Skip to main content
Content Starts Here GSA Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Database Skip to main content

Committee Detail

Note: An Annual Comprehensive Review, as required by §7 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, is conducted each year on committee data entered for the previous fiscal year (referred to as the reporting year). The data for the reporting year is not considered verified until this review is complete and the data is moved to history for an agency/department. See the Data From Previous Years section at the bottom of this page for the committee’s historical, verified data.


ED - 24849 - Regional Advisory Committees - Statutory (Congress Created)
Hide Section - GENERAL INFORMATION

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee NameRegional Advisory CommitteesAgency NameDepartment of Education
Fiscal Year2005Committee Number24849
Original Establishment Date12/29/2003Committee StatusTerminated
Actual Termination Date5/1/2005Committee URLhttp://www.rac-ed.org
New Committee This FYYesPresidential Appointments*No
Terminated This FYYesMax Number of Members*Unlimited
Current Charter Date10/26/2004Designated Fed Officer Position Title*Project Director
Date Of Renewal Charter10/26/2006Designated Federal Officer PrefixMs.
Projected Termination Date5/1/2005Designated Federal Officer First Name*Enid
Exempt From Renewal*NoDesignated Federal Officer Middle Name
Specific Termination AuthorityDesignated Federal Officer Last Name*Simmons
Establishment Authority*Statutory (Congress Created)Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Establishment Authority*20 UCS 9605Designated Federal Officer Phone*(202) 708-9499
Effective Date Of Authority*12/29/2003Designated Federal Officer Fax*202-205-5780
Exempt From EO 13875 Discretionary Cmte Designated Federal Officer Email*enid.simmons@ed.gov
Committee Type*Ad hoc
Presidential*No
Committee Function*Other Committee
Hide Section - RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATIONS

RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATIONS

Agency Recommendation*Terminate
Legislation to Terminate RequiredNo
Legislation StatusEnacted
How does cmte accomplish its purpose?*Regional Advisory Committees To help inform the Secretary’s priorities for the Comprehensive Centers, the Secretary (in accordance with Section 206 of the TA Act) established ten regional advisory committees (RACs) charged with conducting education needs assessments within the geographical regions served by the current regional educational laboratories. In October 2004, the Secretary appointed 155 individuals to serve on the 10 RACs. The membership of each RAC consisted of individuals from the States in the region representing parents, practicing educators, higher education representatives, business representatives, researchers, and a representative from each State educational agency in the region. The RACs conducted their needs assessments between December 2004 and March 2005 by soliciting input from a broad constituency within each region through web-based and face-to-face interviews, focus groups, public hearings, written reports, and public comment on the following three questions: · What are the challenges and needs for assistance as schools, districts, and States strive to improve student achievement and implement the requirements of NCLB?· How can/should these needs be addressed through technical assistance?· How might Federal technical assistance providers help to address these technical assistance needs? The RACs submitted their regional assessment reports for the Secretary’s consideration on March 31, 2005. The RACs identified several education challenges across the 10 regional reports, including for example: · Use of scientifically based research. Many educators have had little or no exposure to scientifically based research. The RACs urged that the new centers play a role in helping decision-makers and practitioners understand how to identify and apply high-quality research to the specific circumstances and student populations within schools and classrooms. · Building State capacity to provide assistance to districts and schools. Under NCLB, States play a major role in creating and sustaining a statewide infrastructure that provides technical assistance to schools in need of improvement. Technical assistance is needed to strengthen the organizational capacity of States and local school districts to support and assist these schools. · Developing and using assessment and accountability systems. States need assistance with putting in place large-scale assessment and accountability systems to meet the requirements of NCLB and training policymakers, administrators, and teachers to use assessment and accountability data and information to assess needs, plan instruction, allocate resources, and monitor and evaluate school improvements efforts.· Addressing diversity and special-needs students. Related to efforts to close the achievement gap at the school and classroom levels, RAC members cited the need for proven instructional strategies for raising achievement in the core content areas, especially for limited English proficient and other students with special needs, as well as proven practices for preparing teachers to address the diverse needs of students. The RACs also cited the special circumstances and challenges faced by both urban and rural districts. · Teacher quality and preparedness. Improving teacher quality emerged as a key challenge identified by each of the RACs. Associated issues included instituting effective programs and strategies for the recruitment, induction, and retention of qualified teachers and identifying effective training models to enhance the knowledge and skills of existing teachers to enable them to meet the “highly qualified teacher” requirements of NCLB. · Leadership for school improvement. Several of the RACs focused on the need to help States recruit, retain and provide professional development for school-level leaders. Part of the leadership challenge is the need for help with rethinking and restructuring education governance, resource management, and infrastructure within districts, intermediate units, and States. · Technology. The RACs identified the need for assistance facilitating the wider use of the Internet for the following:(a) to deliver educational programs to students; (b) to provide professional development and technical assistance to teachers and school administrators; (c) to provide information to parents; and (d) to improve communication between researchers and practitioners around proven practices. In addition to identifying these crosscutting challenges and technical assistance needs, the following themes for Federal technical assistance emerged: · Disseminating up to date information related to NCLB and other Federal programs. The RACs envisioned the new centers as integral to facilitating the dissemination of information about NCLB and other Federal programs, including key NCLB policies and providing technical assistance to support implementation of those policies. · Professional development and training. The RACs saw the centers as helping States with professional development and training, such as training on how to: identify research based practices for students at risk of academic failure, such as, students from economically disadvantaged families and students with limited proficiency in English; translate research into practice; use evaluation and accountability data to inform practice decisions; select and/or develop and use valid assessments; and implement statewide strategies for recruiting, training, and retaining qualified teachers. · Online clearinghouses. Several of the RACs envisioned the centers as purveyors of knowledge that could be available to States and districts via the Internet, particularly around: effective teaching methods for special populations such as students with limited proficiency in English and students from economically disadvantaged families; effective teacher training models; effective leadership models; models for turning around low achieving schools; and models for improving parental involvement and choice. The Department expects that the new centers will address these and other existing challenges and emerging technical assistance needs by improving the quality, coordination, and focus of ongoing State and local NCLB implementation. Applicants for the centers were encouraged to consider the specific priorities and recommendations contained in the RAC reports in preparing their applications.
How is membership balanced?*The membership includes representatives from 10 regional locations throughout the United States, and members were nominated by educational organizations and university-based research sources.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*These 10 regional advisory committees held 4 meetings each.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*The assessment is required by the No Child Left Behind Act, to seek input from stakeholders on how the administration can meet the needs of the regional laboratories and assist IES in that development. The legislation mandated the establishment and set forth the criteria for recruitment of the membership.
Why close or partially close meetings?No meetings were closed to the public.
Recommendation RemarksThese committees submitted their individual reports to the Secretary, therefore completing their mission. The 10 regional committees were terminated on May 1, 2005. Ten regional advisory committees were established under one charter. Each committee submitted their annual report under the subcommittee category in this over all report.
Hide Section - PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Outcome Improvement To Health Or Safety*NoAction Reorganize Priorities*Yes
Outcome Trust In GovernmentYesAction Reallocate ResourcesYes
Outcome Major Policy ChangesYesAction Issued New RegulationsNo
Outcome Advance In Scientific ResearchYesAction Proposed LegislationNo
Outcome Effective Grant MakingNoAction Approved Grants Or Other PaymentsNo
Outcome Improved Service DeliveryYesAction OtherNo
Outcome Increased Customer SatisfactionYesAction CommentNA
Outcome Implement Laws/Reg RequirementsYesGrants Review*No
Outcome OtherNoNumber Of Grants Reviewed0
Outcome CommentNANumber Of Grants Recommended0
Cost Savings*Unable to DetermineDollar Value Of Grants Recommended$0.00
Cost Savings CommentNAGrants Review CommentNA
Number Of Recommendations*7Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*Yes
Number Of Recommendations CommentThe RACs identified several education challenges across the 10 regional reports, which included the 7 recommendations mentioned above.Access Agency WebsiteYes
% of Recs Fully Implemented*80.00%Access Committee WebsiteYes
% of Recs Fully Implemented CommentNAAccess GSA FACA WebsiteYes
% of Recs Partially Implemented*20.00%Access PublicationsNo
% of Recs Partially Implemented CommentNAAccess OtherNo
Agency Feedback*YesAccess CommentNA
Agency Feedback Comment*Based on a review of RAC recommendations, evaluations, and performance reports of the current comprehensive centers; feedback from Department staff focused interviews with technical assistance customers commissioned by the Department and came up with four fundamental principles for the new centers.Narrative Description*In order to assist the Secretary in developing priorities for the Comprehensive Centers, required by law in Section 206 of P.L. 107-279, the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, the Secretary of Education established ten regional advisory committees (RACs) charged with conducting educational needs assessments within the georgraphical regions served by the current regional educational laboratories. In October 2004, the Secretary appointed 155 members to seve on the 10 RACs. The RACs conducted their needs assessment between December 2004 and March 2005 by soliciting input from a broad consituency within each region through web-based and face-to-face interviews, focus groups, public hearings, written reports, and public comments.
Hide Section - COSTS

COSTS

Payments to Non-Federal Members*$0.00Est Payments to Non-Fed Members Next FY*$0.00
Payments to Federal Members*$0.00Est. Payments to Fed Members Next FY*$0.00
Payments to Federal Staff*$125,000.00Estimated Payments to Federal Staff*$0.00
Payments to Consultants*$0.00Est. Payments to Consultants Next FY*$0.00
Travel Reimb. For Non-Federal Members*$222,491.00Est Travel Reimb Non-Fed Members nextFY*$0.00
Travel Reimb. For Federal Members*$0.00Est Travel Reimb For Fed Members*$0.00
Travel Reimb. For Federal Staff*$8,000.00Est. Travel Reimb to Fed Staff Next FY*$0.00
Travel Reimb. For Consultants*$0.00Est Travel Reimb to Consultants Next FY*$0.00
Other Costs$1,668,533.00Est. Other Costs Next FY*$0.00
Total Costs$2,024,024.00Est. Total Next FY*$0.00
Federal Staff Support (FTE)*1.25Est. Fed Staff Support Next FY*0.00
Cost RemarksEst Cost Remarks
Hide Section - Interest Areas

Interest Areas

No interest areas selected for this committee.
Hide Section - MEMBERS,MEETINGS AND ADVISORY REPORTS

MEMBERS,MEETINGS AND ADVISORY REPORTS

To View all the members, meetings and advisory reports for this committee please click here
Hide Section - SUBCOMMITTEES

SUBCOMMITTEES

Committee

Subcommittees

 
ActionCommittee System IDSubcommittee NameFiscal Year
 COM-030413Region 12005
 COM-031183Region 102005
 COM-027209Region 22005
 COM-025763Region 32005
 COM-029782Region 42005
 COM-028189Region 52005
 COM-031551Region 62005
 COM-027996Region 72005
 COM-029366Region 82005
 COM-025236Region 92005
Hide Section - CHARTERS AND RELATED DOCS

CHARTERS AND RELATED DOCS

No Documents Found