State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund — South Dakota
Summary
A South Dakota State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund, on the Department of Education's form issued April 21, 2021 with OMB Number 1810-0754. The cover page leaves the award number blank and carries the printed name of Tiffany Sanderson as the authorized representative with a date of 6/3/2021. The form's introduction says the ARP ESSER Fund provides nearly $122 billion to States, and the plan follows the form's sections, beginning with a description of the State's current status and needs. The page ends with the Department's paperwork burden notice under OMB Control Number 1894-0005.
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 3D0Ce653F3
- Case
- Department Of Education Pdf Www Ed Gov 3D0Ce653F3
Cite this document
“State Plan for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund — South Dakota.”
Original at www.ed.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/department-of-education-pdf-www-ed-gov-3d0ce653f3/
, SHA-256 4537ac7a98b2106e624e73cd678911d37d8d72b9696f43cfafb02671cd6a3400.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:
6/3/2021
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.
Consistent with federal requirements, the department engaged in meaningful consultation as it
developed its State ARP ESSER Plan. It is important to note that consultation with stakeholder
groups had been extensive and ongoing throughout the course of the pandemic. The department
utilized existing, regularly occurring feedback loops to better understand the needs and concerns
of various stakeholders. The SEA will continue to rely on these feedback loops as
implementation of the State ARP ESSER Plan occurs.
The department also held a specific public comment period from May 6-24, 2021. An invitation
to provide public comment for the State Plan was distributed widely via the SEA’s existing
communications channels (listservs, website, social media, newsletters) and via the SEA’s
education partners’ existing channels. Through these mechanisms, the department sought input
from all required stakeholder groups listed above. At the closing of the public comment period,
the department had received 263 completed comments. Several broad, common themes emerged
from this input: concerns about students’ mental health and a lack of capacity to support them;
concerns about lost instructional time and student disengagement; concerns about COVID’s
impact on the educator workforce; and interest in updating facilities to create healthier physical
environments.
Finally, the Board of Education Standards hosted a public comment period on the ARP ESSER
State Plan at its May 2021 meeting.
Department leaders reviewed all the public comments received during the specific public
comment period and considered input provided over the course of the last 14 months in
developing the State ARP ESSER Plan. The final plan addresses the broad themes conveyed in
those comments.
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:
17
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
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
18
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
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
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.
19
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;
Because South Dakota was primarily open for in-person instruction in fall 2021, the department
expects many schools have already begun to address any impact of two months of remote
20
instruction in the spring of 2020. Some initial interim assessment data seems to support that, but
the department will need time to understand the true impact of COVID’s educational disruption
before settling on specific evidence-based interventions. Of particular concern will be those
students, or pockets of students, that were not engaged in instruction either last spring or into the
current school year.
During the summer of 2021, school districts and community-based organizations will lead the
effort at the local level to provide summer programming, since they have first-hand knowledge
of student needs. According to the year-end COVID Impact Survey, 54 percent of public schools
intend to offer in-person summer school as one strategy to close any COVID gaps. The
department will use its reserve funds in this area to target interventions during the 2021-22
school year, summer of 2022, and beyond. Equipped with evidence and analysis, the department
will be able to select meaningful, evidence-based interventions that have positive, long-term
impact on students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs.
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. As districts and the state collect and
analyze data that can quantify the academic impact of the pandemic for these students, who
identify under multiple groups listed in question A.3.i.-viii, the full impact will more readily
emerge. Data sources that likely will bring to light the level of need include summative and
benchmark test scores, attendance measures, chronic absenteeism, graduation rates, and teacher
retention. The department will work in concert with districts to identify strategies and
interventions to meet the needs effectively of vulnerable students, using local and state set-aside
funding.
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 disengaged students due to COVID from its robust
collaboration with districts and local stakeholder networks. A fuller picture of the level of
statewide need in this area will emerge as LEAs submit their 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,
21
students who did not participate or participated inconsistently in remote instruction, and students
most at-risk of dropping out of school. The department is exploring means to assist districts in
identifying disengaged students through additional data tools and programming to support these
students’ academic progress and overall well-being. Identification is only a piece of the puzzle,
however. Once identified, districts need tools to re-engage students in their learning through
learning that is relevant to them.
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;
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, initial data
indicate 54 percent of public schools will offer in-person summer school as well, with a handful
offering an online option. Data will continue to be collected in the fall of 2021 to gauge the
impact the COVID pandemic had on learning during the 2020-21 school year. Once data is
collected and analyzed, including on the impact of summer programs in 2021, the department
will make informed decisions of how to support learning through evidence-based summer
programming in the summer of 2022.
In making decisions about programming, the department’s aim will be 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 will
utilize partnerships with key community-based organizations that can deliver high quality,
effective summer learning programs. Evaluation of programming will be ongoing in order to
make adjustments to continuously address the impact strategies are having towards meeting
students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs.
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
The department will continue to use quantitative data sources and information gathered from
robust feedback loops to determine the impact on learning from the 2020-21 school year. Once
22
the highest needs are determined, the department will work, in coordination with districts and
community-based organizations, to support partners in providing evidence-based summer school
programming, including targeting student groups that demonstrate significant learning loss.
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. A fuller picture of the level
of statewide need in this area will emerge with LEA ARP ESSER plans. As referenced below,
districts will be 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. Once data is collected and analyzed,
including on the extent to which students disengaged and on the impact of summer programs in
2021, the department will make informed decisions of how to support learning through evidence-
based summer programming in the summer of 2022 and in subsequent years.
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. 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 will continue
to be collected in the fall of 2021 to gauge the impact the COVID pandemic had on learning
during the 2020-21 school year. Once outcome data is collected and analyzed, including on the
impact of afterschool programs already offered, the department will make informed decisions of
how to support learning through evidence-based afterschool programming in the 2021-22 school
year and beyond.
23
In making decisions about programming, the department’s aim will be to leverage partnerships to
provide supports to highly impacted student groups and areas. The department will utilize
partnerships with key community-based organizations that can deliver high quality, effective
afterschool programs. Evaluation of programming will be ongoing in order to make adjustments
to continuously address the impact strategies are having towards meeting students’ academic,
social, emotional, and mental health needs.
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
The department will continue to use quantitative data sources and information gathered from
robust feedback loops to determine the impact on learning from the 2020-21 school year. Once
the highest needs are determined, the department will work, in coordination with districts and
community-based organizations, to provide evidence-based afterschool programming supporting
student groups that demonstrate significant learning loss due to the COVID pandemic.
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. A fuller picture of the level
of statewide need in this area will emerge with LEA ARP ESSER plans. As referenced below,
districts will be 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. Once data is collected and analyzed,
including on the extent to which students disengaged and on the impact of afterschool programs
in the 2020-21 school year, the department will make informed decisions of how to support
learning through evidence-based programming.
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.
24
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
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.
25
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
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
26
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.
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
27
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.
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.
28
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-
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
29
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.
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
30
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.
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
31
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.
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
32
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.
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.
33
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
(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
34
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
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);
35
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
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.
36
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.
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:
37
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
• 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,
38
• 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
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
39
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.
40
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
41
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?
42
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.
43
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.
44
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
45
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).
46
Appendix D
OMB Control No. 1894-0005 (Exp. 06/30/2023)
NOTICE TO ALL APPLICANTS
The purpose of this enclosure is to inform you access to, and participation in, its Federally-
about a new provision in the Department of assisted program for students, teachers, and
Educations General Education Provisions other program beneficiaries with special
Act ("GEPA") that applies to applicants for needs. This provision allows applicants
new grant awards under Department discretion in developing the required
programs. This provision is Section 427 of description. The statute highlights six types
GEPA, enacted as part of the Improving of barriers that can impede equitable access
America's Schools Act of 1994 (Public Law or participation: gender, race, national origin,
(P.L.) 103-382). color, disability, or age. Based on local
circumstances, you should determine
To Whom Does This Provision Apply? whether these or other barriers may prevent
your students, teachers, etc. from such access
Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for
to, or participation in, the Federally-funded
new grant awards under this program. ALL
project or activity. The description in your
APPLICANTS FOR NEW AWARDS
application of steps to be taken to overcome
MUST INCLUDE INFORMATION IN
these barriers need not be lengthy; you may
THEIR APPLICATIONS TO ADDRESS
provide a clear and succinct description of
THIS NEW PROVISION IN ORDER TO
how you plan to address those barriers that
RECEIVE FUNDING UNDER THIS
are applicable to your circumstances. In
PROGRAM.
addition, the information may be provided in
(If this program is a State-formula grant a single narrative, or, if appropriate, may be
program, a State needs to provide this discussed in connection with related topics in
description only for projects or activities that the application.
it carries out with funds reserved for State-
Section 427 is not intended to duplicate the
level uses. In addition, local school districts
requirements of civil rights statutes, but
or other eligible applicants that apply to the
rather to ensure that, in designing their
State for funding need to provide this
projects, applicants for Federal funds address
description in their applications to the State
equity concerns that may affect the ability of
for funding. The State would be responsible
certain potential beneficiaries to fully
for ensuring that the school district or other
participate in the project and to achieve high
local entity has submitted a sufficient section
standards. Consistent with program
427 statement as described below.)
requirements and its approved application, an
What Does This Provision Require? applicant may use the Federal funds awarded
to it to eliminate barriers it identifies.
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
47
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.
Click here to enter text.
48
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.
49
File and source
- File
- department-of-education-pdf-www-ed-gov-3d0ce653f3.pdf
- Size
- 737,340 bytes
- SHA-256
- 4537ac7a98b2106e624e73cd678911d37d8d72b9696f43cfafb02671cd6a3400
- Original
- www.ed.gov