Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund, 32171-32182 [2011-13596]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32171-32182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13596]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Overview Information: Investing in Innovation Fund.
    Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 
2011.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411C 
(Development grants).

DATES: 
    Applications Available: June 6, 2011.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 2, 2011.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: October 3, 2011.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The Investing in Innovation Fund, established 
under section 14007 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
2009 (ARRA), provides funding to support (1) local educational agencies 
(LEAs), and (2) nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or 
more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools. The purpose of this program 
is to provide competitive grants to applicants with a record of 
improving student achievement and attainment in order to expand the 
implementation of, and investment in, innovative practices that are 
demonstrated to have an impact on improving student achievement or 
student growth (as defined in this notice), closing achievement gaps, 
decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school graduation rates, or 
increasing college enrollment and completion rates.
    These grants will (1) Allow eligible entities to expand and develop 
innovative practices that can serve as models of best practices, (2) 
allow eligible entities to work in partnership with the private sector 
and the philanthropic community, and (3) support eligible entities in 
identifying and documenting best practices that can be shared and taken 
to scale based on demonstrated success.
    Under this program, the Department awards three types of grants: 
``Scale-up'' grants, ``Validation'' grants, and ``Development'' grants. 
Applicants must specify the type of grant they are seeking at the time 
of application. Among the three grant types, there are differences in 
terms of the evidence that an applicant is required to submit in 
support of its proposed project; the expectations for ``scaling up'' 
successful projects during or after the grant period, either directly 
or through partners; and the funding that a successful applicant is 
eligible to receive. This notice invites applications for Development 
grants. Notices inviting applications for Validation and Scale-up 
grants are published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
    Development grants provide funding to support high-potential and 
relatively untested practices, strategies, or programs whose efficacy 
should be systematically studied. An applicant must provide evidence 
that the proposed practice, strategy, or program, or one similar to it, 
has been attempted previously, albeit on a limited scale or in a 
limited setting, and yielded promising results that suggest that more 
formal and systematic study is warranted. An applicant must provide a 
rationale for the proposed practice, strategy, or program that is based 
on research findings or reasonable hypotheses, including related 
research or theories in education and other sectors. Thus, applications 
for Development grants do not need to provide the same level of 
evidence to support the proposed project as is required for Validation 
or Scale-up grants.
    An applicant for a Development grant must estimate the number of 
students to be served by the project, and provide evidence of the 
applicant's ability to implement and appropriately evaluate the 
proposed project and, if positive results are obtained, its capacity 
(e.g., qualified personnel, financial resources, management capacity) 
to further develop and bring the project to a larger scale directly or 
through partners either during or following the grant period. We 
recognize that LEAs are not typically responsible for taking to scale 
their practices, strategies, or programs. However, all applicants can 
and should partner with others to disseminate and take to scale their 
effective practices, strategies, and programs.
    The Department will screen applications that are submitted for 
Development grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice, 
and determine which applications have met the eligibility and other 
requirements in

[[Page 32172]]

the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria for this program, published in the Federal Register 
on March 12, 2010 (75 FR 12004-12071) (2010 i3 NFP). Peer reviewers 
will review all eligible Development grant applications. However, if 
the Department determines that an application for a Development grant 
is not supported by a reasonable hypothesis for the proposed project, 
or any other eligibility requirement, the Department will not consider 
the application for funding.
    Finally, we remind LEAs that participate in submitting an i3 
application of the continuing applicability of the provisions of the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to students who may 
be served under these awards. Programs proposed in applications in 
which LEAs participate must be consistent with the rights, protections, 
and processes of IDEA for students who are receiving special education 
and related services or are being evaluated for such services. As 
described later in this notice, in connection with making competitive 
grant awards, an applicant is required, as a condition of receiving 
assistance under this program, to make civil rights assurances, 
including an assurance that its program or activity will comply with 
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Department's 
Section 504 implementing regulations, which prohibit discrimination on 
the basis of disability. Regardless of whether students with 
disabilities are specifically targeted as ``high-need'' students under 
a particular application for a grant program, recipients are required 
to comply with the nondiscrimination requirements of these laws. Among 
other things, the nondiscrimination requirements of these laws include 
an obligation that recipients ensure that students with disabilities 
are not discriminated against because benefits provided to all students 
under the recipient's program are inaccessible to students because of 
their disability. The Department also enforces Title II of the 
Americans with Disabilities Act and Title II implementing regulations, 
which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability by public 
entities, with respect to certain public educational entities.
    Priorities: This competition includes five absolute priorities and 
five competitive preference priorities that are explained in the 
following paragraphs.\1\ These priorities are from the 2010 i3 NFP and 
from the notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for 
discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on 
December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486-78511) (Supplemental Priorities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The notice of final revisions to priorities, requirements, 
and selection criteria for this program, published elsewhere in this 
issue of the Federal Register, establishes that the Secretary may 
use any of the priorities established in the 2010 i3 NFP when 
establishing the priorities for a particular Investing in Innovation 
competition.

    Note on Removing Absolute Priority 2--Innovations That Improve 
the Use of Data: For this year's competition, the Secretary chooses 
not to use the priority Innovations That Improve the Use of Data 
(Absolute Priority 2 in the 2010 i3 NFP). This action is not 
intended to discourage applicants from proposing projects that 
improve the use of data, so long as the proposal addresses one of 
the absolute priorities in this notice. Specifically, proposed 
projects that address Absolute Priority 1--Innovations That Support 
Effective Teachers and Principals, Absolute Priority 3--Innovations 
That Complement the Implementation of High Standards and High-
Quality Assessments, and Absolute Priority 4--Innovations That Turn 
Around Persistently Low-Performing Schools may also include using 
data in innovative ways to support the broader aims of the absolute 
priorities. The Secretary recognizes the importance of data 
collection, analysis, and use, and believes that focusing on these 
strategies in the context of the remaining absolute priorities meets 
the goals of the Investing in Innovation program and the overall 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
education reform goals of ARRA.

    Absolute Priorities: For FY 2011 and any subsequent year in which 
we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this 
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet one of these 
priorities. Under this competition for Development grants, each of the 
five absolute priorities constitutes its own funding category. The 
Secretary intends to award grants under each absolute priority for 
which applications of sufficient quality are submitted.
    An applicant for a Development grant must choose one of the five 
absolute priorities contained in this notice and address that priority 
in its application. An applicant must provide information on how its 
proposed project addresses the selection criteria in the project 
narrative section of its application.
    These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1--Innovations That Support Effective Teachers and 
Principals

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support 
practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to increase the 
number or percentages of teachers or principals who are highly 
effective teachers or principals or reduce the number or percentages of 
teachers or principals who are ineffective, especially for teachers of 
high-need students, by identifying, recruiting, developing, placing, 
rewarding, and retaining highly effective teachers or principals (or 
removing ineffective teachers or principals). In such initiatives, 
teacher or principal effectiveness should be determined through an 
evaluation system that is rigorous, transparent, and fair; performance 
should be differentiated using multiple rating categories of 
effectiveness; multiple measures of effectiveness should be taken into 
account, with data on student growth as a significant factor; and the 
measures should be designed and developed with teacher and principal 
involvement. (2010 i3 NFP)

Absolute Priority 2--Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
Mathematics (STEM) Education

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support 
projects that are designed to address one or more of the following 
areas:
    (a) Providing students with increased access to rigorous and 
engaging coursework in STEM.
    (b) Increasing the number and proportion of students prepared for 
postsecondary or graduate study and careers in STEM.
    (c) Increasing the opportunities for high-quality preparation of, 
or professional development for, teachers or other educators of STEM 
subjects.
    (d) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally 
underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with 
disabilities, and women, who are provided with access to rigorous and 
engaging coursework in STEM or who are prepared for postsecondary or 
graduate study and careers in STEM.
    (e) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally 
underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with 
disabilities, and women, who are teachers or educators of STEM subjects 
and have increased opportunities for high-quality preparation or 
professional development. (Supplemental Priorities)

Absolute Priority 3--Innovations That Complement the Implementation of 
High Standards and High-Quality Assessments

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding for practices, 
strategies, or programs that are designed to support States' efforts to 
transition to standards and assessments that measure students' progress 
toward college- and

[[Page 32173]]

career-readiness, including curricular and instructional practices, 
strategies, or programs in core academic subjects (as defined in 
section 9101(11) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 
as amended (ESEA)) that are aligned with high academic content and 
achievement standards and with high-quality assessments based on those 
standards.\2\ Proposed projects may include, but are not limited to, 
practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to: (a) Increase 
the success of under-represented student populations in academically 
rigorous courses and programs (such as Advanced Placement or 
International Baccalaureate courses; dual-enrollment programs; ``early 
college high schools;'' and science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics courses, especially those that incorporate rigorous and 
relevant project-, inquiry-, or design-based contextual learning 
opportunities); (b) increase the development and use of formative 
assessments or interim assessments, or other performance-based tools 
and ``metrics'' that are aligned with high student content and academic 
achievement standards; or (c) translate the standards and information 
from assessments into classroom practices that meet the needs of all 
students, including high-need students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Consistent with the Race to the Top Fund, the Department 
interprets the core academic subject of ``science'' under section 
9101(11) of the ESEA to include STEM education (science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics) which encompasses a wide-range of 
disciplines, including computer science.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this priority, an eligible applicant must propose a project 
that is based on standards that are at least as rigorous as its State's 
standards. If the proposed project is based on standards other than 
those adopted by the eligible applicant's State, the applicant must 
explain how the standards are aligned with and at least as rigorous as 
the eligible applicant's State's standards as well as how the standards 
differ. (2010 i3 NFP)

Absolute Priority 4--Innovations That Turn Around Persistently Low-
Performing Schools

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support 
strategies, practices, or programs that are designed to turn around 
schools that are in any of the following categories: (a) Persistently 
lowest-achieving schools (as defined in the final requirements for the 
School Improvement Grants program) \3\; (b) Title I schools that are in 
corrective action or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA; or 
(c) secondary schools (both middle and high schools) eligible for but 
not receiving Title I funds that, if receiving Title I funds, would be 
in corrective action or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA. 
These schools are referred to as Investing in Innovation Fund Absolute 
Priority 4 schools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Under the final requirements for the School Improvement 
Grants program, ``persistently lowest-achieving schools'' means, as 
determined by the State, (a) any Title I school in improvement, 
corrective action, or restructuring that (i) is among the lowest-
achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective 
action, or restructuring or the lowest-achieving five Title I 
schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the 
State, whichever number of schools is greater; or (ii) is a high 
school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) 
that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; and (b) any 
secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I 
funds that (i) is among the lowest-achieving five percent of 
secondary schools or the lowest-achieving five secondary schools in 
the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, 
whichever number of schools is greater; or (ii) is a high school 
that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that 
is less than 60 percent over a number of years. See https://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/faq.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed projects must include strategies, practices, or programs 
that are designed to turn around Investing in Innovation Fund Absolute 
Priority 4 schools through either whole-school reform or targeted 
approaches to reform. Applicants addressing this priority must focus on 
either:
    (a) Whole-school reform, including, but not limited to, 
comprehensive interventions to assist, augment, or replace Investing in 
Innovation Fund Absolute Priority 4 schools, including the school 
turnaround, restart, closure, and transformation models of intervention 
supported under the Department's School Improvement Grants program (see 
Final Requirements for School Improvement Grants as Amended in January 
2010 (January 28, 2010) at https://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/faq.html); 
or
    (b) Targeted approaches to reform, including, but not limited to: 
(1) Providing more time for students to learn core academic content by 
expanding or augmenting the school day, school week, or school year, or 
by increasing instructional time for core academic subjects (as defined 
in section 9101(11) of the ESEA); (2) integrating ``student supports'' 
into the school model to address non-academic barriers to student 
achievement; or (3) creating multiple pathways for students to earn 
regular high school diplomas (e.g., by operating schools that serve the 
needs of over-aged, under-credited, or other students with an 
exceptional need for support and flexibility pertaining to when they 
attend school; awarding credit based on demonstrated evidence of 
student competency; and offering dual-enrollment options). (2010 i3 
NFP)

Absolute Priority 5--Improving Achievement and High School Graduation 
Rates (Rural Local Educational Agencies)

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support 
projects that are designed to address accelerating learning and helping 
to improve high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) and 
college enrollment rates for students in rural local educational 
agencies (as defined in this notice). (Supplemental Priorities)

    Note: The Secretary encourages applicants that choose to respond 
to Absolute Priority 5 to also address how their applications meet 
one of the other Absolute Priorities. In addition, applicants that 
choose to respond to Absolute Priority 5 should identify in the 
application and the i3 Applicant Information Sheet all rural LEAs 
(as defined in this notice) where the project will be implemented, 
or identify in the application how the applicant will choose any 
rural LEAs where the project will be implemented, and explain how 
the proposed innovative practices, strategies, or programs address 
the unique challenges of high-need students in schools within a 
rural LEA, resulting in accelerated learning and improved high 
school graduation and college enrollment rates. Applicants may also 
provide information on the applicant's experience and skills, or the 
experience and skills of their partners, in serving high-need 
students in rural LEAs in responding to Selection Criterion D. 
Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel.

    Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2011 and any subsequent 
year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from 
this competition, these priorities are competitive preference 
priorities. Applicants may address more than one of the competitive 
preference priorities; however, the Department will review and award 
points only for a maximum of two of the competitive preference 
priorities. Therefore, an applicant must identify in the project 
narrative section of its application the priority or priorities it 
wishes the Department to consider for purposes of earning the 
competitive preference priority points.

    Note: The Department will not review or award points under any 
competitive preference priority for an application that (1) fails to 
clearly identify the competitive preference priorities it wishes the 
Department to consider for purposes of earning the competitive 
preference priority points, or (2) identifies more than two 
competitive preference priorities.

    These priorities are:

[[Page 32174]]

Competitive Preference Priority 6--Innovations for Improving Early 
Learning Outcomes (zero or one point)

    We give competitive preference to applications for projects that 
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are 
designed to improve educational outcomes for high-need students who are 
young children (birth through 3rd grade) by enhancing the quality of 
early learning programs. To meet this priority, applications must focus 
on (a) improving young children's school readiness (including social, 
emotional, and cognitive readiness) so that children are prepared for 
success in core academic subjects (as defined in section 9101(11) of 
the ESEA); (b) improving developmental milestones and standards and 
aligning them with appropriate outcome measures; and (c) improving 
alignment, collaboration, and transitions between early learning 
programs that serve children from birth to age three, in preschools, 
and in kindergarten through third grade. (2010 i3 NFP)

Competitive Preference Priority 7--Innovations That Support College 
Access and Success (zero or one point)

    We give competitive preference to applications for projects that 
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are 
designed to enable kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) students, 
particularly high school students, to successfully prepare for, enter, 
and graduate from a two- or four-year college. To meet this priority, 
applications must include practices, strategies, or programs for K-12 
students that (a) address students' preparedness and expectations 
related to college; (b) help students understand issues of college 
affordability and the financial aid and college application processes; 
and (c) provide support to students from peers and knowledgeable 
adults. (2010 i3 NFP).

Competitive Preference Priority 8--Innovations To Address the Unique 
Learning Needs of Students With Disabilities and Limited English 
Proficient Students (zero or one point)

    We give competitive preference to applications for projects that 
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are 
designed to address the unique learning needs of students with 
disabilities, including those who are assessed based on alternate 
academic achievement standards, or the linguistic and academic needs of 
limited English proficient students. To meet this priority, 
applications must provide for the implementation of particular 
practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to improve 
academic outcomes, close achievement gaps, and increase college- and 
career-readiness, including increasing high school graduation rates (as 
defined in this notice), for students with disabilities or limited 
English proficient students. (2010 i3 NFP).

Competitive Preference Priority 9--Improving Productivity (zero or one 
point)

    We give competitive preference to applications for projects that 
are designed to significantly increase efficiency in the use of time, 
staff, money, or other resources while improving student learning or 
other educational outcomes (i.e., outcome per unit of resource). Such 
projects may include innovative and sustainable uses of technology, 
modification of school schedules and teacher compensation systems, use 
of open educational resources (as defined in this notice), or other 
strategies. (Supplemental Priorities).

Competitive Preference Priority 10--Technology (zero or one point)

    We give competitive preference to applications for projects that 
are designed to improve student achievement \4\ or teacher 
effectiveness through the use of high-quality digital tools or 
materials, which may include preparing teachers to use the technology 
to improve instruction, as well as developing, implementing, or 
evaluating digital tools or materials. (Supplemental Priorities)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of this priority, the Supplemental Priorities 
define student achievement as follows:
    Student achievement means--
    (a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) A student's score on the 
State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA; and, as 
appropriate, (2) other measures of student learning, such as those 
described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are 
rigorous and comparable across classrooms; and
    (b) For non-tested grades and subjects: alternative measures of 
student learning and performance such as student scores on pre-tests 
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language 
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement 
that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Definitions: The Secretary establishes the following definitions 
for the Investing in Innovation Fund. We may apply these definitions in 
any year in which this program is in effect.

    Note:  This notice invites applications for Development grants. 
The following definitions apply to the three types of grants under 
the i3 program (Scale-up, Validation, or Development). Therefore, 
some definitions included in this section may be more applicable to 
applications for Scale-up and Validation grants.

Definitions Related to Evidence

    Carefully matched comparison group design means a type of quasi-
experimental study that attempts to approximate an experimental study. 
More specifically, it is a design in which project participants are 
matched with non-participants based on key characteristics that are 
thought to be related to the outcome. These characteristics include, 
but are not limited to: (1) Prior test scores and other measures of 
academic achievement (preferably, the same measures that the study will 
use to evaluate outcomes for the two groups); (2) demographic 
characteristics, such as age, disability, gender, English proficiency, 
ethnicity, poverty level, parents' educational attainment, and single- 
or two-parent family background; (3) the time period in which the two 
groups are studied (e.g., the two groups are children entering 
kindergarten in the same year as opposed to sequential years); and (4) 
methods used to collect outcome data (e.g., the same test of reading 
skills administered in the same way to both groups).
    Experimental study means a study that employs random assignment of, 
for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or districts to 
participate in a project being evaluated (treatment group) or not to 
participate in the project (control group). The effect of the project 
is the average difference in outcomes between the treatment and control 
groups.
    Independent evaluation means that the evaluation is designed and 
carried out independent of, but in coordination with, any employees of 
the entities who develop a practice, strategy, or program and are 
implementing it. This independence helps ensure the objectivity of an 
evaluation and prevents even the appearance of a conflict of interest.
    Interrupted time series design \5\ means a type of quasi-
experimental study in

[[Page 32175]]

which the outcome of interest is measured multiple times before and 
after the treatment for program participants only. If the program had 
an impact, the outcomes after treatment will have a different slope or 
level from those before treatment. That is, the series should show an 
``interruption'' of the prior situation at the time when the program 
was implemented. Adding a comparison group time series, such as schools 
not participating in the program or schools participating in the 
program in a different geographic area, substantially increases the 
reliability of the findings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A single subject or single case design is an adaptation of 
an interrupted time series design that relies on the comparison of 
treatment effects on a single subject or group of single subjects. 
There is little confidence that findings based on this design would 
be the same for other members of the population. In some single 
subject designs, treatment reversal or multiple baseline designs are 
used to increase internal validity. In a treatment reversal design, 
after a pretreatment or baseline outcome measurement is compared 
with a post treatment measure, the treatment would then be stopped 
for a period of time, a second baseline measure of the outcome would 
be taken, followed by a second application of the treatment or a 
different treatment. A multiple baseline design addresses concerns 
about the effects of normal development, timing of the treatment, 
and amount of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs by using 
a varying time schedule for introduction of the treatment and/or 
treatments of different lengths or intensity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moderate evidence means evidence from previous studies whose 
designs can support causal conclusions (i.e., studies with high 
internal validity) but have limited generalizability (i.e., moderate 
external validity), or studies with high external validity but moderate 
internal validity. The following would constitute moderate evidence: 
(1) At least one well-designed and well-implemented (as defined in this 
notice) experimental or quasi-experimental study (as defined in this 
notice) supporting the effectiveness of the practice, strategy, or 
program, with small sample sizes or other conditions of implementation 
or analysis that limit generalizability; (2) at least one well-designed 
and well-implemented (as defined in this notice) experimental or quasi-
experimental study (as defined in this notice) that does not 
demonstrate equivalence between the intervention and comparison groups 
at program entry but that has no other major flaws related to internal 
validity; or (3) correlational research with strong statistical 
controls for selection bias and for discerning the influence of 
internal factors.
    Quasi-experimental study means an evaluation design that attempts 
to approximate an experimental design and can support causal 
conclusions (i.e., minimizes threats to internal validity, such as 
selection bias, or allows them to be modeled). Well-designed quasi-
experimental studies include carefully matched comparison group designs 
(as defined in this notice), interrupted time series designs (as 
defined in this notice), or regression discontinuity designs (as 
defined in this notice).
    Regression discontinuity design study means, in part, a quasi-
experimental study design that closely approximates an experimental 
study. In a regression discontinuity design, participants are assigned 
to a treatment or comparison group based on a numerical rating or score 
of a variable unrelated to the treatment such as the rating of an 
application for funding. Another example would be assignment of 
eligible students, teachers, classrooms, or schools above a certain 
score (``cut score'') to the treatment group and assignment of those 
below the score to the comparison group.
    Strong evidence means evidence from previous studies whose designs 
can support causal conclusions (i.e., studies with high internal 
validity), and studies that in total include enough of the range of 
participants and settings to support scaling up to the State, regional, 
or national level (i.e., studies with high external validity). The 
following are examples of strong evidence: (1) More than one well-
designed and well-implemented (as defined in this notice) experimental 
study (as defined in this notice) or well-designed and well-implemented 
(as defined in this notice) quasi-experimental study (as defined in 
this notice) that supports the effectiveness of the practice, strategy, 
or program; or (2) one large, well-designed and well-implemented (as 
defined in this notice) randomized controlled, multisite trial that 
supports the effectiveness of the practice, strategy, or program.
    Well-designed and well-implemented means, with respect to an 
experimental or quasi-experimental study (as defined in this notice), 
that the study meets the What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards, 
with or without reservations (see https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1 and in particular the 
description of ``Reasons for Not Meeting Standards'' at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/Doc.aspx?docId=19&tocId=4#reasons).

Other Definitions

    Applicant means the entity that applies for a grant under this 
program on behalf of an eligible applicant (i.e., an LEA or a 
partnership in accordance with section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA).
    Consortium of schools means two or more public elementary or 
secondary schools acting collaboratively for the purpose of applying 
for and implementing an Investing in Innovation Fund grant jointly with 
an eligible nonprofit organization.
    Formative assessment means assessment questions, tools, and 
processes that are embedded in instruction and are used by teachers and 
students to provide timely feedback for purposes of adjusting 
instruction to improve learning.
    Highly effective principal means a principal whose students, 
overall and for each subgroup as described in section 
1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e., economically disadvantaged 
students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, migrant 
students, students with disabilities, students with limited English 
proficiency, and students of each gender), achieve high rates (e.g., 
one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of student growth. 
Eligible applicants may include multiple measures, provided that 
principal effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, based on 
student growth. Supplemental measures may include, for example, high 
school graduation rates; college enrollment rates; evidence of 
providing supportive teaching and learning conditions, support for 
ensuring effective instruction across subject areas for a well-rounded 
education, strong instructional leadership, and positive family and 
community engagement; or evidence of attracting, developing, and 
retaining high numbers of effective teachers.
    Highly effective teacher means a teacher whose students achieve 
high rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of 
student growth. Eligible applicants may include multiple measures, 
provided that teacher effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, 
based on student growth. Supplemental measures may include, for 
example, multiple observation-based assessments of teacher performance 
or evidence of leadership roles (which may include mentoring or leading 
professional learning communities) that increase the effectiveness of 
other teachers in the school or LEA.
    High-need student means a student at risk of educational failure, 
or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as 
students who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools, 
who are far below grade level, who are over-age and under-credited, who 
have left school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who 
are at risk of not graduating with a regular high school diploma on 
time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been 
incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are limited English 
proficient.
    High school graduation rate means a four-year adjusted cohort 
graduation rate consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and may also 
include an extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate consistent 
with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if

[[Page 32176]]

the State in which the proposed project is implemented has been 
approved by the Secretary to use such a rate under Title I of the ESEA.
    Interim assessment means an assessment that is given at regular and 
specified intervals throughout the school year, is designed to evaluate 
students' knowledge and skills relative to a specific set of academic 
standards, and produces results that can be aggregated (e.g., by 
course, grade level, school, or LEA) in order to inform teachers and 
administrators at the student, classroom, school, and LEA levels.
    National level, as used in reference to a Scale-up grant, describes 
a project that is able to be effective in a wide variety of communities 
and student populations around the country, including rural and urban 
areas, as well as with the different groups of students described in 
section 1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e., economically 
disadvantaged students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, 
migrant students, students with disabilities, students with limited 
English proficiency, and students of each gender).
    Nonprofit organization means an entity that meets the definition of 
``nonprofit'' under 34 CFR 77.1(c), or an institution of higher 
education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 
1965, as amended.
    Official partner means any of the entities required to be part of a 
partnership under section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA.
    Other partner means any entity, other than the applicant and any 
official partner, that may be involved in a proposed project.
    Regional level, as used in reference to a Scale-up or Validation 
grant, describes a project that is able to serve a variety of 
communities and student populations within a State or multiple States, 
including rural and urban areas, as well as with the different groups 
of students described in section 1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e., 
economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and 
ethnic groups, migrant students, students with disabilities, students 
with limited English proficiency, and students of each gender). To be 
considered a regional-level project, a project must serve students in 
more than one LEA. The exception to this requirement would be a project 
implemented in a State in which the State educational agency is the 
sole educational agency for all schools and thus may be considered an 
LEA under section 9101(26) of the ESEA. Such a State would meet the 
definition of regional for the purposes of this notice.
    Regular high school diploma means, consistent with 34 CFR 
200.19(b)(1)(iv), the standard high school diploma that is awarded to 
students in the State and that is fully aligned with the State's 
academic content standards or a higher diploma and does not include a 
General Education Development (GED) credential, certificate of 
attendance, or any alternative award.
    Student achievement means--
    (a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) A student's score on the 
State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA; and, as 
appropriate, (2) other measures of student learning, such as those 
described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are 
rigorous and comparable across classrooms; and
    (b) For non-tested grades and subjects: alternative measures of 
student learning and performance such as student scores on pre-tests 
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language 
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement that 
are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
    Student growth means the change in student achievement data for an 
individual student between two or more points in time. Growth may be 
measured by a variety of approaches, but any approach used must be 
statistically rigorous and based on student achievement data, and may 
also include other measures of student learning in order to increase 
the construct validity and generalizability of the information.

Definition From Supplemental Priorities

    Note:  These definitions are from the Supplemental Priorities 
and apply to Absolute Priority 5 and Competitive Preference Priority 
9.

    Open educational resources (OER) means teaching, learning, and 
research resources that reside in the public domain or have been 
released under an intellectual property license that permits their free 
use or repurposing by others.
    Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency 
(LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) 
program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized 
under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine 
whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to 
information on the Department's Web site at https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html.

    Program Authority:  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
2009, Division A, Section 14007, Pub. L. 111-5.

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The notice of final priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program, 
published in the Federal Register on March 12, 2010 (75 FR 12004-
12071). (c) The notice of final revisions to priorities, requirements, 
and selection criteria for this program, published elsewhere in this 
issue of the Federal Register (2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions). (d) 
The notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for 
Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on 
December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486-78511).

    Note:  The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions 
of higher education only.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreements or discretionary grants.
    Estimated Available Funds: $148,200,000.
    These estimated available funds are for all three types of grants 
under the i3 program (Scale-up, Validation, and Development).
    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of the 
applications received, we may make additional awards in FY 2012 or 
later years from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.
    Estimated Range of Awards:
    Scale-up grants: Up to $25,000,000.
    Validation grants: Up to $15,000,000.
    Development grants: Up to $3,000,000.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards:
    Scale-up grants: $24,000,000.
    Validation grants: $12,000,000.
    Development grants: $2,800,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards:
    Scale-up grants: Up to 2 awards.
    Validation grants: Up to 5 awards.
    Development grants: Up to 15 awards.

    Note:  The Department is not bound by any estimates in this 
notice.

    Project Period: 36-60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Providing Innovations that Improve Achievement for High-Need 
Students: All eligible applicants must implement practices, strategies, 
or programs for high-need students (as defined in this notice). (2010 
i3 NFP)
    2. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for Investing in 
Innovation

[[Page 32177]]

Fund grants include: (a) An LEA or (b) a partnership between a 
nonprofit organization and (1) one or more LEAs or (2) a consortium of 
schools. An eligible applicant that is a partnership applying under 
section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA must designate one of its official 
partners (as defined in this notice) to serve as the applicant in 
accordance with the Department's regulations governing group 
applications in 34 CFR 75.127 through 75.129. (2010 i3 NFP)
    3. Eligibility Requirements: To be eligible for an award, an 
eligible applicant must--except as specifically set forth in the Note 
about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a Nonprofit 
Organization that follows:
    (1)(A) Have significantly closed the achievement gaps between 
groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA 
(economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and 
ethnic groups, students with limited English proficiency, students with 
disabilities); or
    (B) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student 
academic achievement for all groups of students described in that 
section;
    (2) Have made significant improvements in other areas, such as 
graduation rates or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality 
teachers and principals, as demonstrated with meaningful data;
    (3) Demonstrate that it has established one or more partnerships 
with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, 
and that the private sector will provide matching funds in order to 
help bring results to scale; and
    (4) In the case of an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit 
organization, provide in the application the names of the LEAs with 
which the nonprofit organization will partner, or the names of the 
schools in the consortium with which it will partner. If an eligible 
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization intends to partner 
with additional LEAs or schools that are not named in the application, 
it must describe in the application the demographic and other 
characteristics of these LEAs and schools and the process it will use 
to select them as either official or other partners. An applicant must 
identify its specific partners before a grant award will be made. (2010 
i3 NFP)

     Note:  Applicants should provide information addressing the 
eligibility requirements in Appendix C, under ``Other Attachments 
Form,'' of their applications.


    Note about LEA Eligibility:  For purposes of this program, an 
LEA is an LEA located within one of the 50 States, the District of 
Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (2010 i3 NFP).


     Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes 
a Nonprofit Organization:
     The authorizing statute (as amended) specifies that an eligible 
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization is considered to 
have met the requirements in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the 
eligibility requirements for this program if the nonprofit 
organization has a record of significantly improving student 
achievement, attainment, or retention. For an eligible applicant 
that includes a nonprofit organization, the nonprofit organization 
must demonstrate that it has a record of significantly improving 
student achievement, attainment, or retention through its record of 
work with an LEA or schools. Therefore, an eligible applicant that 
includes a nonprofit organization does not necessarily need to 
include as a partner for its Investing in Innovation Fund grant an 
LEA or a consortium of schools that meets the requirements in 
paragraphs (1) and (2).
    In addition, the authorizing statute (as amended) specifies that 
an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization is 
considered to have met the requirements of paragraph (3) of the 
eligibility requirements in this notice if the eligible applicant 
demonstrates that it will meet the requirement relating to private-
sector matching. (2010 i3 NFP).

    1. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an 
eligible applicant must demonstrate that it has established one or more 
partnerships with an entity or organization in the private sector, 
which may include philanthropic organizations, and that the entity or 
organization in the private sector will provide matching funds in order 
to help bring project results to scale. An eligible applicant must 
obtain matching funds or in-kind donations equal to at least 15 percent 
of its grant award.\6\ Selected eligible applicants must submit 
evidence of the full amount of private-sector matching funds following 
the peer review of applications. An award will not be made unless the 
applicant provides adequate evidence that the full amount of the 
private-sector match has been committed or the Secretary approves the 
eligible applicant's request to reduce the matching-level requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions modified the ``Cost 
Sharing and Matching'' requirement established in the 2010 i3 NFP by 
providing that the Secretary will specify the amount of required 
private-sector matching funds or in-kind donations in the notice 
inviting applications for the specific i3 competition. For this 
competition, the Secretary establishes a matching requirement of at 
least 15 percent of the grant award.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Secretary may consider decreasing the matching requirement in 
the most exceptional circumstances, on a case-by-case basis. An 
eligible applicant that anticipates being unable to meet the full 
amount of the private-sector matching requirement must include in its 
application a request to the Secretary to reduce the matching-level 
requirement, along with a statement of the basis for the request. (2010 
i3 NFP, as revised by the 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions)
    2. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for 
the Investing in Innovation Fund. We may apply these requirements in 
any year in which this program is in effect.
     Evidence Standards: To be eligible for an award, an 
application for a Development grant must be supported by a reasonable 
hypothesis. (2010 i3 NFP)

    Note:  Applicants should provide information addressing the 
required evidence standards in Appendix D, under ``Other Attachments 
Form,'' of their applications.

     Funding Categories: An applicant must state in its 
application whether it is applying for a Scale-up, Validation, or 
Development grant. An applicant may not submit an application for the 
same proposed project under more than one type of grant. An applicant 
will be considered for an award only for the type of grant for which it 
applies. (2010 i3 NFP)
     Subgrants: In the case of an eligible applicant that is a 
partnership between a nonprofit organization and (1) one or more LEAs 
or (2) a consortium of schools, the partner serving as the applicant 
may make subgrants to one or more official partners (as defined in this 
notice). (2010 i3 NFP)
     Limits on Grant Awards: (a) No grantee may receive more 
than two new grant awards of any type under the i3 program in a single 
year; (b) In any two-year period, no grantee may receive more than one 
new Scale-up or Validation grant; and (c) No grantee may receive more 
than $55 million in new grant awards under the i3 program in a single 
year. (2010 i3 NFP, as revised by the 2011 Notice of Final i3 
Revisions)
     Evaluation: A grantee must comply with the requirements of 
any evaluation of the program conducted by the Department. In addition, 
the grantee is required to conduct an independent evaluation (as 
defined in this notice) of its project and must agree, along with its 
independent evaluator, to cooperate with any technical assistance 
provided by the Department or its contractor. The purpose of this 
technical assistance will be to ensure that the evaluations are of the 
highest quality and to encourage commonality in evaluation approaches 
across funded projects where such

[[Page 32178]]

commonality is feasible and useful. Finally, the grantee must make 
broadly available through formal (e.g., peer-reviewed journals) or 
informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, and in print or 
electronically, the results of any evaluations it conducts of its 
funded activities. For Scale-up and Validation grants, the grantee must 
also ensure the data from their evaluations are made available to 
third-party researchers consistent with applicable privacy 
requirements. (2010 i3 NFP)
     Participation in ``Communities of Practice'': Grantees are 
required to participate in, organize, or facilitate, as appropriate, 
communities of practice for the Investing in Innovation Fund. A 
community of practice is a group of grantees that agrees to interact 
regularly to solve a persistent problem or improve practice in an area 
that is important to them. Establishment of communities of practice 
under the Investing in Innovation Fund will enable grantees to meet, 
discuss, and collaborate with each other regarding grantee projects. 
(2010 i3 NFP).

IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of 
projects that may be proposed in applications for the Investing in 
Innovation Fund, some applications may include proprietary information 
as it relates to confidential commercial information. Confidential 
commercial information is defined as information the disclosure of 
which could reasonably be expected to cause substantial competitive 
harm. Upon submission, applicants should identify any information 
contained in their application that they consider to be confidential 
commercial information. Consistent with the process followed in the FY 
2010 i3 competition, we plan on posting the project narrative section 
of funded Development applications on the Department's Web site. 
Identifying proprietary information in your application will help 
facilitate this public disclosure process. Applicants are encouraged to 
identify only the specific information that the applicant considers to 
be proprietary and list the page numbers on which this information can 
be found in the appropriate Appendix section, under ``Other Attachments 
Form,'' of their applications. In addition to identifying the page 
number on which that information can be found, eligible applicants will 
assist the Department in making determinations on public release of the 
application by being as specific as possible in identifying the 
information they consider proprietary. Please note that, in many 
instances, identification of entire pages of documentation would not be 
appropriate.
    2. Address To Request Application Package: You can obtain an 
application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications 
Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following 
address: https://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/. To obtain a 
copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S. 
Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. 
Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call, toll free: 1-877-
576-7734.
    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: https://www.EDPubs.gov or at its e-mail address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
    If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify 
this program or competition as follows: CFDA number 84.411C.
    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application 
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, 
or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under 
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
    3. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements 
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you 
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
    Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
    We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing 
grant applications if we know the approximate number of applicants that 
intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the 
Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify us of 
the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding by 
completing a web-based form. When completing this form, applicants will 
provide (1) The applicant organization's name and address, (2) the type 
of grant for which the applicant intends to apply, (3) the one absolute 
priority the applicant intends to address, and (4) a maximum of two of 
the competitive preference priorities the applicant wishes the 
Department to consider for purposes of earning the competitive 
preference priority points. Applicants may access this form online at 
https://go.usa.gov/bsG. Applicants that do not complete this form may 
still apply for funding.
    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) 
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that 
reviewers use to evaluate your application. Applicants are strongly 
encouraged to limit the application narrative [Part III] for a 
Development application to no more than 25 pages. Applicants are also 
strongly encouraged not to include lengthy appendices that contain 
information that could not be included in the narrative. Applicants 
should use the following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5 x 11, on one side 
only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
     Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller 
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
     Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, 
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font 
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
    The suggested page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; 
Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget 
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-
page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of 
support. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application 
narrative section [Part III].
    4. Submission Dates and Times:
    Applications Available: June 6, 2011.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
    Pre-Application Meeting: The i3 program intends to hold pre-
application meetings designed to provide technical assistance to 
interested applicants for all three types of grants. Detailed 
information regarding the pre-application meeting locations, dates, and 
times will be provided in a separate notice in the Federal Register. 
Once the notice is published, it will be available, along with 
registration information, on the Investing in Innovation (i3) Web site 
at https://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 2, 2011.
    Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted 
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For 
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your 
application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery 
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic

[[Page 32179]]

submission requirement, please refer to section IV. 8. Other Submission 
Requirements of this notice.
    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the 
deadline requirements.
    Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or 
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact 
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII 
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or 
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the 
application process, the individual's application remains subject to 
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: October 3, 2011.
    5. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to 
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. 
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under 
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this 
competition.
    6. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding 
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
    7. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification 
Number, and Central Contractor Registry: To do business with the 
Department of Education, you must--
    a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a 
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
    b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the Central 
Contractor Registry (CCR), the Government's primary registrant 
database;
    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
    d. Maintain an active CCR registration with current information 
while your application is under review by the Department and, if you 
are awarded a grant, during the project period.
    You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number 
can be created within one business day.
    If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or 
organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. 
If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal 
Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a 
new TIN, please allow 2-5 weeks for your TIN to become active.
    The CCR registration process may take five or more business days to 
complete. If you are currently registered with the CCR, you may not 
need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN 
associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will 
need to update your CCR registration on an annual basis. This may take 
three or more business days to complete.
    In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov, 
you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized 
Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with 
Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined in the 
Grants.gov 3-Step Registration Guide (see https://www.grants.gov/section910/Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf).
    8. Other Submission Requirements:
    Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted 
electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement 
in accordance with the instructions in this section.
    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
    Applications for grants under the Investing in Innovation Fund, 
CFDA number 84.411C (Development grants), must be submitted 
electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at https://www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy 
of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and 
submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a 
grant application to us.
    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format 
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of 
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no 
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written 
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these 
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that 
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in 
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
    You may access the electronic grant application for Investing in 
Innovation Fund at 
                    

                        This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
                        Privacy Policy and
                        Terms of Service apply.