|
The contingency plan is one of the most overlooked aspects of a D.A.T.E. application. A poorly designed contingency plan can result in payouts that do not support program goals. A good contingency plan reflects the purpose and the structure of the main program design.
This section of our database addresses the common mistakes made in past plans and offers suggestions on how to avoid them. Each button below contains a common mistake made in a contingency plan and will take you to a solution and sample language for writing a contingency plan that avoids it. We recommend taking time to look at each of these examples.
N.B. These contingency suggestions are for Cycle 1 districts only. For Cycle 2, contingency plans are restricted. In Part I, districts may only transfer funds to Part II in excess of 60% of the grant. Any fudns under 60% must remain unexpended. In Part II, there are a list of proscribed contingency uses, such as professional development and mentor teacher stipends, but they may not be used for incentive payments.
Mistake: Equally redistributing Part I or Part II funds without restricting the maximum award amount earned by a given teacher or staff member.
Mistake: Redistributing Part I or Part II funds without respect to the proportion in which the funds were originally allocated in the grant.
Mistake: Part II funds that merely redistribute funds among those who earned an award in Part II.
Explanation: Reallocating funds without a cap can create the possibility that a handful of teachers will receive the bulk of the funds. For example, suppose that only two teachers earned their maximum award of $1,000 among a group of 30 teachers. This leaves $28,000 left unspent. These two teachers, with equal redistribution of leftover funds, will receive payouts of $15,000. Such wide imbalances, especially if certain categories of teachers were excluded from the plan altogether, can cause great dissension and make the program seem unfair.
Sample Language:Each of these models
contains a cap. A cap is often insufficient to ensure a fair distribution.
Part I: All remaining and undistributed Part I funds will be equally redistributed amongst teachers who earned a Part I award. The maximum award amount for a given teacher with redistribution for Part I is $_,000.00.
Part II: All remaining and undistributed Part II funds will be equally redistributed amongst staff who earned a Part II award. The maximum award amount for a given staff member with redistribution for Part II is $__,000. If all staff members reach their cap, Part II funds not redistributed will be applied to professional development and to pay substitute teachers in order to release teachers to attend professional development.
Explanation: It is important that the differentiated measures in your program— by achievement level, subject area, grade level, teams, etc.— are reflected in your contingency.
For example, suppose your Part I awards are tiered in the following manner:
|
Level 1: $3,000 |
11% or greater improvement on TAKS |
|
Level 2: $2,000 |
6-10% improvement on TAKS |
|
Level 3: $1,000 |
1-5% improvement on TAKS |
One teacher earned a Level 1 award of $3,000 for raising TAKS scores by 12%--a great year—and another teacher earned a Level 3 award of $1,000 for raising TAKS scores by 2%. The contingency plan redistributed funds equally among all teachers who received an award up to $6,000. If enough teachers do not earn any award, and your awards are capped at $6,000, it is possible that both teachers could receive the same $6,000 but for vastly different results.
Sample Language: Each of these models differentiates the contingency awards.
Part I, Levels:
No teacher may earn more than three times their original award at any point during the distribution of contingency funds. The leftover funds will be distributed proportionately to each Level based upon the award amounts originally assigned to that Level, as follows:
- Level 1 – 50% of remaining funds will be equally distributed to teachers that met Level 1.
- Level 2 – 25% of remaining funds will be equally distributed to teachers that met Level 2.
- Level 3 – 25% of remaining funds will be equally distributed to teachers that met Level 3.
Note: This plan both differentiates by level and adds a requirement that no teacher may earn more than three times their original award amount earned.. This allows teachers to receive additional funds, but in proportion to the degree that they were earned.
Part I, Group and Individual: Unearned award funds will be distributed proportionally according to the amount unearned within the grade level and individual awards.
All unearned funds originally allocated to the grade level awards will be redistributed equally to teachers who earned a grade level award. The maximum award amount that a teacher can receive from a grade level award may not exceed $__,000.
All unearned funds originally allocated to individual achievement awards will be redistributed equally to all teachers who earned an individual award. No teacher may receive more than two times their original award.
The maximum award amount a classroom teacher can earn under Part I is $_,000.
Note: This plan maintains the integrity of the group and individual level awards. It continues to separate group success from individual success, preserving the objectives for having both types of rewards.
Part II, Team Teaching & Tutoring: Unearned Part II award funds will be distributed in proportion to the amount unearned funds within the awards for tutoring and team teaching.
All unearned funds originally allocated to the team teaching awards will be redistributed equally to teachers who earned a team teaching award. The maximum award amount that a teacher can receive from a grade level award may not exceed two times their original awards amount.
All unearned funds originally allocated to the tutoring awards will be redistributed equally to teachers who earned a tutoring award. The maximum award amount that a teacher can receive from a tutoring award may not exceed two times their original awards amount.
After redistribution, money left over will be applied to professional development and to pay substitute teachers in order to release teachers to attend professional development.
Note: The proportions are maintained between the two types of Part II awards, team teaching and tutoring. The awards are capped and remaining funds go to professional development as well as paying for substitutes to enable teachers to go on professional development.
Explanation: Part II affords the most flexibility for a district to invest in support structures for teachers. If money is unearned, it suggests that the staff could benefit from additional supports to help reach performance targets in the future.
Sample Language: This model covers professional development.
Part II: All unearned Part II funds to pay for professional development activities directly related to improving instruction and to pay for substitutes to allow for teacher release time to attend professional development activities. The Principal, Assistant Principal, and at least four teachers will determine the professional development needs and programming options.
Note: This language not only directs funds to professional development, but includes multiple campus stakeholders to ensure that the resources are directed towards staff needs. It also pays for substitutes to allow more teachers to attend professional development.
Additionally, If your original D.A.T.E. plan invested less than 40% in Part II, unearned Part I funds can also be reallocated to Part II and spent on allowable activities as long as at least 60% of total grant funds remain in Part I.
For example, if your district allocated 80% of total grant funds to Part I and 10% of funds remain after Part I awards are distributed, that 10% can be moved to Part II to pay for other allowable activities.
| 
