Application for New Awards; Charter Schools Program Grants for State Educational Agencies, 34228-34238 [2015-14392]
Download as PDF
34228
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Application for New Awards; Charter
Schools Program Grants for State
Educational Agencies
Office of Innovation and
Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Overview Information:
Charter Schools Program (CSP) Grants
for State Educational Agencies (SEAs).
Notice inviting applications for new
awards for fiscal year (FY) 2015.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.282A.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 15, 2015.
Date of Pre-Application Meeting: June
17, 2015, 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
Washington, DC time.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: July 16, 2015.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: August 14, 2015.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the CSP is to increase national
understanding of the charter school
model by:
(1) Providing financial assistance for
the planning, program design, and
initial implementation of charter
schools;
(2) Evaluating the effects of charter
schools, including the effects on
students, student achievement, student
growth, staff, and parents;
(3) Expanding the number of highquality charter schools available to
students across the Nation; and
(4) Encouraging the States to provide
support to charter schools for facilities
financing in an amount more nearly
commensurate to the amount the States
have typically provided for traditional
public schools.
The purpose of the CSP Grants for
SEAs competition is to enable SEAs to
provide financial assistance, through
subgrants to eligible applicants (also
referred to as non-SEA eligible
applicants), for the planning, program
design, and initial implementation of
charter schools and for the
dissemination of information about
successful charter schools, including
practices that existing charter schools
have demonstrated are successful.
Background: For the 2015 CSP SEA
competition, the Department seeks to
achieve three main goals. The first goal
is to ensure that CSP funds are directed
toward the creation of high-quality
charter schools. For example, we ask
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
applicants to explain how charter
schools fit into the State’s broader
education reform strategy. In addition,
the selection criteria request
information from the SEA regarding
how it will manage and report on
project performance.
The second goal is to strengthen
public accountability and oversight for
authorized public chartering agencies
(also referred to as authorizers). The
notice of final priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria for
this program, published elsewhere in
this issue of the Federal Register (NFP),
provides incentives for SEAs to
implement CSP requirements, as well as
State law and policies, in a manner that
encourages authorized public chartering
agencies to focus on school quality
through rigorous and transparent charter
school authorization processes. For
example, Absolute Priorities 1 Periodic
Review and Evaluation and 2 Charter
School Oversight require SEAs to ensure
public accountability and oversight for
charter schools within the State,
including holding authorized public
chartering agencies accountable for the
quality of the charter schools in their
portfolios.
The third goal is to support and
improve academic outcomes for
educationally disadvantaged students.
Our commitment to equitable outcomes
for all students, continued growth of
high-quality charter schools, and
addressing ongoing concerns about
educationally disadvantaged students’
access to and performance in charter
schools compel the Department to
encourage a continued focus on
students at the greatest risk of academic
failure. A critical component of serving
all students, including educationally
disadvantaged students, is
consideration of student body diversity,
including racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic diversity. For example,
we encourage applicants to
meaningfully incorporate student body
diversity into charter school models and
practices and ask applicants to describe
specific actions they would take to
support educationally disadvantaged
students through charter schools.
In addition to the three goals outlined
above, we believe the 2015 CSP Grants
for SEAs competition streamlines the
CSP application process. For example,
selection criterion (f) Dissemination of
Information and Best Practices
combines two statutory criteria that
have been used separately in previous
competitions and asks applicants to
describe their plans to disseminate best
or promising practices of charter schools
to each local educational agency (LEA)
in the State, and to describe their
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
dissemination subgrant awards
processes, thereby decreasing the
burden on applicants.
All charter schools receiving CSP
funds, as outlined in section 5210 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), must
comply with various non-discrimination
laws, including the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975, title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, title IX of the Education
Amendments Act of 1972, section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, part B of
the Individuals with Disabilities Act,
and applicable State laws.
With respect to opening and operating
a single-sex charter school, the
applicant should ensure that charter
schools in its State comply with the
Equal Protection Clause of the U.S.
Constitution (as interpreted in United
States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)
and other cases) and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1970 (20
U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) and its regulations,
including 34 CFR 106.34(c).
Priorities: This notice includes two
absolute priorities and three competitive
preference priorities. These priorities
are from the NFP, published elsewhere
in this issue of the Federal Register, and
section 5202(e) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 7221a(e)).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2015 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition,
these priorities are absolute priorities.
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider
only applications that meet both of the
following absolute priorities.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1—Periodic Review
and Evaluation.
To meet this priority, the applicant
must demonstrate that the State
provides for periodic review and
evaluation by the authorized public
chartering agency of each charter school
at least once every five years, unless
required more frequently by State law,
and takes steps to ensure that such
reviews take place. The review and
evaluation must serve to determine
whether the charter school is meeting
the terms of the school’s charter and
meeting or exceeding the student
academic achievement requirements
and goals for charter schools as set forth
in the school’s charter or under State
law, a State regulation, or a State policy,
provided that the student academic
achievement requirements and goals for
charter schools established by that
policy meet or exceed those set forth
under applicable State law or State
regulation. This periodic review and
evaluation must include an opportunity
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
for the authorized public chartering
agency to take appropriate action or
impose meaningful consequences on the
charter school, if necessary.
Absolute Priority 2—Charter School
Oversight.
To meet this priority, an application
must demonstrate that State law,
regulations, or other policies in the State
where the applicant is located require
the following:
(a) That each charter school in the
State—
(1) Operates under a legally binding
charter or performance contract between
itself and the school’s authorized public
chartering agency that describes the
rights and responsibilities of the school
and the public chartering agency;
(2) Conducts annual, timely, and
independent audits of the school’s
financial statements that are filed with
the school’s authorized public
chartering agency; and
(3) Demonstrates improved student
academic achievement; and
(b) That all authorized public
chartering agencies in the State use
increases in student academic
achievement for all groups of students
described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) of
the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(v)) as
one of the most important factors when
determining whether to renew or revoke
a school’s charter.
Competitive Preference Priorities: For
FY 2015 and any subsequent year in
which we make awards based on the list
of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are
competitive preference priorities. Under
34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award up to
an additional 15 points to an
application depending on how well the
application addresses Competitive
Preference Priority 1, an additional five
points to an application that meets
Competitive Preference Priority 2, and
an additional five points to an
application that meets Competitive
Preference Priority 3. Applications
addressing each of these priorities may
receive up to 25 priority points in total.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1—
High-Quality Authorizing and
Monitoring Processes (up to 15 points).
To meet this priority, an applicant
must demonstrate that all authorized
public chartering agencies in the State
use one or more of the following:
(a) Frameworks and processes to
evaluate the performance of charter
schools on a regular basis that include—
(1) Rigorous academic and operational
performance expectations (including
performance expectations related to
financial management and equitable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
treatment of all students and
applicants);
(2) Performance objectives for each
school aligned to those expectations;
(3) Clear criteria for renewing the
charter of a school based on an objective
body of evidence, including evidence
that the charter school has (a) met the
performance objectives outlined in the
charter or performance contract; (b)
demonstrated organizational and fiscal
viability; and (c) demonstrated fidelity
to the terms of the charter or
performance contract and applicable
law;
(4) Clear criteria for revoking the
charter of a school if there is violation
of law or public trust regarding student
safety or public funds, or evidence of
poor student academic achievement;
and
(5) Annual reporting by authorized
public chartering agencies to each of
their authorized charter schools that
summarizes the individual school’s
performance and compliance, based on
this framework, and identifies any areas
that need improvement.
(b) Clear and specific standards and
formalized processes that measure and
benchmark the performance of the
authorized public chartering agency or
agencies, including the performance of
its portfolio of charter schools, and
provide for the annual dissemination of
information on such performance;
(c) Authorizing processes that
establish clear criteria for evaluating
charter applications and include a
multi-tiered clearance or review of a
charter school, including a final review
immediately before the school opens for
its first operational year; or
(d) Authorizing processes that include
differentiated review of charter petitions
to assess whether, and the extent to
which, the charter school developer has
been successful (as determined by the
authorized public chartering agency) in
establishing and operating one or more
high-quality charter schools.
Competitive Preference Priority 2—
One Authorized Public Chartering
Agency Other than a LEA, or an
Appeals Process (0 or 5 points).
To meet this priority, the applicant
must demonstrate that the State—
(a) Provides for one authorized public
chartering agency that is not an LEA,
such as a State chartering board, for
each individual or entity seeking to
operate a charter school pursuant to
State law; or
(b) In the case of a State in which
LEAs are the only authorized public
chartering agencies, allows for an
appeals process for the denial of an
application for a charter school.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
34229
Note: In order to meet this priority under
paragraph (b) above, the entity hearing
appeal must have the authority to approve
the charter application over the objections of
the LEA.
Competitive Preference Priority 3—
SEAs that Have Never Received a CSP
Grant (0 or 5 points).
To meet this priority, an applicant
must be an eligible SEA applicant that
has never received a CSP grant.
Application Requirements:
Applications for funding under the CSP
Grants for SEAs program must address
the application requirements described
below.
These application requirements are
from section 5203(b) of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 7221b(b)) and the NFP. An
applicant may choose to respond to the
application requirements in the context
of its responses to the selection criteria,
when applicable.
(i) Academically poor-performing
charter school: Provide one of the
following:
(a) Written certification that, for
purposes of the CSP grant, the SEA uses
the definition of academically poorperforming charter school provided in
this notice; or
(b) If the State proposes to use an
alternative definition of academically
poor-performing charter school in
accordance with paragraph (b) of the
definition of the term in this notice, (1)
the specific definition the State
proposes to use; and (2) a written
explanation of how the proposed
definition is at least as rigorous as the
standard in paragraph (a) of the
definition of academically poorperforming charter school set forth in
the Definitions section of this notice.
(ii) Disseminating best practices:
Describe how the SEA will disseminate
best or promising practices of charter
schools to each LEA in the State, as
requested in selection criterion (f)
Dissemination of Information and Best
Practices;
(iii) Federal funds: As requested in
selection criterion (b) Policy Context for
Charter Schools, describe how the
SEA—
(a) Will inform each charter school in
the State about Federal funds the charter
school is eligible to receive and Federal
programs in which the charter school
may participate; and
(b) Will ensure that each charter
school in the State receives the school’s
commensurate share of Federal
education funds that are allocated by
formula each year, including during the
first year of operation of the school and
a year in which the school’s enrollment
expands significantly;
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
34230
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
(iv) High-quality charter school:
Provide one of the following:
(a) Written certification that, for
purposes of the CSP grant, the SEA uses
the definition of high-quality charter
school provided in this notice; or
(b) If the State proposes to use an
alternative definition of high-quality
charter school in accordance with
paragraph (b) of the definition of the
term in this notice, (1) the specific
definition the State proposes to use; and
(2) a written explanation of how the
proposed definition is at least as
rigorous as the standard in paragraph (a)
of the definition of high-quality charter
school set forth in the Definitions
section of this notice.
(v) IDEA Compliance: Describe how
charter schools that are considered to be
LEAs under State law, and LEAs in
which charter schools are located, will
comply with sections 613(a)(5) and
613(e)(1)(B) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20
U.S.C. 1400, et seq.).
(vi) Logic model: Provide a complete
logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1)
for the project. The logic model must
address the role of the grant in
promoting the State-level strategy for
expanding the number of high-quality
charter schools through startup
subgrants, optional dissemination
subgrants, optional revolving loan
funds, and other strategies.
Note: The applicant should review section
VI.4 Performance Measures of this notice for
information on the requirements for
developing project-specific performance
measures and targets consistent with the
objectives of the proposed project. Program
performance measures, which are also
discussed in section VI.4 Performance
Measures of this notice, should be included
within this logic model. The applicant also
should review the information that the
Secretary considers under Selection Criterion
(h). Management Plan and Theory of Action.
For technical assistance in developing
effective performance measures, applicants
are encouraged to review information
provided by the Department’s Regional
Educational Laboratories (RELs). The RELs
seek to build the capacity of States and
school districts to incorporate data and
research into education decision-making.
Each REL provides research support and
technical assistance to its region but makes
learning opportunities available to educators
everywhere. For example, the REL Northeast
and Islands has created the following
resource on logic models:
relpacific.mcrel.org/resources/elm-app.
(vii) Lottery and enrollment
preferences: Describe (1) how lotteries
for admission to charter schools will be
conducted in the State, including any
student enrollment preferences or
exemptions from the lottery that charter
schools are required or expressly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
permitted by the State to employ; and
(2) any mechanisms that exist for the
SEA or authorized public chartering
agency to review, monitor, or approve
such lotteries or student enrollment
preferences or exemptions from the
lottery. In addition, the SEA must
provide an assurance that it will require
each applicant for a CSP subgrant to
include in its application descriptions
of its recruitment and admissions
policies and practices, including a
description of the proposed lottery and
any enrollment preferences or
exemptions from the lottery the charter
school employs or plans to employ, and
how those enrollment preferences or
exemptions are consistent with State
law and the CSP authorizing statute (for
information related to admissions and
lotteries under the CSP, please see
section E of the CSP Nonregulatory
Guidance (January 2014) at
www2.ed.gov/programs/charter/
nonregulatory-guidance.html).
(viii) Objectives: Describe the
objectives of the SEA’s charter school
grant program, as requested in selection
criterion (h) Management Plan and
Theory of Action, and how these
objectives will be fulfilled, including
steps taken by the SEA to inform
teachers, parents, and communities of
the SEA’s charter school grant program;
(ix) Revolving loan fund: If an SEA
elects to reserve a portion of its grant
funds (no more than 10 percent) to
establish a revolving loan fund, describe
how the revolving loan fund would
operate;
(x) Waivers: If an SEA desires the
Secretary to consider waivers under the
authority of the CSP, include a request
and justification for any waiver of
statutory or regulatory provisions that
the SEA believes is necessary for the
successful operation of charter schools
in the State, as requested in selection
criterion (i) Project Design.
Definitions: The following definitions
are from 34 CFR 77.1, the NFP, and
section 5210 of the CSP authorizing
statute (20 U.S.C. 7221i).
Academically poor-performing
charter school means—
(a) A charter school that has been in
operation for at least three years and
that—
(1) Has been identified as being in the
lowest-performing five percent of all
schools in the State and has failed to
improve school performance (based on
the SEA’s accountability system under
the ESEA) over the past three years; and
(2) Has failed to demonstrate student
academic growth of at least an average
of one grade level for each cohort of
students in each of the past three years,
as demonstrated by statewide or other
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
assessments approved by the authorized
public chartering agency; or
(b) An SEA may use an alternative
definition for academically poorperforming charter school, provided that
the SEA complies with the requirements
for proposing to use an alternative
definition for the term as set forth in
paragraph (b) of academically poorperforming charter school in the
Requirements section of this notice.
Ambitious means promoting
continued, meaningful improvement for
program participants or for other
individuals or entities affected by the
grant, or representing a significant
advancement in the field of education
research, practices, or methodologies.
When used to describe a performance
target, whether a performance target is
ambitious depends upon the context of
the relevant performance measure and
the baseline for that measure.
Baseline means the starting point
from which performance is measured
and targets are set.
Developer means an individual or
group of individuals (including a public
or private nonprofit organization),
which may include teachers,
administrators and other school staff,
parents, or other members of the local
community in which a charter school
project will be carried out.
Educationally disadvantaged students
means economically disadvantaged
students, students with disabilities,
migrant students, limited English
proficient students (also referred to as
English learners or English language
learners), neglected or delinquent
students, or homeless students.
Eligible applicant means a developer
that has (a) applied to an authorized
public chartering authority to operate a
charter school; and (b) provided
adequate and timely notice to that
authority under section 5203(d)(3) of the
ESEA.
High-quality charter school means—
(a) A charter school that shows
evidence of strong academic results for
the past three years (or over the life of
the school, if the school has been open
for fewer than three years), based on the
following factors:
(1) Increased student academic
achievement and attainment (including,
if applicable and available, high school
graduation rates and college and other
postsecondary education enrollment
rates) for all students, including, as
applicable, educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter school;
(2) Either—
(i) Demonstrated success in closing
historic achievement gaps for the
subgroups of students described in
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
(20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)) at the
charter school; or
(ii) No significant achievement gaps
between any of the subgroups of
students described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 6311) at the charter school and
significant gains in student academic
achievement for all populations of
students served by the charter school;
(3) Results (including, if applicable
and available, performance on statewide
tests, annual student attendance and
retention rates, high school graduation
rates, college and other postsecondary
education attendance rates, and college
and other postsecondary education
persistence rates) for low-income and
other educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter school
that are above the average academic
achievement results for such students in
the State;
(4) Results on a performance
framework established by the State or
authorized public chartering agency for
the purpose of evaluating charter school
quality; and
(5) No significant compliance issues,
particularly in the areas of student
safety, financial management, and
equitable treatment of students; or
(b) An SEA may use an alternative
definition for high-quality charter
school, provided that the SEA complies
with the requirements for proposing to
use an alternative definition for the term
as set forth in paragraph (b) of highquality charter school in the
Requirements section of this notice.
Logic model (also referred to as theory
of action) means a well-specified
conceptual framework that identifies
key components of the proposed
process, product, strategy, or practice
(i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are
hypothesized to be critical to achieving
the relevant outcomes) and describes
the relationships among the key
components and outcomes, theoretically
and operationally.
Performance measure means any
quantitative indicator, statistic, or
metric used to gauge program or project
performance.
Performance target means a level of
performance that an applicant would
seek to meet during the course of a
project or as a result of a project.
Relevant outcome means the student
outcome(s) (or the ultimate outcome if
not related to students), the proposed
process, product, strategy, or practice is
designed to improve; consistent with
the specific goals of a program.
Significant compliance issue means a
violation that did, will, or could (if not
addressed or if it represents a pattern of
repeated misconduct or material non-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
compliance) lead to the revocation of a
school’s charter by the authorizer.
Program Authority: The CSP is
authorized under Title V, Part B,
Subpart 1 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221–
7221j); and the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act,
2015 (FY 2015 Appropriations Act),
Public Law 113–235.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in
34 CFR parts 75, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84,
86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of
Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide
Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement)in 2 CFR part 180, as
adopted and amended as regulations of
the Department in 2 CFR part 3485, and
the Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit Requirements for Federal Awards
in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and
amended in 2 CFR part 3474. (c) the
NFP.
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 only to institutions of higher
education.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grant.
Estimated Available Funds:
$116,000,000.
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in
subsequent years from the list of
unfunded applications from this
competition.
Note: The FY 2015 Appropriations Act
authorizes the use of CSP funds ‘‘for grants
that support preschool education in charter
schools.’’ Accordingly, an application
submitted under this competition may
propose to use CSP funds to support
preschool education in charter schools. For
guidance on how charter schools may use
CSP funds to support preschool education in
charter schools, please see the Department’s
nonregulatory guidance, entitled Charter
Schools Program Guidance on the Use of
Funds to Support Preschool Education,
released in November 2014, at www2.ed.gov/
programs/charter/csppreschoolfaqs.doc.
Estimated Range of Awards:
$3,500,000 to $45,000,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards:
$10,000,000 per year.
Estimated Number of Awards: 12.
Note: The Department is not bound by any
estimates in this notice. The estimated range,
average size, and number of awards are based
on a single 12-month budget period.
However, the Department may choose to
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
34231
fund more than 12 months of a project using
FY 2015 funds.
Project Period: Up to 36 months.
Note: SEAs may award planning and
implementation subgrants to eligible
applicants for a period of up to three years,
no more than 18 months of which may be
used for planning and program design and no
more than two years of which may be used
for the initial implementation of a charter
school. SEAs may award dissemination
subgrants to eligible charter schools for a
period of up to two years.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs in States
with a State statute specifically
authorizing the establishment of charter
schools.
Note: Non-SEA eligible applicants in States
in which the SEA elects not to participate in
or does not have an application approved
under the CSP may apply for funding directly
from the Department. The Department is
holding a separate competition for CSP grants
to non-SEA eligible applicants under CFDA
numbers 84.282B and 84.282C. The notice
inviting applications for new awards under
CFDA numbers 84.282B and 84.282C will be
published later in FY 2015. Additional
information about the competitions for nonSEA eligible applicants is available at
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/csp/
index.html.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
program does not require cost sharing or
matching.
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Address to Request Application
Package: Kathryn Meeley, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., Room 4W257,
Washington, DC 20202–5970.
Telephone: (202) 453–6818 or by email:
Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
Individuals with disabilities can
obtain a copy of the application package
in an accessible format (e.g., braille,
large print, audiotape, or compact disc)
by contacting the program contact
person listed in this section.
2. 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.
Page Limit: The application narrative
(Part III of the application) is where you,
the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate
your application. We recommend that
you limit the application narrative (Part
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
34232
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
III) to no more than 60 pages, using the
following standards:
• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side
only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom,
and both sides.
• Double space (no more than three
lines per vertical inch) all text in the
application narrative, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations,
references, and captions, as well as all
text in charts, tables, figures, and
graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or
larger or no smaller than 10 pitch
(characters per inch).
• Use one of the following fonts:
Times New Roman, Courier, Courier
New, or Arial. An application submitted
in any other font (including Times
Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be
accepted.
The page limit does not apply to Part
I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget
section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and
certifications; or the one-page abstract,
the resumes, the bibliography, or the
letters of support. However, the page
limit does apply to all of the application
narrative section (Part III).
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: June 15, 2015.
Date of Pre-Application Meeting: The
Department will hold a pre-application
meeting via Webinar for prospective
applicants on June 17, 2015 from 2:00
p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Washington, DC, time.
Individuals interested in attending this
meeting are encouraged to pre-register
by emailing their name, organization,
and contact information with the subject
heading ‘‘SEA PRE-APPLICATION
MEETING’’ to CharterSchools@ed.gov.
There is no registration fee for
participating in this meeting.
For further information about the preapplication meeting, contact Kathryn
Meeley, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room
4W257, Washington, DC 20202–5970.
Telephone: (202) 453–6818 or by email:
Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: July 16, 2015.
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. 7. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application
that does not comply with the deadline
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
Individuals with disabilities who
need an accommodation or auxiliary aid
in connection with the application
process should contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If
the Department provides an
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an
individual with a disability in
connection with the application
process, the individual’s application
remains subject to all other
requirements and limitations in this
notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: August 14, 2015.
4. 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
program.
5. Funding Restrictions: Grant funds
must be used to carry out allowable
activities, as described in section 5204(f)
of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)). The
following funding restrictions apply to
this competition:
Planning and Implementation
Subgrants: An eligible applicant
receiving a subgrant under this program
may use the subgrant funds only for—
(a) Post-award planning and design of
the educational program, which may
include (i) refinement of the desired
educational results and of the methods
for measuring progress toward achieving
those results; and (ii) professional
development of teachers and other staff
who will work in the charter school;
and
(b) Initial implementation of the
charter school, which may include (i)
informing the community about the
school; (ii) acquiring necessary
equipment and educational materials
and supplies; (iii) acquiring or
developing curriculum materials; and
(iv) other initial operational costs that
cannot be met from State or local
sources. (20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)(3))
Dissemination Subgrants: An SEA
may reserve not more than 10 percent of
its grant funds to make subgrants to
eligible charter schools to carry out
dissemination activities. A charter
school may use dissemination subgrant
funds to assist other schools in adapting
the charter school’s program (or certain
aspects of the charter school’s program)
or to disseminate information about the
charter school through such activities
as—
(a) Assisting other individuals with
the planning and start-up of one or more
new public schools, including charter
schools, that are independent of the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
assisting charter school and the assisting
charter school’s developers and that
agree to be held to at least as high a level
of accountability as the assisting charter
school;
(b) Developing partnerships with
other public schools, including charter
schools, designed to improve student
academic achievement in each of the
schools participating in the partnership;
(c) Developing curriculum materials,
assessments, and other materials that
promote increased student achievement
and are based on successful practices
within the assisting charter school; and
(d) Conducting evaluations and
developing materials that document the
successful practices of the assisting
charter school and that are designed to
improve student achievement.
Award Basis. In determining whether
to approve a grant award and the
amount of such award, the Department
will consider, among other things, the
amount of any unobligated carryover
funds the applicant has under an
existing CSP grant and the applicant’s
performance and use of funds under a
previous or existing award under any
Department program (34 CFR 75.233(b)
and 75.217(d)(3)(ii)). In assessing the
applicant’s performance and use of
funds under a previous or existing
award, the Secretary will consider,
among other things, the outcomes the
applicant has achieved and the results
of any Departmental grant monitoring,
including the applicant’s progress in
remedying any deficiencies identified in
such monitoring.
We reference additional regulations
outlining funding restrictions in the
Applicable Regulations section of this
notice.
6. Data Universal Numbering System
Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, and System for Award
Management: 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 System for Award
Management (SAM) (formerly 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 SAM
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
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
can be created within one to two
business days.
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 two to five weeks for your
TIN to become active.
The SAM registration process can take
approximately seven business days, but
may take upwards of several weeks,
depending on the completeness and
accuracy of the data entered into the
SAM database by an entity. Thus, if you
think you might want to apply for
Federal financial assistance under a
program administered by the
Department, please allow sufficient time
to obtain and register your DUNS
number and TIN. We strongly
recommend that you register early.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Note: Once your SAM registration is active,
you will need to allow 24 to 48 hours for the
information to be available in Grants.gov. and
before you can submit an application through
Grants.gov.
If you are currently registered with
SAM, 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 registration
annually. This may take three or more
business days.
Information about SAM is available at
www.SAM.gov. To further assist you
with obtaining and registering your
DUNS number and TIN in SAM or
updating your existing SAM account,
we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet,
which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/
fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.
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 at the following
Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/
web/grants/register.html.
7. Other Submission Requirements.
Applications for grants under this
competition must be submitted
electronically unless you qualify for an
exception to this requirement in
accordance with the instructions in this
section.
a. Electronic Submission of
Applications.
Applications for grants under the CSP
Grants for SEAs competition, CFDA
number 84.282A, must be submitted
electronically using the
Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
application for CSP Grants for SEAs
competition 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 84.282, not
84.282A).
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.
• 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 4:30:00 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 4:30:00 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
4:30:00 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
34233
• 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 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—NonConstruction 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, nonmodifiable format. Do not upload an
interactive or fillable PDF file. If you
upload a file type other than a readonly, 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 EDspecified 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
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
34234
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
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 4:30:00 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
4:30:00 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 4:30:00 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.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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 prevents you from using the
Internet to submit your application.
If you mail your written statement to
the Department, it must be postmarked
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
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: Kathryn Meeley, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., Room 4W257,
Washington, DC 20202–5970. FAX:
(202) 205–5630.
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 84.282A, 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.
(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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
address: U.S. Department of Education,
Application Control Center, Attention:
CFDA Number 84.282A, 550 12th Street
SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202–4260.
The Application Control Center
accepts hand deliveries daily between
8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 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: The selection
criteria for this program are from the
NFP published elsewhere in this issue
of the Federal Register.
Note: The Secretary does not consider
selection criterion (c) Past Performance in
evaluating the application submitted by an
SEA in a State that enacted a charter school
law for the first time less than five years
before the closing date of this competition.
Accordingly, such an SEA should not
address this criterion in its application. To
enable the Secretary to determine whether to
consider criterion (c), an SEA should provide
in its application the date when its State first
enacted a charter school law and relevant
supporting documentation.
In general, an SEA should clearly
identify each selection criterion it
addresses in its application. The
maximum possible score for addressing
each selection criterion is indicated in
parentheses following the selection
criterion. The maximum possible total
score (based on the selection criteria
and not including the competitive
preference priorities) is 100 points,
except that, for SEAs in States that first
enacted a charter school law less than
five years before the closing date of this
competition, the maximum possible
total score is 90 points because, as noted
above, the Secretary does not consider
selection criterion (c) in evaluating
applications from these SEAs. The
Secretary will convert each SEA’s total
score (including any additional points
received based on the competitive
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
preference priorities) to a percentage of
the applicable maximum possible total
score and prepare a single rank order
list using those percentages. Therefore,
SEAs for which the Secretary does not
consider selection criterion (c) will not
be disadvantaged.
In evaluating an application, the
Secretary considers the following
selection criteria:
(a) State-Level Strategy. (15 points)
The Secretary considers the quality of
the State-level strategy for using charter
schools to improve educational
outcomes for students throughout the
State. In determining the quality of the
State-level strategy, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA’s CSP
activities, including the subgrant
program, are integrated into the State’s
overall strategy for improving student
academic achievement and attainment
(including high school graduation rates
and college and other postsecondary
education enrollment rates) and closing
achievement and attainment gaps, and
complement or leverage other statewide
education reform efforts;
(2) The extent to which funding
equity for charter schools (including
equitable funding for charter school
facilities) is incorporated into the SEA’s
State-level strategy; and
(3) The extent to which the State
encourages local strategies for
improving student academic
achievement and attainment that
involve charter schools, including but
not limited to the following:
(i) Collaboration, including the
sharing of data and promising
instructional and other practices,
between charter schools and other
public schools or providers of early
learning and development programs or
alternative education programs; and
(ii) The creation of charter schools
that would serve as viable options for
students who currently attend, or would
otherwise attend, the State’s lowestperforming schools.
(b) Policy Context for Charter Schools.
(5 points)
The Secretary considers the policy
context for charter schools under the
proposed project. In determining the
policy context for charter schools under
the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The degree of flexibility afforded
to charter schools under the State’s
charter school law, including:
(i) The extent to which charter
schools in the State are exempt from
State or local rules that inhibit the
flexible operation and management of
public schools; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
(ii) The extent to which charter
schools in the State have a high degree
of autonomy, including autonomy over
the charter school’s budget,
expenditures, staffing, procurement, and
curriculum;
(2) The quality of the SEA’s processes
for:
(i) Annually informing each charter
school in the State about Federal funds
the charter school is eligible to receive
and Federal programs in which the
charter school may participate; and
(ii) Annually ensuring that each
charter school in the State receives, in
a timely fashion, the school’s
commensurate share of Federal funds
that are allocated by formula each year,
particularly during the first year of
operation of the school and during a
year in which the school’s enrollment
expands significantly; and
(3) The quality of the SEA’s plan to
ensure that charter schools that are
considered to be LEAs under State law
and LEAs in which charter schools are
located will comply with sections
613(a)(5) and 613(e)(1)(B) of IDEA (20
U.S.C. 1400, et seq.), the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C.
6101, et seq.), title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.),
title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.), and
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 (29 U.S.C. 794).
(c) Past Performance. (10 points) The
Secretary considers the past
performance of charter schools in a
State that enacted a charter school law
for the first time five or more years
before submission of its application. In
determining the past performance of
charter schools in such a State, the
Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The extent to which there has been
a demonstrated increase, for each of the
past five years, in the number and
percentage of high-quality charter
schools (as defined in this notice) in the
State;
(2) The extent to which there has been
a demonstrated reduction, for each of
the past five years, in the number and
percentage of academically poorperforming charter schools (as defined
in this notice) in the State; and
(3) Whether, and the extent to which,
the academic achievement and
academic attainment (including high
school graduation rates and college and
other postsecondary education
enrollment rates) of charter school
students equal or exceed the academic
achievement and academic attainment
of similar students in other public
schools in the State over the past five
years.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
34235
(d) Quality of Plan to Support
Educationally Disadvantaged Students.
(15 points) The Secretary considers the
quality of the SEA’s plan to support
educationally disadvantaged students.
In determining the quality of the plan to
support educationally disadvantaged
students, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA’s
charter school subgrant program
would—
(i) Assist students, particularly
educationally disadvantaged students,
in meeting and exceeding State
academic content standards and State
student achievement standards; and
(ii) Reduce or eliminate achievement
gaps for educationally disadvantaged
students;
(2) The quality of the SEA’s plan to
ensure that charter schools attract,
recruit, admit, enroll, serve, and retain
educationally disadvantaged students
equitably, meaningfully, and, with
regard to educationally disadvantaged
students who are students with
disabilities or English learners, in a
manner consistent with, as appropriate,
the IDEA (regarding students with
disabilities) and civil rights laws, in
particular, section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
and title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964;
(3) The extent to which the SEA will
encourage innovations in charter
schools, such as models, policies,
supports, or structures, that are
designed to improve the academic
achievement of educationally
disadvantaged students; and
(4) The quality of the SEA’s plan for
monitoring all charter schools to ensure
compliance with Federal and State laws,
particularly laws related to educational
equity, nondiscrimination, and access to
public schools for educationally
disadvantaged students.
(e) Vision for Growth and
Accountability. (10 points) The
Secretary determines the quality of the
statewide vision, including the role of
the SEA, for charter school growth and
accountability. In determining the
quality of the statewide vision, the
Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The quality of the SEA’s systems
for collecting, analyzing, and publicly
reporting data on charter school
performance, including data on student
academic achievement, attainment
(including high school graduation rates
and college and other postsecondary
education enrollment rates), retention,
and discipline for all students and
disaggregated by student subgroup;
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
34236
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
(2) The ambitiousness, quality of
vision, and feasibility of the SEA’s plan
(including key actions) to support the
creation of high-quality charter schools
during the project period, including a
reasonable estimate of the number of
high-quality charter schools in the State
at both the beginning and the end of the
project period; and
(3) The ambitiousness, quality of
vision, and feasibility of the SEA’s plan
(including key actions) to support the
closure of academically poorperforming charter schools in the State
(i.e., through revocation, non-renewal,
or voluntary termination of a charter)
during the project period.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Note: In the context of closing
academically poor-performing charter
schools, we remind applicants of the
importance of ensuring adherence to
applicable laws, policies, and procedures
that govern the closure of a charter school,
the disposition of its assets, and the transfer
of its students and student records.
(f) Dissemination of Information and
Best Practices. (10 points) The Secretary
considers the quality of the SEA’s plan
to disseminate information about
charter schools and best or promising
practices of successful charter schools to
each LEA in the State as well as to
charter schools, other public schools,
and charter school developers (20 U.S.C.
7221b(b)(2)(C) and 7221(c)(f)(6)). If an
SEA proposes to use a portion of its
grant funds for dissemination subgrants
under section 5204(f)(6)(B) of the ESEA
(20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)(6)(B)), the SEA
should incorporate these subgrants into
the overall plan for dissemination. In
determining the quality of the SEA’s
plan to disseminate information about
charter schools and best or promising
practices of successful charter schools,
the Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA will
serve as a leader in the State for
identifying and disseminating
information and research (which may
include, but is not limited to, providing
technical assistance) about best or
promising practices in successful
charter schools, including how the SEA
will use measures of efficacy and data
in identifying such practices and
assessing the impact of its
dissemination activities;
(2) The quality of the SEA’s plan for
disseminating information and research
on best or promising practices used by,
and the benefits of, charter schools that
effectively incorporate student body
diversity, including racial and ethnic
diversity and diversity with respect to
educationally disadvantaged students,
consistent with applicable law;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
(3) The quality of the SEA’s plan for
disseminating information and research
on best or promising practices in charter
schools related to student discipline and
school climate; and
(4) For an SEA that proposes to use a
portion of its grant funds to award
dissemination subgrants under section
5204(f)(6)(B) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.
7221a(f)(6)(B)), the quality of the
subgrant award process and the
likelihood that such dissemination
activities will increase the number of
high-quality charter schools in the State
and contribute to improved student
academic achievement.
(g) Oversight of Authorized Public
Chartering Agencies (15 points). The
Secretary considers the quality of the
SEA’s plan (including any use of grant
administrative or other funds) to
monitor, evaluate, assist, and hold
accountable authorized public
chartering agencies. In determining the
quality of the SEA’s plan to provide
oversight to authorized public
chartering agencies, the Secretary
considers how well the SEA’s plan will
ensure that authorized public chartering
agencies are—
(1) Seeking and approving charter
school petitions from developers that
have the capacity to create charter
schools that can become high-quality
charter schools;
(2) Approving charter school petitions
with design elements that incorporate
evidence-based school models and
practices, including, but not limited to,
school models and practices that focus
on racial and ethnic diversity in student
bodies and diversity in student bodies
with respect to educationally
disadvantaged students, consistent with
applicable law;
(3) Establishing measureable
academic and operational performance
expectations for all charter schools
(including alternative charter schools,
virtual charter schools, and charter
schools that include pre-kindergarten, if
such schools exist in the State) that are
consistent with the definition of highquality charter school as defined in this
notice;
(4) Monitoring their charter schools
on at least an annual basis, including
conducting an in-depth review of each
charter school at least once every five
years, to ensure that charter schools are
meeting the terms of their charter or
performance contracts and complying
with applicable State and Federal laws;
(5) Using increases in student
academic achievement as one of the
most important factors in renewal
decisions; basing renewal decisions on
a comprehensive set of criteria, which
are set forth in the charter or
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
performance contract; and revoking, not
renewing, or encouraging the voluntary
termination of charters held by
academically poor-performing charter
schools;
(6) Providing, on an annual basis,
public reports on the performance of
their portfolios of charter schools,
including the performance of each
individual charter school with respect
to meeting the terms of, and
expectations set forth in, the school’s
charter or performance contract;
(7) Supporting charter school
autonomy while holding charter schools
accountable for results and meeting the
terms of their charters or performance
contracts; and
(8) Ensuring the continued
accountability of charter schools during
any transition to new State assessments
or accountability systems, including
those based on college- and career-ready
standards.
(h) Management Plan and Theory of
Action. (10 points) The Secretary
considers the quality of the management
plan and the project’s theory of action.
In determining the quality of the
management plan and the project’s
theory of action, the Secretary considers
the following factors:
(1) The quality, including the
cohesiveness and strength of reasoning,
of the logic model (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1(c)) and the extent to which it
addresses the role of the grant in
promoting the State-level strategy for
using charter schools to improve
educational outcomes for students
through CSP subgrants for planning,
program design, and initial
implementation; optional dissemination
subgrants; optional revolving loan
funds; and other strategies;
(2) The extent to which the SEA’s
project-specific performance measures,
including any measures required by the
Department, support the logic model;
and
(3) The adequacy of the management
plan to—
(i) Achieve the objectives of the
proposed project on time and within
budget, including the existence of
clearly defined responsibilities,
timelines, and milestones for
accomplishing project tasks; and
(ii) Address any compliance issues or
findings related to the CSP that are
identified in an audit or other
monitoring review.
Note: The Secretary encourages the
applicant to propose a comprehensive
management plan and theory of action for
assessing the achievement of the objectives,
including developing performance measures
and performance targets for its proposed
grant project that are consistent with those
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
objectives. The applicant should clearly
identify the project-specific performance
measures and performance targets in its plan
and should review the logic model
application requirement and performance
measures section of this notice for
information on the requirements for
developing those performance measures and
performance targets consistent with the
objectives of the proposed project. The
applicant may choose to include a discussion
of the project-specific performance measures
and targets it develops in response to the
logic model requirement when addressing
this criterion.
(i) Project Design. (10 points) The
Secretary considers the quality of the
design of the SEA’s charter school
subgrant program, including the extent
to which the project design furthers the
SEA’s overall strategy for increasing the
number of high-quality charter schools
in the State and improving student
academic achievement. In determining
the quality of the project design, the
Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The quality of the SEA’s process
for awarding subgrants for planning,
program design, and initial
implementation and, if applicable, for
dissemination, including:
(i) The subgrant application and peer
review process, timelines for these
processes, and how the SEA intends to
ensure that subgrants will be awarded to
eligible applicants demonstrating the
capacity to create high-quality charter
schools; and
(ii) A reasonable year-by-year
estimate, with supporting evidence, of
(a) the number of subgrants the SEA
expects to award during the project
period and the average size of those
subgrants, including an explanation of
any assumptions upon which the
estimates are based; and (b) if the SEA
has previously received a CSP grant, the
percentage of eligible applicants that
were awarded subgrants and how this
percentage related to the overall quality
of the applicant pool;
(2) The process for monitoring CSP
subgrantees;
(3) How the SEA will create a
portfolio of subgrantees that focuses on
areas of need within the State, such as
increasing student body diversity or
maintaining a high level of student body
diversity, and how this focus aligns
with the State-Level Strategy;
(4) The steps the SEA will take to
inform teachers, parents, and
communities of the SEA’s charter school
subgrant program; and
(5) A description of any requested
waivers of statutory or regulatory
provisions over which the Secretary
exercises administrative authority and
the extent to which those waivers will,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
if granted, further the objectives of the
project.
2. Review and Selection Process: 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 also may
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 current
2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may
impose special conditions and, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk
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 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant;
or is otherwise not responsible.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application
is successful, we notify your U.S.
Representative and U.S. Senators and
send you a Grant Award Notification
(GAN); or we may send you an email
containing a link to access an electronic
version of your GAN. We may notify
you informally, also.
If your 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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
34237
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:
(a) Program Performance Measures
(GPRA Measures). The goal of the CSP
is to support the creation and
development of high-quality charter
schools that are free from State or local
rules that inhibit flexible operation, are
held accountable for enabling students
to reach challenging State performance
standards, and are open to all students.
The Secretary has established two
performance indicators to measure
progress towards this goal: (1) The
number of charter schools in operation
around the Nation, and (2) the
percentage of fourth- and eighth-grade
charter school students who are
achieving at or above the proficient
level on State assessments in
mathematics and reading/language arts.
Additionally, the Secretary has
established the following measure to
examine the efficiency of the CSP:
Federal cost per student in
implementing a successful school
(defined as a school in operation for
three or more consecutive years).
(b) Project-Specific Performance
Measures. Applicants must propose
project-specific performance measures
and performance targets consistent with
the objectives of the proposed project.
Applications must provide the
following information as directed under
34 CFR 75.110(b) and (c):
(1) Performance measures. How each
proposed performance measure (as
defined in this notice) would accurately
measure the performance of the project
and how the proposed performance
measure would be consistent with the
performance measures established for
the program funding the competition.
(2) Baseline data. (i) Why each
proposed baseline (as defined in this
notice) is valid; or (ii) If the applicant
has determined that there are no
established baseline data for a particular
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
34238
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 / Notices
performance measure, an explanation of
why there is no established baseline and
of how and when, during the project
period, the applicant would establish a
valid baseline for the performance
measure.
(3) Performance targets. Why each
proposed performance target (as defined
in this notice) is ambitious (as defined
in this notice), yet achievable, compared
to the baseline for the performance
measure and when, during the project
period, the applicant would meet the
performance target(s).
Note: The Secretary encourages applicants
to consider developing project-specific
performance measures and targets tied to
their grant activities as well as to student
academic achievement during the grant
period. The project-specific performance
measures should be sufficient to gauge the
progress throughout the grant period, show
results by the end of the grant period, and be
included in the logic model as outlined in
the Application Requirements section of this
document.
(4) Data Collection. The applicant
must also describe in the application: (i)
The data collection and reporting
methods the applicant would use and
why those methods are likely to yield
reliable, valid, and meaningful
performance data, and (ii) the
applicant’s capacity to collect and
report reliable, valid, and meaningful
performance data, as evidenced by highquality data collection, analysis, and
reporting in other projects or research.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Note: If the applicant does not have
experience with collection and reporting of
performance data through other projects or
research, the applicant should provide other
evidence of capacity to successfully carry out
data collection and reporting for their
proposed project.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jun 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
All grantees must submit an annual
performance report with information
that is responsive to these performance
measures.
5. Continuation Awards: In making a
continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among
other things: Whether a grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the goals and objectives of the project;
whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its
approved application and budget; and,
if the Secretary has established
performance measurement
requirements, the performance targets in
the grantee’s approved application. 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).
6. Project Director’s Meeting:
Applicants approved for funding under
this competition must attend a two-day
meeting for project directors at a
location to be determined in the
continental United States during each
year of the project. Applicants may
include the cost of attending this
meeting in their proposed budgets.
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathryn Meeley, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Room 4W257, Washington, DC 20202–
5970. Telephone: (202) 453–6818 or by
email: Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the
FRS, 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
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: June 8, 2015.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and
Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2015–14392 Filed 6–12–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
E:\FR\FM\15JNN2.SGM
15JNN2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34228-34238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14392]
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 2015 /
Notices
[[Page 34228]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Application for New Awards; Charter Schools Program Grants for
State Educational Agencies
AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview Information:
Charter Schools Program (CSP) Grants for State Educational Agencies
(SEAs).
Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY)
2015.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.282A.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 15, 2015.
Date of Pre-Application Meeting: June 17, 2015, 2:00 p.m. to 4:00
p.m., Washington, DC time.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 16, 2015.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 14, 2015.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the CSP is to increase national
understanding of the charter school model by:
(1) Providing financial assistance for the planning, program
design, and initial implementation of charter schools;
(2) Evaluating the effects of charter schools, including the
effects on students, student achievement, student growth, staff, and
parents;
(3) Expanding the number of high-quality charter schools available
to students across the Nation; and
(4) Encouraging the States to provide support to charter schools
for facilities financing in an amount more nearly commensurate to the
amount the States have typically provided for traditional public
schools.
The purpose of the CSP Grants for SEAs competition is to enable
SEAs to provide financial assistance, through subgrants to eligible
applicants (also referred to as non-SEA eligible applicants), for the
planning, program design, and initial implementation of charter schools
and for the dissemination of information about successful charter
schools, including practices that existing charter schools have
demonstrated are successful.
Background: For the 2015 CSP SEA competition, the Department seeks
to achieve three main goals. The first goal is to ensure that CSP funds
are directed toward the creation of high-quality charter schools. For
example, we ask applicants to explain how charter schools fit into the
State's broader education reform strategy. In addition, the selection
criteria request information from the SEA regarding how it will manage
and report on project performance.
The second goal is to strengthen public accountability and
oversight for authorized public chartering agencies (also referred to
as authorizers). The notice of final priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria for this program, published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register (NFP), provides
incentives for SEAs to implement CSP requirements, as well as State law
and policies, in a manner that encourages authorized public chartering
agencies to focus on school quality through rigorous and transparent
charter school authorization processes. For example, Absolute
Priorities 1 Periodic Review and Evaluation and 2 Charter School
Oversight require SEAs to ensure public accountability and oversight
for charter schools within the State, including holding authorized
public chartering agencies accountable for the quality of the charter
schools in their portfolios.
The third goal is to support and improve academic outcomes for
educationally disadvantaged students. Our commitment to equitable
outcomes for all students, continued growth of high-quality charter
schools, and addressing ongoing concerns about educationally
disadvantaged students' access to and performance in charter schools
compel the Department to encourage a continued focus on students at the
greatest risk of academic failure. A critical component of serving all
students, including educationally disadvantaged students, is
consideration of student body diversity, including racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic diversity. For example, we encourage applicants to
meaningfully incorporate student body diversity into charter school
models and practices and ask applicants to describe specific actions
they would take to support educationally disadvantaged students through
charter schools.
In addition to the three goals outlined above, we believe the 2015
CSP Grants for SEAs competition streamlines the CSP application
process. For example, selection criterion (f) Dissemination of
Information and Best Practices combines two statutory criteria that
have been used separately in previous competitions and asks applicants
to describe their plans to disseminate best or promising practices of
charter schools to each local educational agency (LEA) in the State,
and to describe their dissemination subgrant awards processes, thereby
decreasing the burden on applicants.
All charter schools receiving CSP funds, as outlined in section
5210 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended
(ESEA), must comply with various non-discrimination laws, including the
Age Discrimination Act of 1975, title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, part B of the Individuals with
Disabilities Act, and applicable State laws.
With respect to opening and operating a single-sex charter school,
the applicant should ensure that charter schools in its State comply
with the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution (as
interpreted in United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) and other
cases) and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1970 (20 U.S.C. 1681
et seq.) and its regulations, including 34 CFR 106.34(c).
Priorities: This notice includes two absolute priorities and three
competitive preference priorities. These priorities are from the NFP,
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, and section
5202(e) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 7221a(e)).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2015 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet both of the
following absolute priorities.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Periodic Review and Evaluation.
To meet this priority, the applicant must demonstrate that the
State provides for periodic review and evaluation by the authorized
public chartering agency of each charter school at least once every
five years, unless required more frequently by State law, and takes
steps to ensure that such reviews take place. The review and evaluation
must serve to determine whether the charter school is meeting the terms
of the school's charter and meeting or exceeding the student academic
achievement requirements and goals for charter schools as set forth in
the school's charter or under State law, a State regulation, or a State
policy, provided that the student academic achievement requirements and
goals for charter schools established by that policy meet or exceed
those set forth under applicable State law or State regulation. This
periodic review and evaluation must include an opportunity
[[Page 34229]]
for the authorized public chartering agency to take appropriate action
or impose meaningful consequences on the charter school, if necessary.
Absolute Priority 2--Charter School Oversight.
To meet this priority, an application must demonstrate that State
law, regulations, or other policies in the State where the applicant is
located require the following:
(a) That each charter school in the State--
(1) Operates under a legally binding charter or performance
contract between itself and the school's authorized public chartering
agency that describes the rights and responsibilities of the school and
the public chartering agency;
(2) Conducts annual, timely, and independent audits of the school's
financial statements that are filed with the school's authorized public
chartering agency; and
(3) Demonstrates improved student academic achievement; and
(b) That all authorized public chartering agencies in the State use
increases in student academic achievement for all groups of students
described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(2)(C)(v)) as one of the most important factors when determining
whether to renew or revoke a school's charter.
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2015 and any subsequent
year in which we make awards based on the list of unfunded applications
from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference
priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award up to an additional
15 points to an application depending on how well the application
addresses Competitive Preference Priority 1, an additional five points
to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 2, and an
additional five points to an application that meets Competitive
Preference Priority 3. Applications addressing each of these priorities
may receive up to 25 priority points in total.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--High-Quality Authorizing and
Monitoring Processes (up to 15 points).
To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that all
authorized public chartering agencies in the State use one or more of
the following:
(a) Frameworks and processes to evaluate the performance of charter
schools on a regular basis that include--
(1) Rigorous academic and operational performance expectations
(including performance expectations related to financial management and
equitable treatment of all students and applicants);
(2) Performance objectives for each school aligned to those
expectations;
(3) Clear criteria for renewing the charter of a school based on an
objective body of evidence, including evidence that the charter school
has (a) met the performance objectives outlined in the charter or
performance contract; (b) demonstrated organizational and fiscal
viability; and (c) demonstrated fidelity to the terms of the charter or
performance contract and applicable law;
(4) Clear criteria for revoking the charter of a school if there is
violation of law or public trust regarding student safety or public
funds, or evidence of poor student academic achievement; and
(5) Annual reporting by authorized public chartering agencies to
each of their authorized charter schools that summarizes the individual
school's performance and compliance, based on this framework, and
identifies any areas that need improvement.
(b) Clear and specific standards and formalized processes that
measure and benchmark the performance of the authorized public
chartering agency or agencies, including the performance of its
portfolio of charter schools, and provide for the annual dissemination
of information on such performance;
(c) Authorizing processes that establish clear criteria for
evaluating charter applications and include a multi-tiered clearance or
review of a charter school, including a final review immediately before
the school opens for its first operational year; or
(d) Authorizing processes that include differentiated review of
charter petitions to assess whether, and the extent to which, the
charter school developer has been successful (as determined by the
authorized public chartering agency) in establishing and operating one
or more high-quality charter schools.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--One Authorized Public Chartering
Agency Other than a LEA, or an Appeals Process (0 or 5 points).
To meet this priority, the applicant must demonstrate that the
State--
(a) Provides for one authorized public chartering agency that is
not an LEA, such as a State chartering board, for each individual or
entity seeking to operate a charter school pursuant to State law; or
(b) In the case of a State in which LEAs are the only authorized
public chartering agencies, allows for an appeals process for the
denial of an application for a charter school.
Note: In order to meet this priority under paragraph (b) above,
the entity hearing appeal must have the authority to approve the
charter application over the objections of the LEA.
Competitive Preference Priority 3--SEAs that Have Never Received a
CSP Grant (0 or 5 points).
To meet this priority, an applicant must be an eligible SEA
applicant that has never received a CSP grant.
Application Requirements: Applications for funding under the CSP
Grants for SEAs program must address the application requirements
described below.
These application requirements are from section 5203(b) of the ESEA
(20 U.S.C. 7221b(b)) and the NFP. An applicant may choose to respond to
the application requirements in the context of its responses to the
selection criteria, when applicable.
(i) Academically poor-performing charter school: Provide one of the
following:
(a) Written certification that, for purposes of the CSP grant, the
SEA uses the definition of academically poor-performing charter school
provided in this notice; or
(b) If the State proposes to use an alternative definition of
academically poor-performing charter school in accordance with
paragraph (b) of the definition of the term in this notice, (1) the
specific definition the State proposes to use; and (2) a written
explanation of how the proposed definition is at least as rigorous as
the standard in paragraph (a) of the definition of academically poor-
performing charter school set forth in the Definitions section of this
notice.
(ii) Disseminating best practices: Describe how the SEA will
disseminate best or promising practices of charter schools to each LEA
in the State, as requested in selection criterion (f) Dissemination of
Information and Best Practices;
(iii) Federal funds: As requested in selection criterion (b) Policy
Context for Charter Schools, describe how the SEA--
(a) Will inform each charter school in the State about Federal
funds the charter school is eligible to receive and Federal programs in
which the charter school may participate; and
(b) Will ensure that each charter school in the State receives the
school's commensurate share of Federal education funds that are
allocated by formula each year, including during the first year of
operation of the school and a year in which the school's enrollment
expands significantly;
[[Page 34230]]
(iv) High-quality charter school: Provide one of the following:
(a) Written certification that, for purposes of the CSP grant, the
SEA uses the definition of high-quality charter school provided in this
notice; or
(b) If the State proposes to use an alternative definition of high-
quality charter school in accordance with paragraph (b) of the
definition of the term in this notice, (1) the specific definition the
State proposes to use; and (2) a written explanation of how the
proposed definition is at least as rigorous as the standard in
paragraph (a) of the definition of high-quality charter school set
forth in the Definitions section of this notice.
(v) IDEA Compliance: Describe how charter schools that are
considered to be LEAs under State law, and LEAs in which charter
schools are located, will comply with sections 613(a)(5) and
613(e)(1)(B) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
(20 U.S.C. 1400, et seq.).
(vi) Logic model: Provide a complete logic model (as defined in 34
CFR 77.1) for the project. The logic model must address the role of the
grant in promoting the State-level strategy for expanding the number of
high-quality charter schools through startup subgrants, optional
dissemination subgrants, optional revolving loan funds, and other
strategies.
Note: The applicant should review section VI.4 Performance
Measures of this notice for information on the requirements for
developing project-specific performance measures and targets
consistent with the objectives of the proposed project. Program
performance measures, which are also discussed in section VI.4
Performance Measures of this notice, should be included within this
logic model. The applicant also should review the information that
the Secretary considers under Selection Criterion (h). Management
Plan and Theory of Action.
For technical assistance in developing effective performance
measures, applicants are encouraged to review information provided
by the Department's Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs). The
RELs seek to build the capacity of States and school districts to
incorporate data and research into education decision-making. Each
REL provides research support and technical assistance to its region
but makes learning opportunities available to educators everywhere.
For example, the REL Northeast and Islands has created the following
resource on logic models: relpacific.mcrel.org/resources/elm-app.
(vii) Lottery and enrollment preferences: Describe (1) how
lotteries for admission to charter schools will be conducted in the
State, including any student enrollment preferences or exemptions from
the lottery that charter schools are required or expressly permitted by
the State to employ; and (2) any mechanisms that exist for the SEA or
authorized public chartering agency to review, monitor, or approve such
lotteries or student enrollment preferences or exemptions from the
lottery. In addition, the SEA must provide an assurance that it will
require each applicant for a CSP subgrant to include in its application
descriptions of its recruitment and admissions policies and practices,
including a description of the proposed lottery and any enrollment
preferences or exemptions from the lottery the charter school employs
or plans to employ, and how those enrollment preferences or exemptions
are consistent with State law and the CSP authorizing statute (for
information related to admissions and lotteries under the CSP, please
see section E of the CSP Nonregulatory Guidance (January 2014) at
www2.ed.gov/programs/charter/nonregulatory-guidance.html).
(viii) Objectives: Describe the objectives of the SEA's charter
school grant program, as requested in selection criterion (h)
Management Plan and Theory of Action, and how these objectives will be
fulfilled, including steps taken by the SEA to inform teachers,
parents, and communities of the SEA's charter school grant program;
(ix) Revolving loan fund: If an SEA elects to reserve a portion of
its grant funds (no more than 10 percent) to establish a revolving loan
fund, describe how the revolving loan fund would operate;
(x) Waivers: If an SEA desires the Secretary to consider waivers
under the authority of the CSP, include a request and justification for
any waiver of statutory or regulatory provisions that the SEA believes
is necessary for the successful operation of charter schools in the
State, as requested in selection criterion (i) Project Design.
Definitions: The following definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1, the
NFP, and section 5210 of the CSP authorizing statute (20 U.S.C. 7221i).
Academically poor-performing charter school means--
(a) A charter school that has been in operation for at least three
years and that--
(1) Has been identified as being in the lowest-performing five
percent of all schools in the State and has failed to improve school
performance (based on the SEA's accountability system under the ESEA)
over the past three years; and
(2) Has failed to demonstrate student academic growth of at least
an average of one grade level for each cohort of students in each of
the past three years, as demonstrated by statewide or other assessments
approved by the authorized public chartering agency; or
(b) An SEA may use an alternative definition for academically poor-
performing charter school, provided that the SEA complies with the
requirements for proposing to use an alternative definition for the
term as set forth in paragraph (b) of academically poor-performing
charter school in the Requirements section of this notice.
Ambitious means promoting continued, meaningful improvement for
program participants or for other individuals or entities affected by
the grant, or representing a significant advancement in the field of
education research, practices, or methodologies. When used to describe
a performance target, whether a performance target is ambitious depends
upon the context of the relevant performance measure and the baseline
for that measure.
Baseline means the starting point from which performance is
measured and targets are set.
Developer means an individual or group of individuals (including a
public or private nonprofit organization), which may include teachers,
administrators and other school staff, parents, or other members of the
local community in which a charter school project will be carried out.
Educationally disadvantaged students means economically
disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, migrant students,
limited English proficient students (also referred to as English
learners or English language learners), neglected or delinquent
students, or homeless students.
Eligible applicant means a developer that has (a) applied to an
authorized public chartering authority to operate a charter school; and
(b) provided adequate and timely notice to that authority under section
5203(d)(3) of the ESEA.
High-quality charter school means--
(a) A charter school that shows evidence of strong academic results
for the past three years (or over the life of the school, if the school
has been open for fewer than three years), based on the following
factors:
(1) Increased student academic achievement and attainment
(including, if applicable and available, high school graduation rates
and college and other postsecondary education enrollment rates) for all
students, including, as applicable, educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter school;
(2) Either--
(i) Demonstrated success in closing historic achievement gaps for
the subgroups of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of
the ESEA
[[Page 34231]]
(20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)) at the charter school; or
(ii) No significant achievement gaps between any of the subgroups
of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 6311) at the charter school and significant gains in student
academic achievement for all populations of students served by the
charter school;
(3) Results (including, if applicable and available, performance on
statewide tests, annual student attendance and retention rates, high
school graduation rates, college and other postsecondary education
attendance rates, and college and other postsecondary education
persistence rates) for low-income and other educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter school that are above the average
academic achievement results for such students in the State;
(4) Results on a performance framework established by the State or
authorized public chartering agency for the purpose of evaluating
charter school quality; and
(5) No significant compliance issues, particularly in the areas of
student safety, financial management, and equitable treatment of
students; or
(b) An SEA may use an alternative definition for high-quality
charter school, provided that the SEA complies with the requirements
for proposing to use an alternative definition for the term as set
forth in paragraph (b) of high-quality charter school in the
Requirements section of this notice.
Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a well-
specified conceptual framework that identifies key components of the
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice (i.e., the active
``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the
relevant outcomes) and describes the relationships among the key
components and outcomes, theoretically and operationally.
Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or
metric used to gauge program or project performance.
Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant
would seek to meet during the course of a project or as a result of a
project.
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) (or the ultimate
outcome if not related to students), the proposed process, product,
strategy, or practice is designed to improve; consistent with the
specific goals of a program.
Significant compliance issue means a violation that did, will, or
could (if not addressed or if it represents a pattern of repeated
misconduct or material non-compliance) lead to the revocation of a
school's charter by the authorizer.
Program Authority: The CSP is authorized under Title V, Part B,
Subpart 1 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221-7221j); and the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (FY 2015 Appropriations
Act), Public Law 113-235.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 76, 77, 79, 81,
82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget
Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement)in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485, and the Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended in 2 CFR
part 3474. (c) the NFP.
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 only to
institutions of higher education.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grant.
Estimated Available Funds: $116,000,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years from
the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
Note: The FY 2015 Appropriations Act authorizes the use of CSP
funds ``for grants that support preschool education in charter
schools.'' Accordingly, an application submitted under this
competition may propose to use CSP funds to support preschool
education in charter schools. For guidance on how charter schools
may use CSP funds to support preschool education in charter schools,
please see the Department's nonregulatory guidance, entitled Charter
Schools Program Guidance on the Use of Funds to Support Preschool
Education, released in November 2014, at www2.ed.gov/programs/charter/csppreschoolfaqs.doc.
Estimated Range of Awards: $3,500,000 to $45,000,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $10,000,000 per year.
Estimated Number of Awards: 12.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice. The estimated range, average size, and number of awards are
based on a single 12-month budget period. However, the Department
may choose to fund more than 12 months of a project using FY 2015
funds.
Project Period: Up to 36 months.
Note: SEAs may award planning and implementation subgrants to
eligible applicants for a period of up to three years, no more than
18 months of which may be used for planning and program design and
no more than two years of which may be used for the initial
implementation of a charter school. SEAs may award dissemination
subgrants to eligible charter schools for a period of up to two
years.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs in States with a State statute
specifically authorizing the establishment of charter schools.
Note: Non-SEA eligible applicants in States in which the SEA
elects not to participate in or does not have an application
approved under the CSP may apply for funding directly from the
Department. The Department is holding a separate competition for CSP
grants to non-SEA eligible applicants under CFDA numbers 84.282B and
84.282C. The notice inviting applications for new awards under CFDA
numbers 84.282B and 84.282C will be published later in FY 2015.
Additional information about the competitions for non-SEA eligible
applicants is available at www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/csp/.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application Package: Kathryn Meeley, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W257,
Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 453-6818 or by email:
Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
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-
800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or compact disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in
this section.
2. 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.
Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you limit
the application narrative (Part
[[Page 34232]]
III) to no more than 60 pages, using the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support. However, the page
limit does apply to all of the application narrative section (Part
III).
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: June 15, 2015.
Date of Pre-Application Meeting: The Department will hold a pre-
application meeting via Webinar for prospective applicants on June 17,
2015 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Washington, DC, time. Individuals
interested in attending this meeting are encouraged to pre-register by
emailing their name, organization, and contact information with the
subject heading ``SEA PRE-APPLICATION MEETING'' to
CharterSchools@ed.gov. There is no registration fee for participating
in this meeting.
For further information about the pre-application meeting, contact
Kathryn Meeley, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Room 4W257, Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 453-6818 or by
email: Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 16, 2015.
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. 7. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 14, 2015.
4. 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 program.
5. Funding Restrictions: Grant funds must be used to carry out
allowable activities, as described in section 5204(f) of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 7221c(f)). The following funding restrictions apply to this
competition:
Planning and Implementation Subgrants: An eligible applicant
receiving a subgrant under this program may use the subgrant funds only
for--
(a) Post-award planning and design of the educational program,
which may include (i) refinement of the desired educational results and
of the methods for measuring progress toward achieving those results;
and (ii) professional development of teachers and other staff who will
work in the charter school; and
(b) Initial implementation of the charter school, which may include
(i) informing the community about the school; (ii) acquiring necessary
equipment and educational materials and supplies; (iii) acquiring or
developing curriculum materials; and (iv) other initial operational
costs that cannot be met from State or local sources. (20 U.S.C.
7221c(f)(3))
Dissemination Subgrants: An SEA may reserve not more than 10
percent of its grant funds to make subgrants to eligible charter
schools to carry out dissemination activities. A charter school may use
dissemination subgrant funds to assist other schools in adapting the
charter school's program (or certain aspects of the charter school's
program) or to disseminate information about the charter school through
such activities as--
(a) Assisting other individuals with the planning and start-up of
one or more new public schools, including charter schools, that are
independent of the assisting charter school and the assisting charter
school's developers and that agree to be held to at least as high a
level of accountability as the assisting charter school;
(b) Developing partnerships with other public schools, including
charter schools, designed to improve student academic achievement in
each of the schools participating in the partnership;
(c) Developing curriculum materials, assessments, and other
materials that promote increased student achievement and are based on
successful practices within the assisting charter school; and
(d) Conducting evaluations and developing materials that document
the successful practices of the assisting charter school and that are
designed to improve student achievement.
Award Basis. In determining whether to approve a grant award and
the amount of such award, the Department will consider, among other
things, the amount of any unobligated carryover funds the applicant has
under an existing CSP grant and the applicant's performance and use of
funds under a previous or existing award under any Department program
(34 CFR 75.233(b) and 75.217(d)(3)(ii)). In assessing the applicant's
performance and use of funds under a previous or existing award, the
Secretary will consider, among other things, the outcomes the applicant
has achieved and the results of any Departmental grant monitoring,
including the applicant's progress in remedying any deficiencies
identified in such monitoring.
We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions
in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, and System for Award Management: 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 System for Award
Management (SAM) (formerly 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 SAM 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
[[Page 34233]]
can be created within one to two business days.
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 two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.
The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business
days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the
completeness and accuracy of the data entered into the SAM database by
an entity. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal
financial assistance under a program administered by the Department,
please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number
and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.
Note: Once your SAM registration is active, you will need to
allow 24 to 48 hours for the information to be available in
Grants.gov. and before you can submit an application through
Grants.gov.
If you are currently registered with SAM, 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 registration annually. This may take three or more business days.
Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further
assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in
SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov
Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.
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 at the
following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.
7. Other Submission Requirements. Applications for grants under
this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify
for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the
instructions in this section.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
Applications for grants under the CSP Grants for SEAs competition,
CFDA number 84.282A, 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 application for CSP Grants for
SEAs competition 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 84.282, not 84.282A).
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.
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 4:30:00
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 4:30:00 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
4:30:00 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 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
[[Page 34234]]
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 4:30:00 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 4:30:00 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 4:30:00
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
prevents 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: Kathryn Meeley, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W257,
Washington, DC 20202-5970. FAX: (202) 205-5630.
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 84.282A, 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.
(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 84.282A, 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 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: The selection criteria for this program are
from the NFP published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Note: The Secretary does not consider selection criterion (c)
Past Performance in evaluating the application submitted by an SEA
in a State that enacted a charter school law for the first time less
than five years before the closing date of this competition.
Accordingly, such an SEA should not address this criterion in its
application. To enable the Secretary to determine whether to
consider criterion (c), an SEA should provide in its application the
date when its State first enacted a charter school law and relevant
supporting documentation.
In general, an SEA should clearly identify each selection criterion
it addresses in its application. The maximum possible score for
addressing each selection criterion is indicated in parentheses
following the selection criterion. The maximum possible total score
(based on the selection criteria and not including the competitive
preference priorities) is 100 points, except that, for SEAs in States
that first enacted a charter school law less than five years before the
closing date of this competition, the maximum possible total score is
90 points because, as noted above, the Secretary does not consider
selection criterion (c) in evaluating applications from these SEAs. The
Secretary will convert each SEA's total score (including any additional
points received based on the competitive
[[Page 34235]]
preference priorities) to a percentage of the applicable maximum
possible total score and prepare a single rank order list using those
percentages. Therefore, SEAs for which the Secretary does not consider
selection criterion (c) will not be disadvantaged.
In evaluating an application, the Secretary considers the following
selection criteria:
(a) State-Level Strategy. (15 points) The Secretary considers the
quality of the State-level strategy for using charter schools to
improve educational outcomes for students throughout the State. In
determining the quality of the State-level strategy, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA's CSP activities, including the
subgrant program, are integrated into the State's overall strategy for
improving student academic achievement and attainment (including high
school graduation rates and college and other postsecondary education
enrollment rates) and closing achievement and attainment gaps, and
complement or leverage other statewide education reform efforts;
(2) The extent to which funding equity for charter schools
(including equitable funding for charter school facilities) is
incorporated into the SEA's State-level strategy; and
(3) The extent to which the State encourages local strategies for
improving student academic achievement and attainment that involve
charter schools, including but not limited to the following:
(i) Collaboration, including the sharing of data and promising
instructional and other practices, between charter schools and other
public schools or providers of early learning and development programs
or alternative education programs; and
(ii) The creation of charter schools that would serve as viable
options for students who currently attend, or would otherwise attend,
the State's lowest-performing schools.
(b) Policy Context for Charter Schools. (5 points)
The Secretary considers the policy context for charter schools
under the proposed project. In determining the policy context for
charter schools under the proposed project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The degree of flexibility afforded to charter schools under the
State's charter school law, including:
(i) The extent to which charter schools in the State are exempt
from State or local rules that inhibit the flexible operation and
management of public schools; and
(ii) The extent to which charter schools in the State have a high
degree of autonomy, including autonomy over the charter school's
budget, expenditures, staffing, procurement, and curriculum;
(2) The quality of the SEA's processes for:
(i) Annually informing each charter school in the State about
Federal funds the charter school is eligible to receive and Federal
programs in which the charter school may participate; and
(ii) Annually ensuring that each charter school in the State
receives, in a timely fashion, the school's commensurate share of
Federal funds that are allocated by formula each year, particularly
during the first year of operation of the school and during a year in
which the school's enrollment expands significantly; and
(3) The quality of the SEA's plan to ensure that charter schools
that are considered to be LEAs under State law and LEAs in which
charter schools are located will comply with sections 613(a)(5) and
613(e)(1)(B) of IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1400, et seq.), the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6101, et seq.), title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.), title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.), and section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794).
(c) Past Performance. (10 points) The Secretary considers the past
performance of charter schools in a State that enacted a charter school
law for the first time five or more years before submission of its
application. In determining the past performance of charter schools in
such a State, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which there has been a demonstrated increase, for
each of the past five years, in the number and percentage of high-
quality charter schools (as defined in this notice) in the State;
(2) The extent to which there has been a demonstrated reduction,
for each of the past five years, in the number and percentage of
academically poor-performing charter schools (as defined in this
notice) in the State; and
(3) Whether, and the extent to which, the academic achievement and
academic attainment (including high school graduation rates and college
and other postsecondary education enrollment rates) of charter school
students equal or exceed the academic achievement and academic
attainment of similar students in other public schools in the State
over the past five years.
(d) Quality of Plan to Support Educationally Disadvantaged
Students. (15 points) The Secretary considers the quality of the SEA's
plan to support educationally disadvantaged students. In determining
the quality of the plan to support educationally disadvantaged
students, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA's charter school subgrant program
would--
(i) Assist students, particularly educationally disadvantaged
students, in meeting and exceeding State academic content standards and
State student achievement standards; and
(ii) Reduce or eliminate achievement gaps for educationally
disadvantaged students;
(2) The quality of the SEA's plan to ensure that charter schools
attract, recruit, admit, enroll, serve, and retain educationally
disadvantaged students equitably, meaningfully, and, with regard to
educationally disadvantaged students who are students with disabilities
or English learners, in a manner consistent with, as appropriate, the
IDEA (regarding students with disabilities) and civil rights laws, in
particular, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
and title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
(3) The extent to which the SEA will encourage innovations in
charter schools, such as models, policies, supports, or structures,
that are designed to improve the academic achievement of educationally
disadvantaged students; and
(4) The quality of the SEA's plan for monitoring all charter
schools to ensure compliance with Federal and State laws, particularly
laws related to educational equity, nondiscrimination, and access to
public schools for educationally disadvantaged students.
(e) Vision for Growth and Accountability. (10 points) The Secretary
determines the quality of the statewide vision, including the role of
the SEA, for charter school growth and accountability. In determining
the quality of the statewide vision, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The quality of the SEA's systems for collecting, analyzing, and
publicly reporting data on charter school performance, including data
on student academic achievement, attainment (including high school
graduation rates and college and other postsecondary education
enrollment rates), retention, and discipline for all students and
disaggregated by student subgroup;
[[Page 34236]]
(2) The ambitiousness, quality of vision, and feasibility of the
SEA's plan (including key actions) to support the creation of high-
quality charter schools during the project period, including a
reasonable estimate of the number of high-quality charter schools in
the State at both the beginning and the end of the project period; and
(3) The ambitiousness, quality of vision, and feasibility of the
SEA's plan (including key actions) to support the closure of
academically poor-performing charter schools in the State (i.e.,
through revocation, non-renewal, or voluntary termination of a charter)
during the project period.
Note: In the context of closing academically poor-performing
charter schools, we remind applicants of the importance of ensuring
adherence to applicable laws, policies, and procedures that govern
the closure of a charter school, the disposition of its assets, and
the transfer of its students and student records.
(f) Dissemination of Information and Best Practices. (10 points)
The Secretary considers the quality of the SEA's plan to disseminate
information about charter schools and best or promising practices of
successful charter schools to each LEA in the State as well as to
charter schools, other public schools, and charter school developers
(20 U.S.C. 7221b(b)(2)(C) and 7221(c)(f)(6)). If an SEA proposes to use
a portion of its grant funds for dissemination subgrants under section
5204(f)(6)(B) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)(6)(B)), the SEA should
incorporate these subgrants into the overall plan for dissemination. In
determining the quality of the SEA's plan to disseminate information
about charter schools and best or promising practices of successful
charter schools, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the SEA will serve as a leader in the State
for identifying and disseminating information and research (which may
include, but is not limited to, providing technical assistance) about
best or promising practices in successful charter schools, including
how the SEA will use measures of efficacy and data in identifying such
practices and assessing the impact of its dissemination activities;
(2) The quality of the SEA's plan for disseminating information and
research on best or promising practices used by, and the benefits of,
charter schools that effectively incorporate student body diversity,
including racial and ethnic diversity and diversity with respect to
educationally disadvantaged students, consistent with applicable law;
(3) The quality of the SEA's plan for disseminating information and
research on best or promising practices in charter schools related to
student discipline and school climate; and
(4) For an SEA that proposes to use a portion of its grant funds to
award dissemination subgrants under section 5204(f)(6)(B) of the ESEA
(20 U.S.C. 7221a(f)(6)(B)), the quality of the subgrant award process
and the likelihood that such dissemination activities will increase the
number of high-quality charter schools in the State and contribute to
improved student academic achievement.
(g) Oversight of Authorized Public Chartering Agencies (15 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the SEA's plan (including any
use of grant administrative or other funds) to monitor, evaluate,
assist, and hold accountable authorized public chartering agencies. In
determining the quality of the SEA's plan to provide oversight to
authorized public chartering agencies, the Secretary considers how well
the SEA's plan will ensure that authorized public chartering agencies
are--
(1) Seeking and approving charter school petitions from developers
that have the capacity to create charter schools that can become high-
quality charter schools;
(2) Approving charter school petitions with design elements that
incorporate evidence-based school models and practices, including, but
not limited to, school models and practices that focus on racial and
ethnic diversity in student bodies and diversity in student bodies with
respect to educationally disadvantaged students, consistent with
applicable law;
(3) Establishing measureable academic and operational performance
expectations for all charter schools (including alternative charter
schools, virtual charter schools, and charter schools that include pre-
kindergarten, if such schools exist in the State) that are consistent
with the definition of high-quality charter school as defined in this
notice;
(4) Monitoring their charter schools on at least an annual basis,
including conducting an in-depth review of each charter school at least
once every five years, to ensure that charter schools are meeting the
terms of their charter or performance contracts and complying with
applicable State and Federal laws;
(5) Using increases in student academic achievement as one of the
most important factors in renewal decisions; basing renewal decisions
on a comprehensive set of criteria, which are set forth in the charter
or performance contract; and revoking, not renewing, or encouraging the
voluntary termination of charters held by academically poor-performing
charter schools;
(6) Providing, on an annual basis, public reports on the
performance of their portfolios of charter schools, including the
performance of each individual charter school with respect to meeting
the terms of, and expectations set forth in, the school's charter or
performance contract;
(7) Supporting charter school autonomy while holding charter
schools accountable for results and meeting the terms of their charters
or performance contracts; and
(8) Ensuring the continued accountability of charter schools during
any transition to new State assessments or accountability systems,
including those based on college- and career-ready standards.
(h) Management Plan and Theory of Action. (10 points) The Secretary
considers the quality of the management plan and the project's theory
of action. In determining the quality of the management plan and the
project's theory of action, the Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The quality, including the cohesiveness and strength of
reasoning, of the logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) and the
extent to which it addresses the role of the grant in promoting the
State-level strategy for using charter schools to improve educational
outcomes for students through CSP subgrants for planning, program
design, and initial implementation; optional dissemination subgrants;
optional revolving loan funds; and other strategies;
(2) The extent to which the SEA's project-specific performance
measures, including any measures required by the Department, support
the logic model; and
(3) The adequacy of the management plan to--
(i) Achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and
within budget, including the existence of clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project
tasks; and
(ii) Address any compliance issues or findings related to the CSP
that are identified in an audit or other monitoring review.
Note: The Secretary encourages the applicant to propose a
comprehensive management plan and theory of action for assessing the
achievement of the objectives, including developing performance
measures and performance targets for its proposed grant project that
are consistent with those
[[Page 34237]]
objectives. The applicant should clearly identify the project-
specific performance measures and performance targets in its plan
and should review the logic model application requirement and
performance measures section of this notice for information on the
requirements for developing those performance measures and
performance targets consistent with the objectives of the proposed
project. The applicant may choose to include a discussion of the
project-specific performance measures and targets it develops in
response to the logic model requirement when addressing this
criterion.
(i) Project Design. (10 points) The Secretary considers the quality
of the design of the SEA's charter school subgrant program, including
the extent to which the project design furthers the SEA's overall
strategy for increasing the number of high-quality charter schools in
the State and improving student academic achievement. In determining
the quality of the project design, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The quality of the SEA's process for awarding subgrants for
planning, program design, and initial implementation and, if
applicable, for dissemination, including:
(i) The subgrant application and peer review process, timelines for
these processes, and how the SEA intends to ensure that subgrants will
be awarded to eligible applicants demonstrating the capacity to create
high-quality charter schools; and
(ii) A reasonable year-by-year estimate, with supporting evidence,
of (a) the number of subgrants the SEA expects to award during the
project period and the average size of those subgrants, including an
explanation of any assumptions upon which the estimates are based; and
(b) if the SEA has previously received a CSP grant, the percentage of
eligible applicants that were awarded subgrants and how this percentage
related to the overall quality of the applicant pool;
(2) The process for monitoring CSP subgrantees;
(3) How the SEA will create a portfolio of subgrantees that focuses
on areas of need within the State, such as increasing student body
diversity or maintaining a high level of student body diversity, and
how this focus aligns with the State-Level Strategy;
(4) The steps the SEA will take to inform teachers, parents, and
communities of the SEA's charter school subgrant program; and
(5) A description of any requested waivers of statutory or
regulatory provisions over which the Secretary exercises administrative
authority and the extent to which those waivers will, if granted,
further the objectives of the project.
2. Review and Selection Process: 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 also may 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 current 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary
may impose special conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-
risk 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 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a
prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your 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:
(a) Program Performance Measures (GPRA Measures). The goal of the
CSP is to support the creation and development of high-quality charter
schools that are free from State or local rules that inhibit flexible
operation, are held accountable for enabling students to reach
challenging State performance standards, and are open to all students.
The Secretary has established two performance indicators to measure
progress towards this goal: (1) The number of charter schools in
operation around the Nation, and (2) the percentage of fourth- and
eighth-grade charter school students who are achieving at or above the
proficient level on State assessments in mathematics and reading/
language arts. Additionally, the Secretary has established the
following measure to examine the efficiency of the CSP: Federal cost
per student in implementing a successful school (defined as a school in
operation for three or more consecutive years).
(b) Project-Specific Performance Measures. Applicants must propose
project-specific performance measures and performance targets
consistent with the objectives of the proposed project. Applications
must provide the following information as directed under 34 CFR
75.110(b) and (c):
(1) Performance measures. How each proposed performance measure (as
defined in this notice) would accurately measure the performance of the
project and how the proposed performance measure would be consistent
with the performance measures established for the program funding the
competition.
(2) Baseline data. (i) Why each proposed baseline (as defined in
this notice) is valid; or (ii) If the applicant has determined that
there are no established baseline data for a particular
[[Page 34238]]
performance measure, an explanation of why there is no established
baseline and of how and when, during the project period, the applicant
would establish a valid baseline for the performance measure.
(3) Performance targets. Why each proposed performance target (as
defined in this notice) is ambitious (as defined in this notice), yet
achievable, compared to the baseline for the performance measure and
when, during the project period, the applicant would meet the
performance target(s).
Note: The Secretary encourages applicants to consider developing
project-specific performance measures and targets tied to their
grant activities as well as to student academic achievement during
the grant period. The project-specific performance measures should
be sufficient to gauge the progress throughout the grant period,
show results by the end of the grant period, and be included in the
logic model as outlined in the Application Requirements section of
this document.
(4) Data Collection. The applicant must also describe in the
application: (i) The data collection and reporting methods the
applicant would use and why those methods are likely to yield reliable,
valid, and meaningful performance data, and (ii) the applicant's
capacity to collect and report reliable, valid, and meaningful
performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data collection,
analysis, and reporting in other projects or research.
Note: If the applicant does not have experience with collection
and reporting of performance data through other projects or
research, the applicant should provide other evidence of capacity to
successfully carry out data collection and reporting for their
proposed project.
All grantees must submit an annual performance report with
information that is responsive to these performance measures.
5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the
performance targets in the grantee's approved application. 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).
6. Project Director's Meeting: Applicants approved for funding
under this competition must attend a two-day meeting for project
directors at a location to be determined in the continental United
States during each year of the project. Applicants may include the cost
of attending this meeting in their proposed budgets.
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Meeley, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W257, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 453-6818 or by email: Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.
If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, 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 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: June 8, 2015.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2015-14392 Filed 6-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P