Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund, Development Grants, 11087-11101 [2012-4357]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11087-11101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4357]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund, 
Development Grants

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Overview Information: Investing in Innovation Fund, Development 
grants Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 
2012.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411P 
(Development grants Pre-Application). 84.411C (Development grants 
Full Application).

    Note: In order to receive an Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) 
Development grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-
application is intended to reduce the burden of submitting a full i3 
application. Pre-applications will be reviewed and scored by peer 
reviewers using selection criteria designated in this notice. Only 
entities that have submitted a top-rated pre-application will be 
eligible to submit a full i3 application.


DATES: 
    Pre-Applications Available: February 27, 2012.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: March 15, 
2012.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Pre-applications: April 9, 2012.
    Full Applications Available: If you are selected to submit a full 
application, we will transmit the full application package and 
instructions to you.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: Only entities that 
submitted a top-rated pre-application as scored by the peer reviewers 
and as identified by the Department will be eligible to submit a full 
i3 application. The Department will announce on its Web site the 
deadline date for transmission of full applications.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: 60 calendar days after the 
deadline date for transmittal of full applications.

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) 
support partnerships between eligible entities and the private sector 
and 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. 
The three grant types differ in 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. The Department anticipates 
publishing notices inviting applications for the other types of i3 
grants (i.e., Validation and Scale-up grants) in the spring of 2012.
    Development grants provide funding to support high-potential and 
relatively untested practices, strategies, or programs whose efficacy 
should be

[[Page 11088]]

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. These requirements 
mean that applications for Development grants do not require the same 
level of evidence to support the proposed project as is required for 
Validation or Scale-up grants.
    As it did in the FY 2011 i3 Development competition, the Department 
is including in the FY 2012 i3 Development competition competitive 
preference priorities that focus on technology and productivity. With 
the technology priority, the Department indicates its continuing 
interest in Development projects that have the potential to 
dramatically improve student achievement by taking full advantage of 
advances in diverse fields such as the learning sciences (e.g., 
cognitive science, educational psychology), computer science, and 
personal technology. These advances offer real promise for affordable, 
personalized education, the benefits of which have been acknowledged 
for decades, notably in Benjamin Bloom's 1984 article ``The 2 Sigma 
Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as 
One-to-One Tutoring.''
    More recently, the Department's National Education Technology Plan 
2010 \1\ highlighted the potential of ``connected teaching'' that makes 
it possible to extend the reach of the most effective teachers by using 
online tools. The National Education Technology Plan 2010 also 
highlighted the need for high-quality learning resources that can reach 
learners wherever and whenever they are needed. Similarly, the 2010 
report of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and 
Technology, Prepare and Inspire,\2\ called for ``deeply digital'' 
materials that combine simulations, probes, multimedia, and other 
digital resources in coherent ways; instructional platforms that 
provide customized paths for different learners, including integrated 
assessments and continuous feedback; and tools that help teachers grade 
work, solicit student feedback, and create lesson plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010.
    \2\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-execsum.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the productivity priority, because districts and 
schools remain under financial pressure, the Department is also 
particularly interested in approaches that achieve the same or better 
outcomes while substantially reducing costs. For this reason, we will 
again give priority to applications for projects designed to increase 
productivity.
    We also remind LEAs of the continuing applicability of the 
provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 
for students who may be served under i3 grants. 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.
    Changes for the FY 2012 i3 Development Competition: The Department 
has made several changes to the FY 2012 i3 Development competition that 
prospective applicants should note.
    First, as previously described, the FY 2012 i3 Development 
competition will use a pre-application process. In the past, the i3 
competition has received many more applications than it can fund, 
particularly in the Development category. Under the pre-application 
process, peer reviewers will read and score the shorter pre-application 
against an abbreviated set of selection criteria, and only the entities 
that submit the highest-scoring pre-applications will be invited to 
submit full applications. These entities will be given more time to 
complete their submission. The pre-application process thus requires 
fewer resources for applicants that are judged to be less competitive, 
while providing additional time for applicants that are judged to be 
more competitive to improve their proposal. We also anticipate that the 
shorter pre-application will simplify the application process for 
applicants from districts or other organizations with fewer resources.
    An entity that is invited to submit a full application for a 
Development grant must include the following information in its full 
application: an estimate of the number of students to be served by the 
project; evidence of the applicant's ability to implement and 
appropriately evaluate the proposed project; and information about its 
capacity (i.e., 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, if positive results are obtained. 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 pre- and full applications that are 
submitted for Development grants in accordance with the requirements in 
this notice, and it will determine which applications have met the 
eligibility and other requirements in 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 pre- and full 
applications for Development grants that are submitted by the 
established deadlines.
    Applicants should note, however, that the Department may screen for 
eligibility at multiple points during the competition process, 
including before and after peer review, and applicants that are 
determined ineligible will not receive a grant regardless of peer 
reviewer scores or comments. If the Department determines that a full 
application for a Development grant is not supported by a reasonable

[[Page 11089]]

hypothesis for the proposed project, does not demonstrate the required 
prior record of improvement, or does not meet any other eligibility 
requirement, the Department will not consider the application for 
funding.
    Second, the Development competition in FY 2012 includes an absolute 
priority focused on Parent and Family Engagement. The Department has 
added this absolute priority because of the critical role that parents 
and families play in increasing student achievement and supporting 
school improvement. As various States and districts implement new, more 
demanding academic content standards, parents' and families' 
understanding of those standards and the related assessments will be 
instrumental in helping children improve their academic performance. 
Therefore, there is a nationwide need for new practices, strategies, 
and models for building parents', families', and guardians' awareness 
of their role in improving their children's educational outcomes. There 
is also a nationwide need for enhancing parents', families', and 
guardians' knowledge, skills, and abilities to support student learning 
and school improvement. There is a corresponding need for school staff 
to support and cultivate environments welcoming to parents and to build 
relationships that increase parents', families', and guardians' 
capacity to support their children's educational needs. As with all i3 
projects, prospective applicants choosing to address the Parent and 
Family Engagement priority should keep in mind the importance that i3 
places on rigorous evaluation of how the activities that comprise a 
project, in this case increased parent and family engagement, lead to 
increased student achievement and school improvement.
    Third, the absolute priority focused on teacher and principal 
effectiveness (Absolute Priority 1) now uses the language from the 
Improving Effectiveness and Distribution of Effective Teachers or 
Principals priority established in the May 12, 2011, Federal Register 
notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for 
discretionary grant programs. The language in this supplemental 
priority offers greater flexibility for projects to improve teacher and 
principal effectiveness through targeted strategies that address 
components of the teacher and principal pipeline, rather than its 
entirety, as required by the Innovations that Support Effective 
Teachers and Principals priority in 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).
    Fourth, the Department notes that the removal of an absolute 
priority focused on the implementation of high academic content 
standards and high-quality assessments does not indicate that projects 
with such a focus are not of interest. Many such projects may be 
responsive to other absolute priorities, and the Department continues 
to be interested in these projects. For example, strategies that help 
increase teacher effectiveness or that support increased parental or 
family engagement with student learning can and should align to the 
State's academic content standards and their associated assessments.
    Priorities: This competition includes five absolute priorities and 
five competitive preference priorities. These priorities are from the 
2010 i3 NFP \3\ 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), and corrected on 
May 12, 2011 (76 FR 27637) (Supplemental Priorities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The 2011 notice of final i3 revisions, which was published 
in the Federal Register on June 3, 2011 (76 FR 32073), provides the 
Secretary with the flexibility to choose one or more of the 
priorities established in the 2010 i3 NFP for use in any i3 
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Absolute Priorities: For FY 2012 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 pre-application. Both pre-applications and full applications 
will be peer reviewed and scored; scores will be rank ordered by 
absolute priority, so an applicant must identify clearly the single 
absolute priority on which its proposed project focuses.
    These absolute priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1--Improving the Effectiveness and Distribution of 
Effective Teachers or Principals

    Projects that are designed to address one or more of the following 
priority areas:
    (a) Increasing the number or percentage of teachers or principals 
who are effective or reducing the number or percentage of teachers or 
principals who are ineffective, particularly in high-poverty schools 
(as defined in this notice) including through such activities as 
improving the preparation, recruitment, development, and evaluation of 
teachers and principals; implementing performance-based certification 
and retention systems; and reforming compensation and advancement 
systems.
    (b) Increasing the retention, particularly in high-poverty schools 
(as defined in this notice), and equitable distribution of teachers or 
principals who are effective.
    For the purposes of this priority, teacher and principal 
effectiveness should be measured using:
    (1) Teacher or principal evaluation data, in States or local 
educational agencies that have in place a high-quality teacher or 
principal evaluation system that takes into account student growth (as 
defined in this notice) in significant part and uses multiple measures, 
that, in the case of teachers, may include observations for determining 
teacher effectiveness (such as systems that meet the criteria for 
evaluation systems under the Race to the Top program as described in 
criterion (D)(2)(ii) of the Race to the Top notice inviting 
applications (74 FR 59803)); or
    (2) Data that include, in significant part, student achievement (as 
defined in this notice) or student growth data (as defined in this 
notice) and may include multiple measures in States or local 
educational agencies that do not have the teacher or principal 
evaluation systems described in paragraph (1). (Supplemental 
Priorities) \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of this priority, the Supplemental Priorities 
define ``student achievement'' and ``student growth'' as follows:
    ``Student achievement'' means--a) For tested grades and 
subjects: (1) a student's score on the State's assessments under 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 schools.
    (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 schools.
    ``Student growth'' means the change in student achievement (as 
defined in this notice) for an individual student between two or 
more points in time. A State may also include other measures that 
are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
    Note that the definitions in this footnote apply only to 
Absolute Priority 1. Elsewhere in this notice the use of these term 
refers to the i3 definitions established in the 2010 i3 NFP that are 
provided in the Definitions section of this notice.

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

[[Page 11090]]

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--Improving School Engagement, School Environment, 
and School Safety and Improving Family and Community Engagement

    Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support 
projects that are designed to improve student outcomes by improving 
parent and family engagement (as defined in this notice). (Supplemental 
Priorities)

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); \5\ (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 \6\ are referred to as Investing in Innovation Fund 
Absolute Priority 4 schools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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.
    \6\ In this context, ``these schools'' refers to the schools 
described in (a) through (c)in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: Absolute Priority 5 aims to support projects that address 
the unique challenges of serving high-need students in rural LEAs 
(as defined in this notice). Based on the overall i3 program 
requirement, set out in Section III.1 of this Notice, and as with 
all i3 projects, applicants choosing to address this priority must 
specify how they will serve high-need students. In addition, 
applicants that choose to respond to Absolute Priority 5 may want to 
consider identifying in both the pre-application and full 
application all rural LEAs where the project will be implemented, or 
explain how the applicant will choose the rural LEAs where the 
project will be implemented. In full applications, applicants should 
also identify these rural LEAs on the i3 Applicant Information Sheet 
and 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 C. 
Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel.

    Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2012 and any subsequent 
year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from 
this competition, these priorities are competitive preference 
priorities.
    Competitive preference priority points will only be awarded in the 
review of full applications, not in the review of pre-applications. 
However, applicants may discuss the competitive priorities that are 
relevant to their projects in their pre-applications.
    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 in the 
review of the full applications. Therefore, an entity that is invited 
to submit a full application must identify in the project narrative 
section of its full application the priority or priorities it wishes 
the

[[Page 11091]]

Department to consider for purposes of earning competitive preference 
priority points.

    Note: The Department will not review or award points under any 
competitive preference priority for a full application that (1) 
fails to clearly identify the competitive preference priority or 
priorities the applicant wishes the Department to consider for 
purposes of earning competitive preference priority points, or (2) 
identifies more than two competitive preference priorities the 
applicant wishes the Department to consider for purposes of earning 
competitive preference priority points. An entity that is invited to 
submit a full application may identify and address a maximum of two 
competitive preference priorities in the full application that it 
wishes the Department to consider for purposes of earning 
competitive preference priority points, regardless of whether that 
entity identified or addressed any competitive preference priorities 
in its pre-application.

    These competitive preference priorities are:

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 \7\ 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)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 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 schools; 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 schools.
    Note that this definition for student achievement applies only 
to Absolute Priority 1 and Competitive Preference Priority 10. 
Elsewhere in this notice the use of this term refers to the i3 
definition established in the 2010 i3 NFP that is provided in the 
Definitions section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Definitions:
    These definitions are from the 2010 i3 NFP and the Supplemental 
Priorities. 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 of the definitions included in this section, primarily those 
related to demonstrations of evidence, may be more applicable to 
applications for Scale-up and Validation grants.

Definitions Related to Evidence From the 2010 i3 NFP

    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

[[Page 11092]]

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 \8\ means a type of quasi-
experimental study in 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 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 From the 2010 i3 NFP

    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 i3 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.
    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 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

[[Page 11093]]

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.

Definitions From Supplemental Priorities

    High-poverty school means a school in which at least 50 percent of 
students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the 
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act or in which at least 50 
percent of students are from low-income families as determined using 
one of the criteria specified under section 1113(a)(5) of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended. For middle 
and high schools, eligibility may be calculated on the basis of 
comparable data from feeder schools. Eligibility as a high-poverty 
school under this definition is determined on the basis of the most 
currently available data.
    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.
    Parent and family engagement means the systematic inclusion of 
parents and families, working in partnership with local educational 
agencies and school staff, in their child's education, which may 
include strengthening the ability of (a) Parents and families to 
support their child's education and (b) school staff to work with 
parents and families.
    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, Public Law 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 in the Federal 
Register on June 3, 2011 (76 FR 32073) (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), and corrected on May 12, 
2011 (76 FR 27637).

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants 
except federally recognized Indian tribes.


    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: $140,452,000.
    These estimated available funds are the total available 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 2013 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: $14,500,000.
    Development grants: $3,000,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards:
    Scale-up grants: 0-2 awards.
    Validation grants: 1-5 awards.
    Development grants: 10-20 awards.


[[Page 11094]]


    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 i3 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: Except as specifically set forth in 
the Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a 
Nonprofit Organization that follows, to be eligible for an award, an 
eligible applicant must--
    (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: An entity submitting a full application should provide, in 
Appendix C, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its full 
application, information addressing the eligibility requirements 
described in this section. An applicant must provide, in the full 
application, sufficient supporting data or other information to 
allow the Department to determine whether the applicant has met the 
eligibility requirements. If the Department determines that an 
applicant has provided insufficient information in its full 
application, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide 
additional information.


    Note: Instructions for the pre-application will be available on 
the i3 Web site. Entities invited to submit a full application will 
receive instructions about the full application package.


    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 i3 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)

    4. 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.\9\ Selected eligible applicants must submit 
evidence of the full amount of private-sector matching funds following 
the peer review of full 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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)

    Note: An entity does not need to include a request for a 
reduction of the matching-level requirement in its pre-application. 
However, an applicant that does not provide a request for a 
reduction of the matching-level requirement in its full application 
may not submit that request at a later time.

    5. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for 
the i3 program. These requirements are from the 2010 i3 NFP. 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: An entity invited to submit a full application should 
provide, in Appendix D, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its 
application, information addressing the required evidence standards. 
An applicant must either ensure that all evidence is available to 
the Department from publicly available sources and provide links or 
other guidance indicating where it is available; or, in the full 
application, include copies of evidence in Appendix D. If the 
Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient 
information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide 
additional information to support its full application.


[[Page 11095]]


     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 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 i3 program. 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 i3 program 
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 i3 program, 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, in both pre-applications and full applications, 
should identify any information contained in their application that 
they consider to be confidential commercial information. Consistent 
with the process followed in the prior two i3 competitions, we plan on 
posting the project narrative section of funded Development 
applications on the Department's Web site. Identifying proprietary 
information in the submitted 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 a pre-
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) or a text telephone (TTY), 
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-877-576-7734.
    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at 
its email address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
    If you request a pre-application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify 
this program or competition as follows: CFDA number 84.411P.
    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the pre-
application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 
print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the person or team 
listed under Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.

    Note: The full application package will be made available to 
entities invited to submit a full application and additional 
information will be available on the i3 Web site.

    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. 
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: March 15, 
2012.
    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 a pre-application by completing a web-
based form. When completing this form, applicants will provide (1) the 
applicant organization's name and address and (2) the one absolute 
priority the applicant intends to address. Applicants may access this 
form online at https://go.usa.gov/Qvd. Applicants that do not complete 
this form may still submit a pre-application.
    Page Limit: For the pre-application, the project narrative is where 
you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use 
to evaluate your pre-application. For the full application, the project 
narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, 
address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your full 
applications.
    Pre-Application page limit: Applicants should limit the pre-
application narrative to no more than seven pages.
    Full-Application page limit: Applicants invited to submit a full 
application should 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 for the full 
application that contain information that could not be included in the 
narrative. Aside from the required forms, applicants should not include 
appendices in their pre-applications. Applicants for both pre- and full

[[Page 11096]]

applications 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.
     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.
    The page limit for the full application 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 for the full application. However, the page limit does apply to 
all of the application narrative section [Part III] of the full 
application.
    4. Submission Dates and Times:
    Pre-Applications Available: February 27, 2012.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: March 15, 
2012.
    Informational Meetings: The i3 program intends to hold meetings 
designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants for 
all three types of grants. Detailed information regarding these 
meetings will be provided on the i3 Web site at https://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Pre-Applications: April 9, 2012.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: The Department will 
announce on its Web site the deadline date for transmission of full 
applications. Under the pre-application process, peer reviewers will 
read and score the shorter pre-application against an abbreviated set 
of selection criteria, and only the entities that submit the highest-
scoring pre-applications will be invited to submit full applications.
    Pre- and full 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 
submission requirement, please refer to section IV. 8. Other Submission 
Requirements of this notice.
    We do not consider a pre-application or full 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 
pre-application or full application process, the individual's pre-
application or full application remains subject to all other 
requirements and limitations in this notice.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review of Full Applications: 60 
calendar days after the deadline date for transmittal of full 
applications.
    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 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 (both pre- and full applications) for grants under the 
i3 program, pre application CFDA 84.411P and full application CFDA 
number 84.411C (Development grants), must be submitted electronically 
using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at 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 email 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 applications for i3 at 
www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application 
package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the 
CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.411, not 
84.411C).
    Please note the following:
     When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find 
information about submitting an application electronically through the 
site, as well as the hours of operation.

[[Page 11097]]

     Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time 
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must 
be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as 
otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if 
it is received--that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov 
system--after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application 
deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply 
with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from 
Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application 
because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 
4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.
     The amount of time it can take to upload an application 
will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the 
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we 
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline 
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
     You should review and follow the Education Submission 
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are 
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that 
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov 
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures 
pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 
system home page at https://www.G5.gov.
     You will not receive additional point value because you 
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you 
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your 
application in paper format.
     You must submit all documents electronically, including 
all information you typically provide on the following forms: the 
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of 
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and 
certifications.
     You must upload any narrative sections and all other 
attachments to your application as files in a PDF (Portable Document) 
read-only, non-modifiable format. Do not upload an interactive or 
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, 
non-modifiable .PDF or submit a password-protected file, we will not 
review that material.
     Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
     After you electronically submit your application, you will 
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that 
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates 
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The 
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send 
a second notification to you by email. This second notification 
indicates that the Department has received your application and has 
assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified 
identifying number unique to your application).
     We may request that you provide us original signatures on 
forms at a later date.
    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues 
With the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting 
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov 
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a 
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your 
application on the application deadline date because of technical 
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension 
until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to 
enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand 
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing 
instructions described elsewhere in this notice.
    If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, 
on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice and 
provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with 
Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will 
accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem 
occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your 
ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, 
on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after 
a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted.

    Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply 
only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the 
Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed 
to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before 
the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem 
you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

    Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an 
exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your 
application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application 
through the Grants.gov system because--
     You do not have access to the Internet; or
     You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to 
the Grants.gov system; and
     No later than two weeks before the application deadline 
date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the 
application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business 
day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement 
to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception 
prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application.
    If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be 
postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline 
date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must 
receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the 
application deadline date.
    Address and mail or fax your statement to: Carol Lyons, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W203, 
Washington, DC 20202-5930. FAX: (202) 205-5631.
    Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the 
mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.
    b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a 
commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail 
the original and two copies of your application, on or before the 
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: 
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: 
(CFDA Number 84.411C), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
    You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

[[Page 11098]]

    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the 
U.S. Postal Service.
    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial 
carrier.
    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the 
U.S. Department of Education.
    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do 
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
    (1) A private metered postmark.
    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service. If 
your application is postmarked after the application deadline date, we 
will not consider your application.

    Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated 
postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your 
local post office.

    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper 
application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original 
and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the 
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: 
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: 
(CFDA Number 84.411C), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center 
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily 
between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, 
Sundays, and Federal holidays.

    Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you 
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department--
    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by 
the Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including 
suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are 
submitting your application; and
    (2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a 
notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not 
receive this notification within 15 business days from the 
application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of 
Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: This competition has separate selection 
criteria for pre-applications and full applications. The selection 
criteria for the Development competition are from the 2010 i3 NFP and 
from 34 CFR 75.210.\10\ The points assigned to each criterion are 
indicated in the parenthesis next to the criterion. An applicant may 
earn up to a total of 20 points based on the selection criteria for the 
pre-application. An applicant may earn up to a total of 100 selection 
criteria points and up to a total of two competitive preference points 
for the full application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions establishes that the 
Secretary may use one or more of the selection criteria established 
in the 2010 i3 NFP, any of the selection criteria in 34 CFR 75.210, 
criteria based on the statutory requirements for the i3 program in 
accordance with 34 CFR 75.209, or any combination of these when 
establishing selection criteria for each particular type of grant 
(Scale-up, Validation, and Development) in an i3 competition.

    Note: In responding to the selection criteria, applicants, for 
pre- and full applications, should keep in mind that peer reviewers 
may consider only the information provided in the written 
application when scoring and commenting on the application. 
Therefore, applicants should draft their responses with the goal of 
helping peer reviewers understand:
     What the applicant is proposing to do, including the 
single Absolute Priority under which the applicant intends the 
application to be reviewed;
     How the proposed project will improve upon existing 
products, processes, or strategies for addressing similar needs;
     What the outcomes of the project will be if it is 
successful; and
     What the proposed project will cost and why the 
proposed project is an effective use of funds.

    Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Pre-Application:
    A. Quality of Project Design (up to 10 points).
    The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of the project design, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed project has a clear set of 
goals and an explicit strategy, with actions that are (a) aligned with 
the priorities the eligible applicant is seeking to meet, and (b) 
expected to result in achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes of 
the proposed project. (2010 i3 NFP)
    (2) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project. 
(34 CFR 75.210)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
the applicant to describe what the applicant proposes to do in the 
proposed project, how the applicant will do it, what the project 
costs are, and why those costs are sufficient and reasonable to 
achieve the goals, objectives, and outcomes.

    B. Significance (up to 10 points).
    The Secretary considers the significance of the project. In 
determining the significance of the project, the Secretary considers 
the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed project represents an 
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities established for the 
competition. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the 
development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in the 
field of study. (34 CFR 75.210)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
applicants to address the likely impact of the proposed project if 
it is successful and how the project would move the field (as 
opposed to only the entities or individuals being served with grant 
funds) forward.

    Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Full Application:
    A. Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).
    The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of the project design, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed project has a clear set of 
goals and an explicit strategy, with actions that are (a) aligned with 
the priorities the eligible applicant is seeking to meet, and (b) 
expected to result in achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes of 
the proposed project. (2010 i3 NFP)
    (2) The eligible applicant's estimate of the cost of the proposed 
project, which includes the start-up and operating costs per student 
per year (including indirect costs) for reaching the total number of 
students proposed to be served by the project. The eligible applicant 
must include an estimate of the costs for the eligible applicant or 
others (including other partners) to reach 100,000, 250,000, and 
500,000 students. (2010 i3 NFP)

    Note: The Secretary considers cost estimates both (a) to assess 
the reasonableness of the costs relative to the objectives, design, 
and potential significance for the total number of students to be 
served by the proposed project, which is determined by the eligible 
applicant, and (b) to understand the possible costs for the eligible 
applicant or others (including other partners) to reach the scaling 
targets of 100,000, 250,000, and 500,000 students for Development 
grants. An eligible applicant is free to propose the number of 
students it will serve under its project, and is expected to reach 
that number of students by the end of the grant period. The scaling 
targets, in contrast, are theoretical and allow peer reviewers to 
assess the cost-effectiveness generally of proposed projects, 
particularly in cases where an initial investment may be required to 
support projects that operate at reduced cost in the future, whether

[[Page 11099]]

implemented by the eligible applicant or any other entity. Grantees 
are not required to reach these numbers during the grant period.

    (3) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project. 
(34 CFR 75.210)
    (4) The potential and planning for the incorporation of project 
purposes, activities, or benefits into the ongoing work of the eligible 
applicant and any other partners at the end of the Development grant. 
(2010 i3 NFP)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
the applicant to address what the applicant proposes to do for the 
proposed project, how the applicant will do it, what the project 
costs will be, why the project costs will be sufficient and 
reasonable to achieve the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the 
proposed project, and how the project costs would change if the 
project were scaled to serve a larger number of students (i.e., 
which of the costs are fixed regardless of how many students are 
served and which of the costs are variable and increase as more 
students are served). Additionally, an applicant may wish to address 
why the project costs are reasonable compared to what the project 
will accomplish, particularly in comparison to similar projects or 
alternative ways of achieving similar outcomes.

    B. Significance (up to 35 points).
    The Secretary considers the significance of the project. In 
determining the significance of the project, the Secretary considers 
the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed project represents an 
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities established for the 
competition. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the 
development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in the 
field of study. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (3) The extent to which the eligible applicant demonstrates that, 
if funded, the proposed project likely will have a positive impact, as 
measured by the importance or magnitude of the effect, on improving 
student achievement or student growth, closing achievement gaps, 
decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school graduation rates, or 
increasing college enrollment and completion rates. (2010 i3 NFP)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
the applicant to explain what is exceptional about how the proposed 
project addresses the absolute priority under which the applicant is 
submitting its i3 application. Also, the Secretary encourages the 
applicant to explain how the proposed project fits into existing 
national and international theory, knowledge, or practice, and how 
it will move the field (as opposed to only the entities or 
individuals being served with grant funds) forward. Additionally, 
the Secretary encourages the applicant to quantify the impact if the 
proposed project is successful and why the applicant expects the 
proposed project to have the described impact (i.e., describe what 
existing evidence or theory supports that level of impact).

    C. Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel (up to 20 points).
    The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan and 
personnel for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the 
management plan and personnel for the proposed project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks, as well as tasks related to the sustainability and 
scalability of the proposed project. (2010 i3 NFP)
    (2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of the project director and key project personnel, especially in 
managing projects of the size and scope of the proposed project. (34 
CFR 75.210)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
applicants to address how the team's prior experiences have prepared 
them for implementing the proposed project successfully.

    D. Quality of Project Evaluation (up to 20 points).
    The Secretary considers the quality of the project evaluation. In 
determining the quality of the project evaluation to be conducted, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
high-quality implementation data and performance feedback, and permit 
periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. 
(2010 i3 NFP)
    (2) The extent to which the evaluation will provide sufficient 
information about the key elements and approach of the project to 
facilitate further development, replication, or testing in other 
settings. (2010 i3 NFP)
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes 
sufficient resources to carry out the project evaluation effectively. 
(2010 i3 NFP)

    Note: In responding to this criterion, the Secretary encourages 
applicants to describe the key evaluation questions and address how 
the proposed evaluation methodologies will allow the project to 
answer those questions. This may include whether the evaluation 
would produce information about the effectiveness of the proposed 
project with the specific student populations being served with 
grant funds. Further, the Secretary encourages applicants to 
identify what implementation and performance data the evaluation 
will generate and how the evaluation will provide data during the 
period to help indicate whether the project is on track to meet its 
goals. Finally, applicants should address whether the budget 
allocates sufficient resources to support the planned evaluation.

    We encourage eligible applicants to review the following technical 
assistance resources on evaluation:
    (1) What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook: 
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: 
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/.
    2. Review and Selection Process: In order to receive an i3 
Development grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-
application will be reviewed and scored by peer reviewers using two 
selection criteria established in this notice. Only entities that 
submitted top-rated pre-applications will be eligible to submit full 
applications. The Department will inform the entities that submitted 
pre-applications of their eligibility to submit full applications. 
Scores received on pre-applications will not carry over to the review 
of the full application.
    As described earlier in this notice, before making awards, the 
Department will screen pre- and full applications submitted in 
accordance with the requirements in this notice and will determine 
which applications have met eligibility and other statutory 
requirements. This screening process may occur at various stages of the 
pre-application and full application processes and applicants that are 
determined ineligible will not receive a grant regardless of peer 
reviewer scores or comments.
    The Department will use independent peer reviewers with various 
backgrounds and professions including pre-kindergarten-12 teachers and 
principals, college and university educators, researchers and 
evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grant makers 
and managers, and others with education expertise. The Department will 
thoroughly screen all reviewers for conflicts of interest to ensure a 
fair and competitive review process.
    Reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation, and score the 
assigned pre-applications and full applications, using the respective 
selection criteria provided in this notice. For Development pre-
applications, the

[[Page 11100]]

Department, depending on the number of submissions, may use a multi-
tiered review process. For full applications submitted for Development 
grants, peer reviewers will review and score the applications based on 
all four selection criteria. If eligible applicants have chosen to 
address competitive preference priorities (a maximum of two) for 
purposes of earning competitive preference priority points, reviewers 
will review and score those competitive preference priorities as part 
of the peer review of the full applications. If competitive preference 
priority points are awarded, those points will be added to the eligible 
applicant's full application score.
    We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in 
any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 
34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying 
out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement 
of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The 
Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a 
timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable 
quality.
    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary 
also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal 
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or 
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department 
of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
    3. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary 
may impose special conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is 
not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; 
has a financial or other management system that does not meet the 
standards in 34 CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has not fulfilled 
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your full application is successful, we notify 
your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award 
Notification (GAN). We may notify you informally, also.
    If your pre-application is not evaluated, or following the 
submission of your pre-application you are not invited to submit a full 
application, we notify you. If your full application is not evaluated 
or not selected for funding, we notify you.
    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify 
administrative and national policy requirements in the application 
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable 
Regulations section of this notice.
    We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of 
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and 
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also 
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding 
commitments under the grant.
    3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, 
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and 
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply 
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
    (b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final 
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the 
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual 
performance report that provides the most current performance and 
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance 
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, 
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
    4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the i3 program is 
to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative 
practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on improving student 
achievement or student growth for high-need students. We have 
established several performance measures for the i3 Development grants.
    Short-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees 
whose projects are being implemented with fidelity to the approved 
design; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies 
supported by a Development grant with ongoing evaluations that provide 
evidence of their promise for improving student outcomes; (3) the 
percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a 
Development grant with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-
quality implementation data and performance feedback that allow for 
periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes; and 
(4) the cost per student actually served by the grant.
    Long-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of programs, 
practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with a 
completed evaluation that provides evidence of their promise for 
improving student outcomes; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, 
or strategies supported by a Development grant with a completed 
evaluation that provides information about the key elements and 
approach of the project so as to facilitate further development, 
replication, or testing in other settings; and (3) the cost per student 
for programs, practices, or strategies that were proven promising at 
improving educational outcomes for students.
    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award, the 
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.253, the extent to which a 
grantee has made ``substantial progress toward meeting the objectives 
in its approved application.'' This consideration includes the review 
of a grantee's progress in meeting the targets and projected outcomes 
in its approved application, and whether the grantee has expended funds 
in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and 
budget. In making a continuation grant, the Secretary also considers 
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in 
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil 
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities 
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

VII. Agency Contact

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Lyons, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W203, Washington, DC 20202-
5930. FAX: (202) 205-5631. Telephone: (202) 453-7122 or by email: 
i3@ed.gov.
    If you use a TDD or a TTY, call toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

VIII. Other Information

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format 
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to 
the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
in section VII of this notice.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free 
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the 
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System 
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well 
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal 
Register, in

[[Page 11101]]

text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have 
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

    Dated: February 21, 2012.
James H. Shelton, III,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2012-4357 Filed 2-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P