submission of an
application by subrecipients. LEA subrecipients are required to provide program information and
budgets in their ARP ESSER applications. The applications are reviewed by both program and
fiscal staff to ensure the program and fiscal requirements will be met. The proposed activities
and budgets are reviewed to ensure compliance with applicable statutes and regulations; and to
ensure the costs are reasonable, necessary, allocable and allowable under the program.
Program applications are reviewed in the following order:
1. Program Specialist
2. Fiscal Program Specialist
3. Grants Management Administrator
At each level, if it is determined that the applicant meets the program and fiscal requirements, the
application will be forwarded to the next level with a recommendation for approval. The Grants
Management Office Administrator will provide final approval of the applications. If, at any level
during the review process, it is determined that the application does not meet program or fiscal
requirements:
• Additional information may be requested from the LEA or prior SEA reviewers, or
50
• Application may be returned to the LEA with written notification of the specific parts of
the application that fail to meet the federal requirements. Technical assistance will be
provided to the LEA as necessary. The LEA must address the specific issues and
resubmit the application.
The department will approve an LEA’s ARP ESSER application once it determines that the
applicant meets the requirements of the federal statutes and regulations that apply to the ARP
ESSER program. (EDGAR §76.400)
An LEA may submit budget amendment requests to the SEA as needed. The SEA will review
and process these requests using the original application process, to ensure they are appropriate
and within program requirements before approving an amendment. When an LEA submits an
amendment request, it will follow the same review process as the original application.
Risk Analysis
The department will evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with federal statutes,
regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward as described in 2 CFR 200.331(b), and
may in appropriate circumstances apply specific conditions under 2 CFR 3474.10. The risk
assessment process permits the department to differentiate oversight based on local needs. This
has the potential to reduce burden for both the SEA and its LEAs, and ensures LEAs get the
specific supports they need to run effective and compliant programs.
The department considers the following risk assessment criteria when evaluating an LEA’s risk
of noncompliance:
• The size of the grant awards,
• Outcome of initial or prior reimbursement request analysis,
• Recent (last two years) turnover of key administrative staff (superintendents and business
managers),
• Prior experience with the same or similar awards,
• Noncompliance identified in audit or prior monitoring findings,
• Subject to the equitable private school services requirements.
Other factors that may be considered in the risk process at the discretion of the Program
Specialists and Office Administrator:
• High average federal funding amount per student,
• Turnover of key federal program director or staff,
• Single audit eligibility status,
• Failure to submit timely reimbursement requests,
• Lack of alignment between actual expenditures and approved budgets,
• Failure to adhere to the terms and conditions of the awards,
• Other risk factors that may become apparent.
Federal Education Grant Payments on the GMS
Approved LEAs submit requests for reimbursement of incurred expenses based on the approved
51
program budgets in the GMS. An authorized fiscal representative of the LEA must log into the
GMS using their own unique username and password. Once in the GMS, the user goes to the
appropriate application and program section and creates a reimbursement request in the GMS.
The reimbursement requests pull in the approved program budget line items by activity code and
sub object. The LEA’s fiscal representative must enter the requested amounts by line item. The
GMS limits reimbursements requests to no more than 10 percent above the approved budget line
item amounts, while staying within the total approved budget amount. An account inquiry from
the LEA’s accounting software that matches the total amount requested must be uploaded in the
GMS with each reimbursement request.
The LEA is also required to submit a closeout report on the GMS at the end of the grant period
or sooner if all funds are exhausted.
The authorized user must electronically sign the following required certification statement in 2
CFR 200.415(a) when submitting the reimbursement requests or closeout reports.
The reimbursement requests will be reviewed by the SEA’s Division of Finance and
Management staff to ensure they are supported by an appropriate account inquiry report that
indicates costs consistent with the activities listed in the approved budget. Once the
reimbursement request is accepted, it goes into a batch payment file that the Accounting Office
will process after the 10th day of each month. The batch payment file is approved by the Grants
Management Office Administrator and the Director of Finance, or if unavailable, their designees.
ARP ESSER Fund Fiscal Monitoring Reviews
The department will conduct fiscal reviews of a selected portion of LEAs based on the ongoing
risk analysis. The fiscal reviews will primarily be conducted as desk reviews; however, the SEA
may decide to do on-site review depending on the complexity and risk involved.
The number of LEAs chosen will be based on the resources (staff time) available, and the size,
complexity or high-risk nature of the LEAs identified for review. The LEAs will be selected
based on a risk assessment and at the discretion of the SEA. The SEA will select districts for
review periodically throughout the year based on the resources available to initiate and conduct
timely monitoring reports.
The department will use a program specific monitoring protocol as part of the review process to
verify that the selected LEA meets the fiscal requirements of the ARP ESSER grant program.
Selected LEAs will be asked to submit ledger accounting reports to verify the expenditures
reflected on the reimbursement requests or project end close out report. The accounting reports
and expenditures will be reviewed to determine if they are consistent with the approved program
budget. The SEA will select and request a sampling of support documentation for entries in these
accounting reports. Requested documentation may include items such as: employee time
distribution records, employment contracts, copies of vouchers with invoices attached, property
records, etc. The SEA will check this documentation to verify that the expenditures are an
appropriate and allowable charge to the program. If irregularities are discovered on the sample
audited, the SEA may request additional information or conduct an on-site audit.
52
53
Appendix A: School Operating Status and Instructional Mode Data Template
Indicate the date or time period represented by the following data.
Table 1
In the most recent time period available, how many schools in your State offered each mode of
instruction or learning model described below? Each row should account for all schools in your
State, so that, for each row, the sum of the numbers in the “offered to all students,” “offered to
some students,” and “not offered” columns is equal to the number in the “all schools” column.
Explanation
The data in Table 1 represent the month of May 2021. The data on virtual learning represent the
spring semester. These data are preliminary from the department’s year-end COVID Impact
Survey. The data is for public schools only.
The modes of instruction mentioned in this section are defined below.
Virtual learning – Virtual learning is a long-term distance learning arrangement (i.e., a
quarter, a semester, or a full school year) that utilizes either the South Dakota Virtual
School or an online curriculum purchased specifically for learners participating in this
method (i.e. Edgenuity, Odysseyware, k12.com, Acellus, etc.). The online curriculum is
different than the curriculum that would have been used in the classroom.
Remote learning – Remote learning can be a short- or long-term distance learning
arrangement that utilizes district curriculum materials. It seeks to re-create the traditional
classroom environment through use of technology and/or take-home packets.
Hybrid learning– Hybrid learning takes place when learning is done in a combination of
in-person and remote learning.
In-person learning – In-person learning takes place when students and teachers can be
physically present in a traditional learning environment.
The table below shows how many schools offered a full-time virtual option for each instructional
level.
School Type All schools Offered virtual
learning
All 679 422
Elementary 329 186
Middle 155 110
High 188 124
54
The tables below describe the number of schools that had at least some students participate in
remote, hybrid, or in-person learning in the month of May.
All Schools
Mode of All Schools that had
Instruction schools students participate
Remote 679 330
Hybrid 679 101
In-person 679 645
Elementary Schools
Mode of All Schools that had
Instruction schools students participate
Remote 329 157
Hybrid 329 40
In-person 329 315
Middle Schools
Mode of All Schools that had
Instruction schools students participate
Remote 155 77
Hybrid 155 22
In-person 155 149
High Schools
Mode of All Schools that had
Instruction schools students participate
Remote 188 94
Hybrid 188 39
In-person 188 177
To the extent data are available, please complete the above table for 1) all schools in the State,
and 2) separately for each instructional level (e.g., pre-kindergarten/elementary schools, middle
schools, high schools).
Table 2
In the most recent time period available, what was the enrollment and mode of instruction for the
schools in your State?
55
Explanation
South Dakota’s student information system does not capture enrollment by mode of instruction.
As explained previously, the department is exploring options for capturing certain data by mode
of instruction moving forward. The department will continue to examine its data collections in
light of emerging needs and what is practicable to gather.
The data in Table 2 come from a variety of sources with different time periods. Enrollment
numbers for the racial and ethnic groups, English learners and students from low-income
families come from the fall enrollment census on the last Friday in September 2020. The
numbers for children with disabilities come from the December 1st Child Count (2020). The
foster care data is from Oct. 10, 2020. The data is for public schools only and includes grades
K-12.
Number of students Total enrollment
Students from low-income families 48668
White, not Hispanic 97911
Black or African American, not Hispanic 4429
Hispanic, of any race 9617
Asian, not Hispanic 2320
American Indian or Alaskan Native, not 14521
Hispanic
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not 164
Hispanic
Two or more races, not Hispanic 6998
English learners 6547
Children with disabilities 19775
Students experiencing homelessness *
Children and youth in foster care 1052
Migratory students *
*Data for 2020-21 school year is not yet available.
56
Appendix B: Reporting Language Included in the Grant Award Notification (“GAN”)
As described in the Grant Award Notification (“GAN”), the SEA will comply with, and ensure
that its LEAs comply with, all reporting requirements at such time and in such manner and
containing such information as the Secretary may reasonably require, including on matters such
as:
• How the State is developing strategies and implementing public health protocols
including, to the greatest extent practicable, policies and plans in line with the CDC
guidance related to mitigating COVID-19 in schools;
• Overall plans and policies related to State support for return to in-person instruction and
maximizing in-person instruction time, including how funds will support a return to and
maximize in-person instruction time, and advance equity and inclusivity in participation
in in-person instruction;
• Data on each school’s mode of instruction (fully in-person, hybrid, and fully remote) and
conditions;
• SEA and LEA uses of funds to meet students’ social, emotional, and academic needs,
including through summer enrichment programming and other evidence-based
interventions, and how they advance equity for underserved students;
• SEA and LEA uses of funds to sustain and support access to early childhood education
programs;
• Impacts and outcomes (disaggregated by student subgroup) through use of ARP ESSER
funding (e.g., quantitative and qualitative results of ARP ESSER funding, including on
personnel, student learning, and budgeting at the school and district level);
• Student data (disaggregated by student subgroup) related to how the COVID-19
pandemic has affected instruction and learning;
• Requirements under the Federal Financial Accountability Transparency Act (“FFATA”);
and
• Additional reporting requirements as may be necessary to ensure accountability and
transparency of ARP ESSER funds.
57
Appendix C: Assurances
By signing this document, the SEA assures all of the following:
• The SEA will conduct all its operations so that no person shall be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under the ARP
ESSER program or activity based on race, color, national origin, which includes a
person’s limited English proficiency or English learner status and a person’s actual or
perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics; sex; age; or disability. These non-
discrimination obligations arise under Federal civil rights laws, including but not limited
to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of
1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of
1975. In addition, the SEA must comply with all regulations, guidelines, and standards
issued by the Department under any of these statutes;
• The SEA will comply with all ARP Act and other ARP ESSER requirements and all
requirements of its Grant Award Notification, including but not limited to:
o Complying with the maintenance of effort provision in section 2004(a)(1) of the
ARP Act, absent a waiver by the Secretary pursuant to section 2004(a)(2) of the
ARP Act; and
o Complying with the maintenance of equity provisions in section 2004(b) of the
ARP Act, and ensuring its LEAs comply with the maintenance of equity provision
in section 2004(c) of the ARP Act (please note that the Department will provide
additional guidance on maintenance of equity shortly);
• The SEA will allocate ARP ESSER funds to LEAs in an expedited and timely manner
and, to the extent practicable, not later than 60 days after the SEA receives ARP ESSER
funds (i.e., 60 days from the date the SEA receives each portion of its ARP ESSER
funds). An SEA that is not able to allocate such funds within 60 days because it is not
practicable (e.g., because of pre-existing State board approval requirements) will provide
an explanation to the Department within 30 days of receiving each portion of its ARP
ESSER funds (submitted via email to your Program Officer at [State].OESE@ed.gov
(e.g., Alabama.OESE@ed.gov)), including a description of specific actions the SEA is
taking to provide ARP ESSER funds to LEAs in an expedited and timely manner and the
SEA’s expected timeline for doing so;
• The SEA will implement evidence-based interventions as required under section 2001(f)
of the ARP Act and ensure its LEAs implement evidence-based interventions, as required
by section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act;
• The SEA will address the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
underserved students (i.e., students from low-income families, students from racial or
ethnic groups (e.g., identifying disparities and focusing on underserved student groups by
race or ethnicity), gender (e.g., identifying disparities and focusing on underserved
student groups by gender), English learners, children with disabilities, students
experiencing homelessness, children and youth in foster care, and migratory students), as
required under section 2001(f) of the ARP Act, and ensure its LEAs address the
disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on underserved students (i.e.,
students from low-income families, students from racial or ethnic groups, gender, English
learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and
58
youth in foster care, and migratory students), as required by section 2001(e)(1) of the
ARP Act; and
• The SEA will provide to the Department: (1) the URL(s) where the public can readily
find data on school operating status and (2) the URL(s) for the SEA and/or LEA websites
where the public can find the LEA plans for a) the safe return to in-person instruction and
continuity of services required under section 2001(i) of the ARP Act, and b) use of ARP
ESSER funds. SEAs should consider ensuring a standardized URL format in all cases
(e.g., xxx.gov/COVIDplan).
59
Appendix D
OMB Control No. 1894-0005 (Exp. 06/30/2023)
NOTICE TO ALL APPLICANTS
The purpose of this enclosure is to inform you about a new provision in the Department of
Educations General Education Provisions Act ("GEPA") that applies to applicants for new grant
awards under Department programs. This provision is Section 427 of GEPA, enacted as part of
the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (Public Law (P.L.) 103-382).
To Whom Does This Provision Apply?
Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for new grant awards under this program. ALL
APPLICANTS FOR NEW AWARDS MUST INCLUDE INFORMATION IN THEIR
APPLICATIONS TO ADDRESS THIS NEW PROVISION IN ORDER TO RECEIVE
FUNDING UNDER THIS PROGRAM.
(If this program is a State-formula grant program, a State needs to provide this description only
for projects or activities that it carries out with funds reserved for State-level uses. In addition,
local school districts or other eligible applicants that apply to the State for funding need to provide
this description in their applications to the State for funding. The State would be responsible for
ensuring that the school district or other local entity has submitted a sufficient section 427
statement as described below.)
What Does This Provision Require?
Section 427 requires each applicant for funds (other than an individual person) to include in its
application a description of the steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access to,
and participation in, its Federally-assisted program for students, teachers, and other program
beneficiaries with special needs. This provision allows applicants discretion in developing the
required description. The statute highlights six types of barriers that can impede equitable access
or participation: gender, race, national origin, color, disability, or age. Based on local
circumstances, you should determine whether these or other barriers may prevent your students,
teachers, etc. from such access to, or participation in, the Federally-funded project or activity. The
description in your application of steps to be taken to overcome these barriers need not be lengthy;
you may provide a clear and succinct description of how you plan to address those barriers that
are applicable to your circumstances. In addition, the information may be provided in a single
narrative, or, if appropriate, may be discussed in connection with related topics in the application.
Section 427 is not intended to duplicate the requirements of civil rights statutes, but rather to ensure
that, in designing their projects, applicants for Federal funds address equity concerns that may
affect the ability of certain potential beneficiaries to fully participate in the project and to achieve
high standards. Consistent with program requirements and its approved application, an applicant
may use the Federal funds awarded to it to eliminate barriers it identifies.
60
What are Examples of How an Applicant Might Satisfy the Requirement of This
Provision?
The following examples may help illustrate how an applicant may comply with Section 427.
(1) An applicant that proposes to carry out an adult literacy project serving, among others,
adults with limited English proficiency, might describe in its application how it intends to
distribute a brochure about the proposed project to such potential participants in their native
language.
(2) An applicant that proposes to develop instructional materials for classroom use might
describe how it will make the materials available on audio tape or in braille for students who
are blind.
(3) An applicant that proposes to carry out a model science program for secondary students
and is concerned that girls may be less likely than boys to enroll in the course, might indicate
how it intends to conduct "outreach" efforts to girls, to encourage their enrollment.
(4) An applicant that proposes a project to increase school safety might describe the special
efforts it will take to address concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students, and
efforts to reach out to and involve the families of LGBT students.
We recognize that many applicants may already be implementing effective steps to ensure equity
of access and participation in their grant programs, and we appreciate your cooperation in
responding to the requirements of this provision.
The South Dakota Department of Education recognizes the importance of equitable access to,
and participation in, federally assisted programs for students, teachers, and their beneficiaries
with special needs. As a component of submitting an application for federal funds, districts must
submit assurances that include nondiscrimination. These assurances relate specifically to ARP
ESSER funding and to the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA).
ARP ESSER-specific assurances include that recipients will comply with all state and federal
rules and regulations regarding nondiscrimination on the basis of gender, race, national origin,
color, disability, or age.
To assist districts in ensuring they are in compliance with GEPA, as part of the state’s ARP
ESSER application process, all recipients must provide a written GEPA statement that pertains to
the recipient that explains how its intended use of funds will be all-inclusive. To assist recipients
in the creation of these statements, the department provides an example statement that recipients
can refine to reflect their unique local requirements and needs. The example explains that the
recipient must provide a specific explanation of the recipient’s proposed use(s) of grant funds
and a specific explanation of how the recipient will use grant funds in a way that addresses
barriers to access and does not discriminate on the basis of any federally protected category.
61
Estimated Burden Statement for GEPA Requirements
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a
collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. Public
reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 3 hours per
response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain
benefit (Public Law 103-382). Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other
aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20210-4537 or
email ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1894-0005.
62
File and source
- File
- department-of-education-pdf-www-ed-gov-288e7ca521.pdf
- Size
- 868,008 bytes
- SHA-256
- 13c248e313ac3926da387fbc16484c049ed85de7ee345c5cc734f44d7a4ff5c2
- Original
- www.ed.gov