Performance Standards Questions and Answers
PS45 Q&A update for June 14, 2004: More on Basic Education and Literacy and Numeracy Gains
Question: How is the "contract-to-date" value calculated for Basic Education, which is a "point-in-time" measurement? Is this done by adding all numerators and denominators together and then dividing to get a percentage, or is it done by averaging the percentages?
Answer: To arrive at a "contract-to-date" calculation for the "point-in-time" Basic Education performance measure, the numerators and denominators for each month are added together and divided to arrive at a percentage.
Question: A participant was incorrectly enrolled in Basic Education when she was in fact completing her GED. The worker entered a completion code ‘A,’ claiming an attainment for the Basic Ed component. Obviously this is incorrect, since obtaining a GED does not qualify as an activity for Basic Education and should not be counted as an attainment for the Literacy and Numeracy Gains. We would like to have it counted as an attainment for the Attainment of Degree or Certificate. What should we do?
Answer: Delete the BE component and then open the GE component, then enter a successful completion based on the GED.
Question: In August 2003 we pre-tested a participant, and November 2003 we entered an attainment (as provided for under the PS23 standard) based on a post-test score that met the attainment goal. In February of 2004 we tested the participant again. Although the test score increase from November 2003 to February 2004 did not represent an increase in "Educational Functioning Levels" based on the "descriptors" chart for PS45, the increase from August 2003 to February 2004 did. Can we claim a PS45 attainment for this participant on the basis of this August 2003 to February 2004 increase?
Answer: No. A pre-test that served as the basis for claiming an attainment under a prior contract cannot also be the basis for an attainment under the current contract. A test may serve only once as the pre-test baseline for post-test comparison to claim a successful completion; that post-test then establishes the new baseline for any subsequent attainment.
In the scenario above, the November 2003 post-test score should now serve as the "pre-test" against which to measure a skill level increase and record an attainment for the 2004-2005 contract. For the February 2004 test to justify a claim of an attainment, it would need to show an increase in Educational Functioning Levels in comparison with the November 2003 score.
Question: We are now using TABE forms 9 and 10, which were not mentioned in the chart that went out with Ops Memo 04-14. How do those tests relate to the educational functioning levels on that chart?
Answer: According to information from the U.S. Department of Education, the scores for TABE 9-10 correspond to the federally-defined "Educational Functioning Levels" in exactly the same way as the scores for TABE 7-8. The descriptors chart has been updated to reflect this new information. If you happen to be using the earlier version that was attached to Ops Memo 04-14, just use the TABE 7-8 relationships to correlate TABE 9-10 with the functioning levels.
Question: When one of our customers moved out of the county, the worker closed that customer’s basic education component with an "A." This is incorrect, but since the case has been closed for our county, we can no longer delete the component. What should we do?
Answer: You should file for an adjustment request to have the case removed from your numerator.
Question: The federal descriptors chart to be used for measuring increases in basic education skill-levels identifies only one level as "Literacy Skills" (associated with a TABE grade level of 1.9 or less). The next levels are designated as "Basic Education." Does this mean that a participant in the W-2 Literacy Skills component who has a pre-test score of 2.0 or above will not be able to record an attainment?
Answer: No. Of course, as a matter of good general practice, the skill level increases attained by a participant should bear some logical relationship to the component in which that participant is placed. The LS component was defined, even before Ops Memo 04-14, as a course of study aimed at teaching skills "necessary to prepare an individual to participate in ABE," or other types of basic education. So it is not unreasonable to infer that someone already functioning at a higher adult basic education level is more appropriately placed in BE rather than LS.
But DWS has not made, and has no immediate plans to enforce, any hard and fast rule prescribing the range of skill level increases that can be associated with a particular component, or relating the "Educational Functional Levels" on the federal chart to particular W-2 components in a particular way. There may be a legitimate reason for a participant who is already functioning at a fairly high educational level to be assigned to the LS component. For example, the best or only available provider of basic educational services in a given area may be the local literacy provider. As long as the participant is in one of the three components associated with the Literacy/Numeracy Gains Performance standard (LS, BE, or EL), any increase in "educational functioning level" counts as an attainment, no matter where on the descriptors chart that increase occurs.
Question: The 2004-2005 Performance Standards Information Map identifies the qualifying activities for the Literacy/Numeracy Gains performance standard as basic education (BE), literacy skills (LS), and English as a second language (EL). The federal "descriptors" chart of "Educational Functioning Levels," however, also includes levels for "adult secondary education." Will the Department be adding other components, related to secondary education, to the list of activities that qualify for the Literacy/Numeracy Gains performance standard?
Answer: No. BE, EL, and LS are indeed the only components to which the literacy/numeracy gain performance standard applies, and we have no reason to expect that to change. The federally-defined "educational functioning levels" on the chart attached to Ops Memo 04-14 describe skill levels attained through participation in W-2 activities or components, not the activities or components themselves. In other words, there is no direct relationship between those levels as they are labeled on the chart and any particular W-2 activity or component. A participant in Basic Education (BE) may be functioning at, and register a skills gain by moving between, any of the six adult basic educational "Educational Functioning Levels" on that chart, including "Low Adult Secondary Education" and "High Adult Secondary Education"). (See the Wisconsin CARES Guide Definitions of Components and Statuses, which defines Adult Basic Education (BE) to encompass all grade levels 0-12.9, and thus includes the full range of functioning levels on the federal chart attached to Ops Memo 04-14.)
Of course, someone functioning at an "Adult Secondary Education" level might also be appropriately placed in a General Educational Development (GE) or High School Equivalency (HS) component. In that case, however, the applicable performance standard would be the Attainment of a Degree or Certificate, attainment of which is based not on educational functioning levels as established through tests, but by earning a degree or certificate through successful completion of a particular educational program.