Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund-Development Grants, 24070-24083 [2016-09436]

Download as PDF 24070 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari. Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350–3100. Dated: April 20, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2016–09582 Filed 4–22–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD–2016–OS–0046] Proposed Collection; Comment Request Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), DoD. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the DFAS announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by June 24, 2016. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: ODCMO, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Attn: Mailbox 24, Alexandria, VA 22350–1700. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. Any associated form(s) for this collection may be located within this same electronic docket and downloaded for review/testing. Follow the instructions at http:// www.regulations.gov for submitting comments. Please submit comments on any given form identified by docket number, form number, and title. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Enterprise Solutions and Standards, ATTN: Stuart Kran (JJFJB), 1240 East 9th Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44199 or via email at stuart.a.kran.civ@mail.mil or (216) 204– 4377. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: ‘‘Authorization to Start, Stop, or Change an Allotment,’’ DD Form 2558; OMB Control Number 0730–TBD. Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to ensure starts, stops, and changes are in keeping with the member’s desires. The information collected on this form may be used outside of the DoD as a routine use of the Federal Reserve Bank for the purpose of distributing payments through the direct deposit system. Affected Public: Individuals or Households. Annual Burden Hours: 30,372. Number of Respondents: 121,488. Responses Per Respondent: 1. Annual Responses: 121,488. Average Burden Per Response: 15 minutes. Frequency: On occasion. ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Dated: April 20, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2016–09534 Filed 4–22–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund— Development Grants Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Overview Information: Investing in Innovation Fund— Development Grants. Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2016. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411P (Development grants Pre-Application) and 84.411C (Development grants Full Application). Note: To receive an Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) Development grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-application is intended to reduce the burden of submitting a full application for an i3 Development grant. Pre-applications will be reviewed and scored by peer reviewers using the selection criteria designated in this notice. Entities that submit a highly rated pre-application will be invited to submit a full application for a Development grant; however, any entity that successfully submits a pre-application may choose to submit a full application. DATES: Pre-Applications Available: April 27, 2016. Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 2016. Deadline for Transmittal of Preapplications: May 25, 2016. Full Applications Available: If you are invited to submit a full application for a Development grant, we will transmit the full application package and instructions using the contact information you provide to us in your pre-application. Other pre-applicants that choose to submit a full application may access these items on the i3 Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/whatwe-do/innovation/investing-ininnovation-i3/. Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: Entities that submit a highly rated pre-application, as scored by peer reviewers and as identified by the Department, will be invited to submit a full application for a Development grant. Other preapplicants may choose to submit a full E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices application. The Department will announce on its Web site the deadline date for transmission of full applications and will also communicate this deadline to applicants in the full application package and instructions. Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: 60 calendar days after the deadline date for transmittal of full applications. Full Text of Announcement asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES I. Funding Opportunity Description Purpose of Program: The Investing in Innovation Fund (i3), established under section 14007 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), provides funding to support (1) local educational agencies (LEAs), and (2) nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools. The i3 program is designed to generate and validate solutions to persistent educational challenges and to support the expansion of effective solutions to serve substantially larger numbers of students. The central design element of the i3 program is its multi-tier structure that links the amount of funding that an applicant may receive to the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the proposed project. Applicants proposing practices supported by limited evidence can receive relatively small grants that support the development and initial evaluation of promising practices and help to identify new solutions to pressing challenges; applicants proposing practices supported by evidence from rigorous evaluations, such as large randomized controlled trials, can receive sizable grants to support expansion across the country. This structure provides incentives for applicants to build evidence of effectiveness of their proposed projects and to address the barriers to serving more students across schools, districts, and States. As importantly, all i3 projects are required to generate additional evidence of effectiveness. All i3 grantees must use part of their budgets to conduct independent evaluations (as defined in this notice) of their projects. This requirement ensures that projects funded under the i3 program contribute significantly to improving the information available to practitioners and policymakers about which practices work, for which types of students, and in what contexts. The Department awards three types of grants under this program: ‘‘Development’’ grants, ‘‘Validation’’ grants, and ‘‘Scale-up’’ grants. These grants differ in terms of the level of VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 prior evidence of effectiveness required for consideration of funding, the level of scale the funded project should reach, and, consequently, the amount of funding available to support the project. Development grants provide funding to support the development or testing of practices that are supported by evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice) and whose efficacy should be systematically studied. Development grants will support new or substantially more effective practices for addressing widely shared challenges. Development projects are novel and significant nationally, not projects that simply implement existing practices in additional locations or support needs that are primarily local in nature. All Development grantees must evaluate the effectiveness of the project at the level of scale proposed in the application. This notice invites applications for Development grants only. The Department anticipates publishing notices inviting applications for the other types of i3 grants (Validation and Scale-up grants) in the spring of 2016. We remind LEAs of the continuing applicability of the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for students who may be served under i3 grants. Any grants in which LEAs participate must be consistent with the rights, protections, and processes established under IDEA for students who are receiving special education and related services or who are in the process of being evaluated to determine their eligibility for such services. As described later in this notice, an applicant is required, as a condition of receiving assistance under this program, to make civil rights assurances, including an assurance that its program or activity will comply with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the Department’s section 504 implementing regulations, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. Regardless of whether a student with disabilities is specifically targeted as a ‘‘high-need student’’ (as defined in this notice) in a particular grant application, recipients are required to comply with all legal nondiscrimination requirements, including, but not limited to, the obligation to ensure that students with disabilities are not denied access to the benefits of the recipient’s program because of their disability. The Department also enforces Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as the regulations implementing Title II of the ADA, which prohibit PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24071 discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. Furthermore, Title VI and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin, and sex, respectively. On December 2, 2011, the Departments of Education and Justice jointly issued guidance that explains how educational institutions can promote student diversity or avoid racial isolation within the framework of Title VI (e.g., through consideration of the racial demographics of neighborhoods when drawing assignment zones for schools or through targeted recruiting efforts). The ‘‘Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools’’ is available on the Department’s Web site at http:// www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ docs/guidance-ese-201111.pdf.1 Background: Through its competitions, the i3 program seeks to improve the academic achievement of students in high-need schools by identifying and scaling promising solutions to pressing challenges in kindergarten through grade 12 (K–12). Now in its seventh year, the i3 program has invested over $1.3 billion—matched by over $200 million in private sector resources—in a portfolio of solutions and rigorous evaluations of several approaches that address critical challenges in education. When selecting the priorities for a given competition, the Department considers several factors including policy priorities, the need for new solutions in a particular priority area, the extent of the existing evidence supporting effective practices in a particular priority area, whether other available funding exists for a particular priority area, and the results and lessons learned from funded projects from prior i3 competitions. This year’s competition does not include specific priorities for students with disabilities and English learners, as the program has successfully funded a range of projects serving these high-need populations under i3’s broader priorities in previous competitions. Additionally, all applicants continue to be required to serve high-need student populations, and we continue to encourage applicants to consider how their 1 In both 2013 and 2014, the Departments reiterated the continued viability of this 2011 guidance after two relevant Supreme Court decisions. Those guidance documents may be found at www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201309.pdf, www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/dcl-qa-201309.pdf, and www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201405-schuetteguidance.pdf. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 24072 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES proposed projects could serve students with disabilities or English learners. Applicants are encouraged to design an evaluation that will report findings on English learners, students with disabilities, and other subgroups. We include five absolute priorities in the FY 2016 Development competition. We include absolute priorities that are intended to prompt new approaches to challenges in education, represent new areas of policy focus in which rigorous evidence is scarce, and constitute areas that we would like to strengthen within the current portfolio of i3 grantees. As in the past three competitions, applicants applying under the Serving Rural Communities priority (Absolute Priority 5) must also address one of the other four absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 Development competition. This structure has resulted in a strong set of grantees that are addressing the unique challenges in rural communities. We also include one competitive preference priority as described below. First, we include an absolute priority that asks applicants to focus their projects on student diversity. In parts of the country, America’s schools are more segregated than they were in the late 1960s, including by students’ race and socioeconomic status.2 One-quarter of our nation’s public school students attend high-poverty schools where more than 75 percent of the student body is eligible for free and reduced-price lunch; in our cities, nearly half of all students attend schools where poverty is concentrated.3 In addition, almost half of all African-American and Latino public school students attend these economically segregated schools. Children raised in segregated communities have significantly lower social and economic mobility than children growing up in integrated communities, and States with socioeconomically segregated schools tend to have larger achievement gaps between students from low- and higherincome households.4 There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that socioeconomic diversity in schools can 2 Orfield, G., and Frankenberg, E., (May, 2014). Brown at 60: Great Progress, a Long Retreat and an Uncertain Future. Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, May 2014 (revised version 5–15– 14). 3 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), ‘‘Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,’’ 2012–13. See Digest of Education Statistics 2014. https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ pubschuniv.asp. 4 Mantil, A., Perkins, A.G., and Aberger, S., (2012). ‘‘The Challenge of High-Poverty Schools: How Feasible Is Socioeconomic School Integration?’’ The Future of School Integration: 155–222. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 lead to improved outcomes for students from low-income households (compared to students from low-income households who attend higher-poverty schools).5 Moreover, research shows that students educated in diverse settings have shown a higher level of critical thinking and life skills.6 Therefore, through the invitational priority, the Department invites projects with ambitious strategies that improve outcomes for high-need students by increasing racial and socioeconomic diversity in classroom or school settings. These projects could leverage approaches at the school, district, or regional level that encourage racial or socioeconomic diversity within classroom or school environments. Proposed strategies may range from new instructional approaches that impact socioeconomic integration and student achievement within schools (e.g., schools could improve participation of students from low-income households in advanced placement or ‘‘honors’’ coursework) or through redesigning district recruitment and admissions strategies to support and foster such diversity in schools. The Department seeks to invest in projects that focus concurrently on increasing diversity and school quality in areas where schools are acutely impacted by segregation while closing gaps in academic performance between socioeconomic and racial groups. The Department also encourages all applicants to carefully consider their evaluation design as the Department is keenly interested in developing a body of evidence on how classrooms, schools, and districts can better integrate their student bodies across racial and socioeconomic lines and produce outstanding outcomes for all students. Second, we include an absolute priority for projects designed to implement and support the transition to 5 Brown, S. (1999). High School Racial Composition: Balancing Excellence and Equity. Paper presented at the American Sociological Association, Chicago, IL; Mickelson, R.A. (2001). ‘‘Subverting Swann: First and Second-Generation Segregation in Charlotte, North Carolina.’’ American Educational Research Journal, 38, 215– 252; Mickelson, R.A. (2006). How Middle School Segregation Contributes to the Race Gap in Academic Achievement. Paper presented at AERA 425; Tevis, (2007). African-American Students’ College Transition Trajectory: An Examination of the Effects of High School Composition and Expectations on Degree Attainment. Dissertation in Educational Theory & Policy. The Pennsylvania State University. 6 Kahlenberg, R. D., and Potter, H. (2012). Diverse Charter Schools: Can Racial and Socioeconomic Integration Promote Better Outcomes for Students? Washington, DC, and New York: Poverty and Race Research Action Council and Century Foundation. Retrieved from http://tcf.org/assets/downloads/ Diverse_Charter_Schools.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 internationally benchmarked, collegeand career-ready academic content standards and associated assessments. Many States have raised the expectations for what schools should teach and their students should learn and do across the K–12 grade span by adopting new, more rigorous standards and assessments aligned to the demands of college and careers. Emerging research confirms that these exams are aligned to more rigorous standards.7 Educators are now faced with the important task of effectively implementing these higher standards and ensuring their students are adequately prepared for the associated assessments, in order to ensure that all students are ready for post-secondary opportunities and their careers. Furthermore, throughout this continuing transition to higher standards and new assessments, schools and school districts need to continue to develop evidence-based approaches to increase the rigor of teaching and learning across various academic settings. For example, efforts are underway in districts across the country to provide teachers and school leaders with rich, student-specific information based on formative and summative assessments to help educators understand why students might be struggling—thereby enabling them to better align their subsequent instruction. Through this priority, the Department seeks to invest in strategies that leverage data and results from internationally benchmarked, college- and career-ready assessments to inform instruction and, ultimately, to support and improve student achievement. Third, we include an absolute priority to improve school climate. Under this priority, the Department seeks to support innovative alternatives to exclusionary discipline and other positive interventions that can help address the negative and often disparate impact of classroom removals by promoting safe schools that have a positive culture for all students. When students feel engaged and supported in school, their academic performance improves; this type of engagement and support is particularly important for students with disabilities and students of color (especially African-American male students) who suffer 7 Doorey, N., and Polikoff, M. Evaluating the Content and Quality of Next Generation Assessments (2016). Washington, DC: Thomas Fordham Institute. Retrieved from http://edex.s3us-west-2.amazonaws.com/%2802.09%20%20Final%20Published% 29%20Evaluating%20the%20Content% 20and%20Quality%20of%20Next% 20Generation%20Assessments.pdf. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES disproportionately under typical school discipline policies. Research has shown that implementing alternative disciplinary policies and behavioral supports can support both improved academic and non-academic outcomes for students.8 The Department expects successful applicants to identify and address the root causes of disciplinerelated disparities, and develop and implement alternative practices. To date, some schools and school systems have begun to take on these challenges, resulting in positive outcomes for school communities 9 Under this priority, the Department is particularly interested in investing in projects that demonstrate viable alternatives to removing students from classroom activities, while ensuring a positive and inclusive school culture for students and educators alike. Fourth, we include an absolute priority on influencing the development of non-cognitive factors. Non-cognitive factors may encompass many skills and behaviors, including but not limited to academic behaviors, academic mindset, perseverance, self-regulation, social and emotional skills, and approaches toward learning strategies.10 A promising body of research suggests that non-cognitive factors play an important role in students’ academic, career, and life outcomes.11 Notably, some initial interventions focused on enhancing these skills and behaviors are seemingly scalable and lower-cost as compared to more conventional education interventions—and have a positive 8 Flay, B., Acock, A., Vuchinich, S., and Beets, M. (2006). Progress Report of the Randomized Trial of Positive Action in Hawaii: End of Third Year of Intervention. Twin Falls, ID: Positive Action, Inc.; Flay, B.R., and Allred, C.G. (2003). ‘‘Long-term Effects of the Positive Action Program.’’ American Journal of Healthy Behavior, 27(1), 6–21. 9 Hui, T. Keung, (2015). ‘‘Wake County Presents Plan for Equitable Student Discipline.’’ The News & Observer, May 11, 2015, www.newsobserver.com/ news/local/education/article20709030.html. Fabelo, T., Thompson, M.D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M.P. III, and Booth E.A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York, NY; College Station, TX: Council of State Governments Justice Center; Public Policy Research Institute of Texas A&M University. http://justicecenter.csg.org/ files/Breaking_Schools_Rules_Report_Final.pdf. 10 The University of Chicago Consortium of Chicago School Research (June 2015). Foundations for Young Adult Success: A Developmental Framework. Retrieved from https:// consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/ publications/Wallace%20Report.pdf. 11 The University of Chicago Consortium of Chicago School Research (June 2012). Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Performance. Available at: https:// ccsr.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/ Noncognitive%20Report.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 impact on students most in need.12 As interest in this area grows, we think it is important to identify solutions and build evidence to determine effective ways to help students develop such skills and behaviors (e.g., interventions that directly target students, support changes in educators’ instructional practices, or redesign learning environments), as well as how to measure such skills and behaviors in valid and reliable ways, and to demonstrate how improvement in such skills and behaviors affects overall student outcomes. Fifth, we include an absolute priority that focuses on serving rural communities. Students living in rural communities face unique challenges. Applicants applying under this priority must also address one of the other four absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 Development competition, while serving students enrolled in rural LEAs (as defined in this notice). We also include one competitive preference priority in the FY 2016 Development competition. To expand the reach of the i3 program and encourage entities that have not previously received an i3 grant to apply, the Department includes a competitive preference priority for novice i3 applicants. A novice i3 applicant is an applicant that has never received a grant under the i3 program. An applicant must identify whether it is a novice applicant when completing the applicant information sheet. Instructions on how to complete the applicant information sheet are included in the application package. In summary, applications must address one of the first four absolute priorities for this competition and propose projects designed to implement practices that serve students who are in grades K–12 at some point during the funding period. If an applicant chooses to also address the absolute priority regarding students in rural LEAs, that applicant must also address one of the other four absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 Development competition, while serving students enrolled in rural LEAs (as defined in this notice). Applicants must be able to demonstrate that the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice included in their applications is supported by either evidence of promise (as defined 12 Walton, G.M., and Cohen, G.L. (2011). ‘‘A Brief Social-Belonging Intervention Improves Academic and Health Outcomes of Minority Students.’’ Science, 331 (6023): 1447–1451; and Cohen, G.L., Garcia, J., Purdie-Vaugns, V., Apfel, N., and Brzustoski, P. (2009). ‘‘Recursive Processes in Selfaffirmation: Intervening to Close the Minority Achievement Gap.’’ Science, 324, 400–403. PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24073 in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice). Applicants should carefully review all of the application requirements and the requirements in the Eligibility Information section of this notice for instructions on how to demonstrate the proposed project is supported by evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice) and for information on the other eligibility and program requirements. To meet the eligibility requirement regarding the applicant’s record of improvement, an applicant must provide, in its application, sufficient supporting data or other information to allow the Department to determine whether the applicant has met the eligibility requirements. Note that, to address the statutory eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b) of the statutory eligibility requirements (provided in the Eligibility Information section), applicants must provide data that demonstrate a change due to the work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In other words, applicants must provide data for at least two definitive points in time when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their applications. Additional information for this requirement can be found under the Eligibility Information section of this notice. The i3 program includes a statutory requirement for a private-sector match for all i3 grantees. For Development grants, an applicant must obtain matching funds or in-kind donations from the private sector equal to at least 15 percent of its grant award. Each highest-rated applicant, as identified by the Department following peer review of the applications, must submit evidence of at least 50 percent of the required private-sector match prior to the awarding of an i3 grant. An applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 percent of the required private-sector match no later than three months after the project start date (i.e., for the FY 2016 competition, three months after January 1, 2017, or by April 1, 2017). The grant will be terminated if the grantee does not secure its private-sector match by the established deadline. This notice also includes selection criteria for the FY 2016 Development competition that are designed to ensure that the applications that peer reviewers recommend for funding have the best potential to generate substantial improvements in student achievement (and other key outcomes), and include well-articulated plans for the implementation and evaluation of the E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 24074 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices proposed projects. Applicants should review the selection criteria and submission instructions carefully to ensure their applications address this year’s criteria. An entity that submits a full application for a Development grant should include the following information in its application: An estimate of the number of students to be served by the project; evidence of the applicant’s ability to implement and appropriately evaluate the proposed project; and information about its capacity (e.g., management capacity, financial resources, qualified personnel) to implement the project at the proposed level of scale. We recognize that LEAs are not typically responsible for taking their processes, products, strategies, or practices to scale; however, all applicants can and should develop plans to potentially take them to scale, as well as partner with others to disseminate their effective processes, products, strategies, and practices. The Department will screen applications that are submitted for Development grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice and determine which applications meet eligibility and other requirements. Peer reviewers will review all applications for Development grants that are submitted by the established deadline. Applicants should note, however, that we may screen for eligibility at multiple points during the competition process, including before and after peer review; and applicants that are determined to be ineligible will not receive a grant award regardless of peer reviewer scores or comments. If we determine that a Development grant application is not supported by evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice), or that the applicant does not demonstrate the required prior record of improvement, or does not meet any other i3 requirement, the application will not be considered for funding. Please note that on December 10, 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, was signed into law. ESSA establishes the Education Innovation and Research Program (EIR), a new program that builds on the work led by the i3 program and its grantees. Accordingly, this FY 2016 i3 competition will be the final i3 competition under current statute and regulations. Pending congressional appropriations, the Department will launch the first EIR competition in FY 2017. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 Priorities: This competition includes five absolute priorities, one competitive preference priority, and one invitational priority. Absolute Priorities 1, 2, 3, and 4 are from the Department’s notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for Discretionary Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425) (Supplemental Priorities). Absolute Priority 5 and the competitive preference priority are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program, published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2013 (78 FR 18681) (the ‘‘2013 i3 NFP’’). Absolute Priorities: For FY 2016 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 one of these priorities. Under the Development grant competition, each of the five absolute priorities constitutes its own funding category. The Secretary intends to award grants under each absolute priority for which applications of sufficient quality are submitted. Applicants must address one of the first five absolute priorities in their preapplications and full applications. An applicant that addresses Absolute Priority 5, Serving Rural Communities, must also address one of the first four absolute priorities. Because applications will be rank ordered by absolute priority, applicants must clearly identify the specific absolute priority that the proposed project addresses. Applications submitted under Absolute Priority 5 will be ranked with other applications under Absolute Priority 5, and not included in the ranking for the additional priority that the applicant identified. This design helps us ensure that applications under Absolute Priority 5 receive an ‘‘apples to apples’’ comparison with other applicants addressing the Serving Rural Communities priority. These priorities are: Absolute Priority 1—Promoting Diversity. Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to prepare students for success in an increasingly diverse workforce and society by increasing the diversity, including racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity, of students enrolled in individual schools or postsecondary programs; or, in the case of preschool, elementary, or secondary programs, decreasing the racial, ethnic, PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 or socioeconomic isolation of students who are served by the project. Within this absolute priority, we are particularly interested in applications that address the following invitational priority. Invitational Priority: Under 34 CFR.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets this invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications. This priority is: Designing and implementing intradistrict, inter-district, community, or regional programs that improve student outcomes by increasing socioeconomic diversity. Such programs may include one or more of the following: • Giving students increased choices in selecting a high-quality public school (e.g., centralized enrollment application process that utilizes weighted lotteries for students from low-income households, students from lowperforming schools, or students residing in neighborhoods experiencing concentrated poverty), and providing ongoing support to ensure their academic success in such schools. • Policies designed to attract and enroll substantial proportions of students from low-income households in schools that have relatively fewer students from low-income households in those schools, enrolling such students, and providing school-level support to promote equitable academic success within such schools. • Establishing magnet schools, themebased schools, or other schools of choice (e.g., charter schools) that attract students who will reduce, eliminate, or prevent socioeconomic segregation of students from low-income households. • Providing targeted academic and socio-emotional interventions to retain economically disadvantaged children within schools, and to support their academic success. • Restructuring programs for highachieving students such as honors programs, gifted and talented programs, or Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate courses, so that they include students from low-income households and support their academic success. Please note that evaluations of these programs should pay special attention to creating measurable outcomes for high-need students. Absolute Priority 2—Implementing Internationally Benchmarked Collegeand Career-Ready Standards and Assessments. Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to support the implementation of, and transition to, internationally E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices benchmarked college- and career-ready standards and assessments, including developing and implementing strategies that use the standards and information from assessments to inform classroom practices that meet the needs of all students. Absolute Priority 3—Improving School Climate, Behavioral Supports, and Correctional Education. Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to improve student outcomes through reducing or eliminating disparities in school disciplinary practices for particular groups of students, including minority students and students with disabilities, or reducing or eliminating the use of exclusionary discipline (such as suspensions, expulsions, and unnecessary placements in alternative education programs) by identifying and addressing the root causes of those disparities or uses and promoting alternative disciplinary practices that address the disparities or uses. Absolute Priority 4—Influencing the Development of Non-Cognitive Factors. Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to improve students’ mastery of noncognitive skills and behaviors (such as academic behaviors, academic mindset, perseverance, self-regulation, social and emotional skills, and approaches toward learning strategies) and enhance student motivation and engagement in learning. Absolute Priority 5—Serving Rural Communities. Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address one of the absolute priorities established for the 2016 Development i3 competition and under which the majority of students to be served are enrolled in rural local educational agencies (as defined in this notice). Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2016 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional three points to an application that meets the competitive preference priority. The priority is: Competitive Preference Priority— Supporting Novice i3 Applicants (0 or 3 points). Eligible applicants that have never directly received a grant under this program. Definitions: The definitions of ‘‘evidence of promise,’’ ‘‘logic model,’’ ‘‘national level,’’ ‘‘quasi-experimental design study,’’ ‘‘randomized controlled trial,’’ ‘‘regional level,’’ ‘‘relevant VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 outcome,’’ ‘‘strong theory,’’ and ‘‘What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Evidence Standards’’ are from 34 CFR 77.1. All other definitions are from the 2013 i3 NFP. We may apply these definitions in any year in which this program is in effect. Consortium of schools means two or more public elementary or secondary schools acting collaboratively for the purpose of applying for and implementing an i3 grant jointly with an eligible nonprofit organization. Evidence of promise means there is empirical evidence to support the theoretical linkage(s) between at least one critical component and at least one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. Specifically, evidence of promise means the conditions in both paragraphs (i) and (ii) of this definition are met: (i) There is at least one study that is a— (A) Correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias; (B) Quasi-experimental design study that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations; or (C) Randomized controlled trial that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with or without reservations. (ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) of this definition found a statistically significant or substantively important (defined as a difference of 0.25 standard deviations or larger) favorable association between at least one critical component and one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. High-minority school is defined by a school’s LEA in a manner consistent with the corresponding State’s Teacher Equity Plan, as required by section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The applicant must provide, in its i3 application, the definition(s) used. High-need student means a student at risk of educational failure or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as students who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools (as defined in this notice), who are far below grade level, who have left school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at risk of not graduating with a diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are English learners. High school graduation rate means a four-year adjusted cohort graduation PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24075 rate consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and may also include an extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if the State in which the proposed project is implemented has been approved by the Secretary to use such a rate under Title I of the ESEA. Independent evaluation means that the evaluation is designed and carried out independent of, but in coordination with, any employees of the entities who develop a process, product, strategy, or practice and are implementing it. Innovation means a process, product, strategy, or practice that improves (or is expected to improve) significantly upon the outcomes reached with status quo options and that can ultimately reach widespread effective usage. 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. National level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to be effective in a wide variety of communities, including rural and urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations, individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of each gender). Nonprofit organization means an entity that meets the definition of ‘‘nonprofit’’ under 34 CFR 77.1(c), or an institution of higher education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental design by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations (but not What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations). Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 24076 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices the average outcomes for the treatment group and for the control group. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations. Regional level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to serve a variety of communities within a State or multiple States, including rural and urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations, individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of each gender). For an LEAbased project to be considered a regional-level project, a process, product, strategy, or practice must serve students in more than one LEA, unless the process, product, strategy, or practice is implemented in a State in which the State educational agency is the sole educational agency for all schools. 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. Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency (LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to information on the Department’s Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/ freedom/local/reap.html. Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice that includes a logic model (as defined in this notice). Student achievement means— (a) For grades and subjects in which assessments are required under ESEA section 1111(b)(3): (1) A student’s score on such assessments and may include (2) other measures of student learning, such as those described in paragraph (b), provided they are rigorous and comparable across schools within an LEA. (b) For grades and subjects in which assessments are not required under ESEA section 1111(b)(3): Alternative measures of student learning and performance such as student results on pre-tests, end-of-course tests, and objective performance-based assessments; student learning objectives; student performance on English language proficiency assessments; and other measures of VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 student achievement that are rigorous and comparable across schools within an LEA. Student growth means the change in student achievement (as defined in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in time. An applicant may also include other measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms. What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link: http:// ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19. Program Authority: ARRA, Division A, Section 14007, Public Law 111–5. Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 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. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The 2013 i3 NFP. (e) The Supplemental Priorities. Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants except federally recognized Indian tribes. Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only. II. Award Information Type of Award: Cooperative agreements or discretionary grants. Estimated Available Funds: $103,100,000. These estimated available funds are the total available for all three types of grants under the i3 program (Development, Validation, and Scale-up grants). Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 or later years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition. Estimated Range of Awards: Development grants: Up to $3,000,000. Validation grants: Up to $12,000,000. Scale-up grants: Up to $20,000,000. Note: The upper limit of the range of awards (e.g., $3,000,000 for Development PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 grants) is referred to as the ‘‘maximum amount of awards’’ under Other in section III of this notice. Estimated Average Size of Awards: Development grants: $3,000,000. Validation grants: $11,500,000. Scale-up grants: $19,000,000. Estimated Number of Awards: Development grants: 9–11 awards. Validation grants: 2–3 awards. Scale-up grants: 0–2 awards. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. Project Period: 36–60 months. III. Eligibility Information 1. Innovations that Improve Achievement for High-Need Students: All grantees must implement practices that are designed to improve student achievement (as defined in this notice) or student growth (as defined in this notice), close achievement gaps, decrease dropout rates, increase high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice), or increase college enrollment and completion rates for high-need students (as defined in this notice). 2. Innovations that Serve Kindergarten-through-Grade-12 (K–12) Students: All grantees must implement practices that serve students who are in grades K–12 at some point during the funding period. To meet this requirement, projects that serve early learners (i.e., infants, toddlers, or preschoolers) must provide services or supports that extend into kindergarten or later years, and projects that serve postsecondary students must provide services or supports during the secondary grades or earlier. 3. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for i3 grants include either of the following: (a) An LEA. (b) A partnership between a nonprofit organization and— (1) One or more LEAs; or (2) A consortium of schools. Statutory Eligibility Requirements: Except as specifically set forth in the Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a Nonprofit Organization that follows, to be eligible for an award, an eligible applicant must— (a)(1) Have significantly closed the achievement gaps between groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA (economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, students with limited English proficiency, students with disabilities); or (2) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices academic achievement for all groups of students described in that section; (b) Have made significant improvements in other areas, such as high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and principals, as demonstrated with meaningful data; (c) Demonstrate that it has established one or more partnerships with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, and that organizations in the private sector will provide matching funds in order to help bring results to scale; and (d) In the case of an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization, provide in the application the names of the LEAs with which the nonprofit organization will partner, or the names of the schools in the consortium with which it will partner. If an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization intends to partner with additional LEAs or schools that are not named in the application, it must describe in the application the demographic and other characteristics of these LEAs and schools and the process it will use to select them. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Note: An entity submitting an application should provide, in Appendix C, under ‘‘Other Attachments Form,’’ of its application, information addressing the eligibility requirements described in this section. An applicant must provide, in its application, sufficient supporting data or other information to allow the Department to determine whether the applicant has met the eligibility requirements. Note that, to address the statutory eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b), applicants must provide data that demonstrate a change due to the work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In other words, applicants must provide data for at least two definitive points in time when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their applications. For further guidance, please refer to the definition of ‘‘student achievement’’ in this notice; and the question and answer Webinar for FY 2016 i3 Development Full Applications for further guidance. Additionally, information on the statutory eligibility requirements can be found on the i3 Web site at http:// innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/ investing-in-innovation-i3/. If the Department determines that an applicant provided insufficient information in its application, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide additional information. Note about LEA Eligibility: For purposes of this program, an LEA is an LEA located within one of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a Nonprofit Organization: The authorizing statute specifies that an eligible applicant that VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 includes a nonprofit organization meets the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the eligibility requirements for this program if the nonprofit organization has a record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, or retention. For an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization, the nonprofit organization must demonstrate that it has a record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, or retention through its record of work with an LEA or schools. Therefore, an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization does not necessarily need to include as a partner for its i3 grant an LEA or a consortium of schools that meets the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the eligibility requirements in this notice. In addition, the authorizing statute specifies that an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of the eligibility requirements in this notice if the eligible applicant demonstrates that it will meet the requirement for privatesector matching. 4. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an applicant must demonstrate that one or more privatesector organizations, which may include philanthropic organizations, will provide matching funds in order to help bring project results to scale. An eligible Development applicant must obtain matching funds, or in-kind donations, equal to at least 15 percent of its Federal grant award. The highest-rated eligible applicants must submit evidence of 50 percent of the required private-sector matching funds following the peer review of applications. A Federal i3 award will not be made unless the applicant provides adequate evidence that the 50 percent of the required private-sector match has been committed or the Secretary approves the eligible applicant’s request to reduce the matching-level requirement. An applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 percent of required private-sector match three months after the project start date. The Secretary may consider decreasing the matching requirement on a case-by-case basis, and only in the most exceptional circumstances. An eligible applicant that anticipates being unable to meet the full amount of the private-sector matching requirement must include in its application a request that the Secretary reduce the matchinglevel requirement, along with a statement of the basis for the request. Note: An applicant that does not provide a request for a reduction of the matchinglevel requirement in its full application may not submit that request at a later time. 5. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for the i3 program. These requirements are from PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24077 the 2013 i3 NFP. We may apply these requirements in any year in which the program is in effect. • Evidence Standards: To be eligible for an award, an application for a Development grant must be supported by evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice). Applicants must identify in Appendix D and the Applicant Information Sheet if their evidence is supported by evidence of promise or a strong theory. Note: In Appendix D, under the ‘‘Other Attachments Form,’’ an entity that submits a full application should provide information addressing one of the required evidence standards for Development grants. This information should include a description of the intervention(s) the applicant plans to implement and the intended student outcomes that the intervention(s) attempts to impact. Applicants must identify in Appendix D and the Applicant Information Sheet if their evidence is supported by evidence of promise or a strong theory. An applicant submitting its Development grant application under the evidence of promise standard should identify up to two study citations to be reviewed for the purposes of meeting the i3 evidence standard requirement and include those citations in Appendix D. In addition, the applicant should specify the intervention that they plan to implement, the findings within the citations that the applicant is requesting be considered as evidence of promise, including page number(s) of specific tables if applicable. The Department will not consider a study citation that an applicant fails to clearly identify for review. An applicant must either ensure that all evidence is available to the Department from publicly available sources and provide links or other guidance indicating where it is available; or, in the full application, include copies of evidence in Appendix D. If the Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide additional information at a later time. However, for applicants applying under evidence of promise, if the WWC determines that a study does not provide enough information on key aspects of the study design, such as sample attrition or equivalence of intervention and comparison groups, the WWC will submit a query to the study author(s) to gather information for use in determining a study rating. Authors are asked to respond to queries within ten business days. Should the author query E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 24078 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices remain incomplete within 14 days of the initial contact to the study author(s), the study will be deemed ineligible under the grant competition. After the grant competition closes, the WWC will continue to include responses to author queries and will make updates to study reviews as necessary. However, the competition can only take into account information that is available at the time the competition is open. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Note: The evidence standards apply to the prior research that supports the effectiveness of the proposed project. The i3 program does not restrict the source of prior research providing evidence for the proposed project. As such, an applicant could cite prior research in Appendix D for studies that were conducted by another entity (i.e., an entity that is not the applicant) so long as the prior research studies cited in the application are relevant to the effectiveness of the proposed project. If an applicant applies under the evidence of promise standard but does not meet it, their application will not be reviewed under the strong theory standard. • Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered for an award only for the type of i3 grant (i.e., Development, Validation, and Scale-up grants) for which it applies. An applicant may not submit an application for the same proposed project under more than one type of grant. • Limit on Grant Awards: (a) No grantee may receive more than two new grant awards of any type under the i3 program in a single year; (b) in any twoyear period, no grantee may receive more than one new Scale-up or Validation grant; and (c) no grantee may receive in a single year new i3 grant awards that total an amount greater than the sum of the maximum amount of funds for a Scale-up grant and the maximum amount of funds for a Development grant for that year. For example, in a year when the maximum award value for a Scale-up grant is $20 million and the maximum award value for a Development grant is $3 million, no grantee may receive in a single year new grants totaling more than $23 million. • Subgrants: In the case of an eligible applicant that is a partnership between a nonprofit organization and (1) one or more LEAs or (2) a consortium of schools, the partner serving as the applicant and, if funded, as the grantee, may make subgrants to one or more entities in the partnership. • Evaluation: The grantee must conduct an independent evaluation (as defined in this notice) of its project. This evaluation must estimate the impact of the i3-supported practice (as implemented at the proposed level of scale) on a relevant outcome (as defined VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 in this notice). The grantee must make broadly available digitally and free of charge, through formal (e.g., peerreviewed journals) or informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, the results of any evaluations it conducts of its funded activities. In addition, the grantee and its independent evaluator must agree to cooperate with any technical assistance provided by the Department or its contractor and comply with the requirements of any evaluation of the program conducted by the Department. This includes providing to the Department, within 100 days of a grant award, an updated comprehensive evaluation plan in a format and using such tools as the Department may require. Grantees must update this evaluation plan at least annually to reflect any changes to the evaluation. All of these updates must be consistent with the scope and objectives of the approved application. • Communities of Practice: Grantees must participate in, organize, or facilitate, as appropriate, communities of practice for the i3 program. A community of practice is a group of grantees that agrees to interact regularly to solve a persistent problem or improve practice in an area that is important to them. • Management Plan: Within 100 days of a grant award, the grantee must provide an updated comprehensive management plan for the approved project in a format and using such tools as the Department may require. This management plan must include detailed information about implementation of the first year of the grant, including key milestones, staffing details, and other information that the Department may require. It must also include a complete list of performance metrics, including baseline measures and annual targets. The grantee must update this management plan at least annually to reflect implementation of subsequent years of the project. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: http:// innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/ innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1–877–433–7827. FAX: (703) 605– 6794. PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1–877– 576–7734. You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at its email address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov. If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.411P (for pre-applications) or 84.411C (for full applications). 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 person or team listed under Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice. 2. a. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition. Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 2016. We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant applications if we know the approximate number of applicants that intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify us of the applicant’s intent to submit a pre-application by completing a Web-based form. When completing this form, applicants will provide (1) the applicant organization’s name and address and (2) the absolute priority the applicant intends to address. Applicants may access this form online at https:// www.surveymonkey.com/r/Q97PKP8. Applicants that do not complete this form may still submit a pre-application. Page Limit: For the pre-application, the project narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your preapplication. For the full application, the project narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your full application. Pre-Application page limit: Applicants should limit the preapplication narrative to no more than seven pages. Aside from the required forms, applicants should not include appendices in their pre-applications. Full-Application page limit: Applicants submitting a full application should limit the application narrative for a Development grant application to no more than 25 pages. Applicants are also strongly encouraged not to include lengthy appendices for the full E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices application that contain information that they were unable to include in the narrative. Applicants for both pre- and full applications should use the following standards: • A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. • Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions. • Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch). • Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. The page limit for the full application does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support for the full application. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative section of the full application. b. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the i3 program, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define ‘‘business information’’ and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended). Consistent with the process followed in the prior i3 competitions, we plan on posting the project narrative section of funded i3 applications on the Department’s Web site. Accordingly, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information. Identifying proprietary information in the submitted application will help facilitate this public disclosure process. Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under ‘‘Other Attachments Form,’’ please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c). 3. Submission Dates and Times: Pre-Applications Available: April 27, 2016. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 2016. Informational Meetings: The i3 program intends to hold Webinars designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants for all three types of grants. Detailed information regarding these meetings will be provided on the i3 Web site at http:// innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/ innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. Deadline for Transmittal of PreApplications: May 25, 2016. Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: The Department will announce on its Web site the deadline date for transmission of full applications for Development grants. Under the preapplication process, peer reviewers will read and score the shorter preapplication against an abbreviated set of selection criteria, and entities that submit highly rated pre-applications will be invited to submit full applications for a Development grant. Other pre-applicants may choose to submit a full application. Pre- and full applications for Development 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 Other Submission Requirements in section IV 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 of Full Applications: October 17, 2016. 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 competition. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24079 5. Funding Restrictions: We reference 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), 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 at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/ webform. A DUNS number 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 you enter into the SAM database. 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, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can access the information in, and 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 E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 24080 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices 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: http:// www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/samfaqs.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 for the i3 program must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section. a. Electronic Submission of Applications. Applications (both pre- and full applications) for Development grants under the i3 program, CFDA number 84.411P (pre-applications) and CFDA number 84.411C (full applications), 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 the i3 program at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number’s alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.411, not 84.411P or 84.411C). Please note the following: • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 • 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. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/ apply-for-grants.html. • 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 read-only, PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 non-modifiable Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a readonly, non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note that this could result in your application not being considered for funding because the material in question—for example, the project narrative—is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material from other formats to PDF. • 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. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications. Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application. These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department’s application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in a readonly, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department’s requirements. • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1–800–518–4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it. If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 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 the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 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: Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W312, Washington, DC 20202. FAX: (202) 401– 4123. 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 84.411P or 84.411C), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202– 4260, Note: Entities submitting preapplications for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411P, and entities submitting full applications for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411C. 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. Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24081 should check with your local post office. We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date. 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 84.411P or 84.411C), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260. Note: Entities submitting preapplications for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411P, and entities submitting full applications for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411C. 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: This competition has separate selection criteria for preapplications and full applications. The selection criteria for the Development competition are from the 2013 i3 NFP and 34 CFR 75.210, and are listed below. The points assigned to each criterion are indicated in the parentheses next to the criterion. An applicant may earn up to a total of 20 points based on the selection criteria for the pre-application. An applicant may earn up to a total of 100 points based on the selection criteria for the full application. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 24082 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Pre-Application: A. Significance (up to 10 points). In determining the significance of the project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project involves the development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (34 CFR 75.210) B. Quality of Project Design (up to 10 points). In determining the quality of the proposed project design, the Secretary considers the extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the project are clearly specified and measured. (34 CFR 75.210) Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Full Application: A. Significance (up to 35 points). In determining the significance of the project, the Secretary considers the following factors: (1) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210) (2) The extent to which the proposed project involves the development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (34 CFR 75.210) (3) The extent to which the proposed project addresses the absolute priority the applicant is seeking to meet. (2013 i3 NFP) B. Quality of the Project Design and Management Plan (up to 45 points). In determining the quality of the proposed project design, the Secretary considers the following factors: (1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the project are clearly specified and measurable. (34 CFR 75.210) (2) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. (2013 i3 NFP) (3) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (2013 i3 NFP) (4) The mechanisms the applicant will use to broadly disseminate information on its project so as to support further development or replication. (34 CFR 75.210) C. Quality of Project Evaluation (up to 20 points). In determining the quality of the project evaluation to be conducted, the Secretary considers the following factors: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 (1) The clarity and importance of the key questions to be addressed by the project evaluation, and the appropriateness of the methods for how each question will be addressed. (2013 i3 NFP) (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well-implemented, produce evidence about the project’s effectiveness that would meet the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations. (34 CFR 75.210) (3) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes sufficient resources to carry out the project evaluation effectively. (2013 i3 NFP) Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/ idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid =1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ tech_methods/. In addition, applicants may view two optional Webinar recordings that were hosted by the Institute of Education Sciences. The first Webinar discussed strategies for designing and executing well-designed quasi-experimental design studies and is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=23. The second Webinar focused on more rigorous evaluation designs and discussed strategies for designing and executing studies that meet WWC evidence standards without reservations. This Webinar is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ Multimedia.aspx?sid=18. 2. Review and Selection Process: To receive an i3 Development grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-application will be reviewed and scored by peer reviewers using the two selection criteria established in this notice. We will inform the entities that submitted pre-applications of the results of the peer review process. Entities with highly rated pre-applications will be invited to submit full applications. Other pre-applicants may choose to submit a full application. Scores received on pre-applications will not carry over to the review of the full application. Before making awards, we will screen applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in this notice to determine which applications have met eligibility and other statutory requirements. This screening process may occur at various stages of the preapplication and full application processes; applicants that are determined ineligible will not receive a PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 grant, regardless of peer reviewer scores or comments. For the pre- and full application review processes, we will use independent peer reviewers with varied backgrounds and professions including pre-kindergarten through grade 12 teachers and principals, college and university educators, researchers and evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grant makers and managers, and others with education expertise. All reviewers will be thoroughly screened for conflicts of interest to ensure a fair and competitive review process. Peer reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation of, and score the assigned pre-applications and full applications, using the respective selection criteria provided in this notice. For Development grant preapplications, peer reviewers will review and score the applications based on the two selection criteria for preapplications listed in the Selection Criteria for the Development Grant PreApplication section of this notice. For full applications submitted for Development grants, peer reviewers will review and score the applications based on the three selection criteria for full applications listed in the Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Full Application section of this notice. If an eligible applicant addresses the competitive preference priority (Supporting Novice i3 Applicants), the Department will review its list of previous i3 grantees in scoring this competitive preference priority. We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant’s use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality. In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary 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. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this program the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Under 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 multiyear 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. (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Apr 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the i3 program is to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on improving student achievement or student growth for high-need students. We have established several performance measures for the i3 Development grants. Short-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees whose projects are being implemented with fidelity to the approved design; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with ongoing evaluations that provide evidence of their promise for improving student outcomes; (3) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-quality implementation data and performance feedback that allow for periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes; and (4) the cost per student actually served by the grant. Long-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with a completed evaluation that provides evidence of their promise for improving student outcomes; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with a completed evaluation that provides information about the key elements and approach of the project so as to facilitate further development, replication, or testing in other settings; and (3) the cost per student for programs, practices, or strategies that were proven promising at improving educational outcomes for students. 5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award 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 award, 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). PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24083 VII. Agency Contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4CW312, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453–7122. FAX: (202) 401–4123 or by email: i3@ed.gov. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service, 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 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: April 19, 2016. Nadya Chinoy Dabby, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement. [FR Doc. 2016–09436 Filed 4–22–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Northern New Mexico Department of Energy. Notice of open meeting. AGENCY: ACTION: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Northern New Mexico. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24070-24083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09436]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


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

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Overview Information:
    Investing in Innovation Fund--Development Grants.
    Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 
2016.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411P 
(Development grants Pre-Application) and 84.411C (Development grants 
Full Application).

    Note:  To receive an Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) 
Development grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-
application is intended to reduce the burden of submitting a full 
application for an i3 Development grant. Pre-applications will be 
reviewed and scored by peer reviewers using the selection criteria 
designated in this notice. Entities that submit a highly rated pre-
application will be invited to submit a full application for a 
Development grant; however, any entity that successfully submits a 
pre-application may choose to submit a full application.


DATES: 
    Pre-Applications Available: April 27, 2016.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 
2016.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Pre-applications: May 25, 2016.
    Full Applications Available: If you are invited to submit a full 
application for a Development grant, we will transmit the full 
application package and instructions using the contact information you 
provide to us in your pre-application. Other pre-applicants that choose 
to submit a full application may access these items on the i3 Web site 
at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: Entities that submit 
a highly rated pre-application, as scored by peer reviewers and as 
identified by the Department, will be invited to submit a full 
application for a Development grant. Other pre-applicants may choose to 
submit a full

[[Page 24071]]

application. The Department will announce on its Web site the deadline 
date for transmission of full applications and will also communicate 
this deadline to applicants in the full application package and 
instructions.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: 60 calendar days after the 
deadline date for transmittal of full applications.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The Investing in Innovation Fund (i3), 
established under section 14007 of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), provides funding to support (1) local 
educational agencies (LEAs), and (2) nonprofit organizations in 
partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools. 
The i3 program is designed to generate and validate solutions to 
persistent educational challenges and to support the expansion of 
effective solutions to serve substantially larger numbers of students. 
The central design element of the i3 program is its multi-tier 
structure that links the amount of funding that an applicant may 
receive to the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the 
proposed project. Applicants proposing practices supported by limited 
evidence can receive relatively small grants that support the 
development and initial evaluation of promising practices and help to 
identify new solutions to pressing challenges; applicants proposing 
practices supported by evidence from rigorous evaluations, such as 
large randomized controlled trials, can receive sizable grants to 
support expansion across the country. This structure provides 
incentives for applicants to build evidence of effectiveness of their 
proposed projects and to address the barriers to serving more students 
across schools, districts, and States.
    As importantly, all i3 projects are required to generate additional 
evidence of effectiveness. All i3 grantees must use part of their 
budgets to conduct independent evaluations (as defined in this notice) 
of their projects. This requirement ensures that projects funded under 
the i3 program contribute significantly to improving the information 
available to practitioners and policymakers about which practices work, 
for which types of students, and in what contexts.
    The Department awards three types of grants under this program: 
``Development'' grants, ``Validation'' grants, and ``Scale-up'' grants. 
These grants differ in terms of the level of prior evidence of 
effectiveness required for consideration of funding, the level of scale 
the funded project should reach, and, consequently, the amount of 
funding available to support the project.
    Development grants provide funding to support the development or 
testing of practices that are supported by evidence of promise (as 
defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this notice) 
and whose efficacy should be systematically studied. Development grants 
will support new or substantially more effective practices for 
addressing widely shared challenges. Development projects are novel and 
significant nationally, not projects that simply implement existing 
practices in additional locations or support needs that are primarily 
local in nature. All Development grantees must evaluate the 
effectiveness of the project at the level of scale proposed in the 
application. This notice invites applications for Development grants 
only. The Department anticipates publishing notices inviting 
applications for the other types of i3 grants (Validation and Scale-up 
grants) in the spring of 2016.
    We remind LEAs of the continuing applicability of the provisions of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for students who 
may be served under i3 grants. Any grants in which LEAs participate 
must be consistent with the rights, protections, and processes 
established under IDEA for students who are receiving special education 
and related services or who are in the process of being evaluated to 
determine their eligibility for such services.
    As described later in this notice, an applicant is required, as a 
condition of receiving assistance under this program, to make civil 
rights assurances, including an assurance that its program or activity 
will comply with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 
amended, and the Department's section 504 implementing regulations, 
which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. Regardless of 
whether a student with disabilities is specifically targeted as a 
``high-need student'' (as defined in this notice) in a particular grant 
application, recipients are required to comply with all legal 
nondiscrimination requirements, including, but not limited to, the 
obligation to ensure that students with disabilities are not denied 
access to the benefits of the recipient's program because of their 
disability. The Department also enforces Title II of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as the regulations implementing Title 
II of the ADA, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability 
by public entities.
    Furthermore, Title VI and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 
prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national 
origin, and sex, respectively. On December 2, 2011, the Departments of 
Education and Justice jointly issued guidance that explains how 
educational institutions can promote student diversity or avoid racial 
isolation within the framework of Title VI (e.g., through consideration 
of the racial demographics of neighborhoods when drawing assignment 
zones for schools or through targeted recruiting efforts). The 
``Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid 
Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools'' is available on 
the Department's Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/guidance-ese-201111.pdf.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In both 2013 and 2014, the Departments reiterated the 
continued viability of this 2011 guidance after two relevant Supreme 
Court decisions. Those guidance documents may be found at 
www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201309.pdf, www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/dcl-qa-201309.pdf, and www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201405-schuette-guidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Background:
    Through its competitions, the i3 program seeks to improve the 
academic achievement of students in high-need schools by identifying 
and scaling promising solutions to pressing challenges in kindergarten 
through grade 12 (K-12). Now in its seventh year, the i3 program has 
invested over $1.3 billion--matched by over $200 million in private 
sector resources--in a portfolio of solutions and rigorous evaluations 
of several approaches that address critical challenges in education. 
When selecting the priorities for a given competition, the Department 
considers several factors including policy priorities, the need for new 
solutions in a particular priority area, the extent of the existing 
evidence supporting effective practices in a particular priority area, 
whether other available funding exists for a particular priority area, 
and the results and lessons learned from funded projects from prior i3 
competitions. This year's competition does not include specific 
priorities for students with disabilities and English learners, as the 
program has successfully funded a range of projects serving these high-
need populations under i3's broader priorities in previous 
competitions. Additionally, all applicants continue to be required to 
serve high-need student populations, and we continue to encourage 
applicants to consider how their

[[Page 24072]]

proposed projects could serve students with disabilities or English 
learners. Applicants are encouraged to design an evaluation that will 
report findings on English learners, students with disabilities, and 
other subgroups.
    We include five absolute priorities in the FY 2016 Development 
competition. We include absolute priorities that are intended to prompt 
new approaches to challenges in education, represent new areas of 
policy focus in which rigorous evidence is scarce, and constitute areas 
that we would like to strengthen within the current portfolio of i3 
grantees. As in the past three competitions, applicants applying under 
the Serving Rural Communities priority (Absolute Priority 5) must also 
address one of the other four absolute priorities established for the 
FY 2016 i3 Development competition. This structure has resulted in a 
strong set of grantees that are addressing the unique challenges in 
rural communities. We also include one competitive preference priority 
as described below.
    First, we include an absolute priority that asks applicants to 
focus their projects on student diversity. In parts of the country, 
America's schools are more segregated than they were in the late 1960s, 
including by students' race and socioeconomic status.\2\ One-quarter of 
our nation's public school students attend high-poverty schools where 
more than 75 percent of the student body is eligible for free and 
reduced-price lunch; in our cities, nearly half of all students attend 
schools where poverty is concentrated.\3\ In addition, almost half of 
all African-American and Latino public school students attend these 
economically segregated schools. Children raised in segregated 
communities have significantly lower social and economic mobility than 
children growing up in integrated communities, and States with 
socioeconomically segregated schools tend to have larger achievement 
gaps between students from low- and higher-income households.\4\ There 
is a growing body of evidence suggesting that socioeconomic diversity 
in schools can lead to improved outcomes for students from low-income 
households (compared to students from low-income households who attend 
higher-poverty schools).\5\ Moreover, research shows that students 
educated in diverse settings have shown a higher level of critical 
thinking and life skills.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Orfield, G., and Frankenberg, E., (May, 2014). Brown at 60: 
Great Progress, a Long Retreat and an Uncertain Future. Civil Rights 
Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, May 2014 (revised version 5-15-
14).
    \3\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), ``Public Elementary/Secondary 
School Universe Survey,'' 2012-13. See Digest of Education 
Statistics 2014. https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubschuniv.asp.
    \4\ Mantil, A., Perkins, A.G., and Aberger, S., (2012). ``The 
Challenge of High-Poverty Schools: How Feasible Is Socioeconomic 
School Integration?'' The Future of School Integration: 155-222.
    \5\ Brown, S. (1999). High School Racial Composition: Balancing 
Excellence and Equity. Paper presented at the American Sociological 
Association, Chicago, IL; Mickelson, R.A. (2001). ``Subverting 
Swann: First and Second-Generation Segregation in Charlotte, North 
Carolina.'' American Educational Research Journal, 38, 215-252; 
Mickelson, R.A. (2006). How Middle School Segregation Contributes to 
the Race Gap in Academic Achievement. Paper presented at AERA 425; 
Tevis, (2007). African-American Students' College Transition 
Trajectory: An Examination of the Effects of High School Composition 
and Expectations on Degree Attainment. Dissertation in Educational 
Theory & Policy. The Pennsylvania State University.
    \6\ Kahlenberg, R. D., and Potter, H. (2012). Diverse Charter 
Schools: Can Racial and Socioeconomic Integration Promote Better 
Outcomes for Students? Washington, DC, and New York: Poverty and 
Race Research Action Council and Century Foundation. Retrieved from 
http://tcf.org/assets/downloads/Diverse_Charter_Schools.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, through the invitational priority, the Department 
invites projects with ambitious strategies that improve outcomes for 
high-need students by increasing racial and socioeconomic diversity in 
classroom or school settings. These projects could leverage approaches 
at the school, district, or regional level that encourage racial or 
socioeconomic diversity within classroom or school environments. 
Proposed strategies may range from new instructional approaches that 
impact socioeconomic integration and student achievement within schools 
(e.g., schools could improve participation of students from low-income 
households in advanced placement or ``honors'' coursework) or through 
redesigning district recruitment and admissions strategies to support 
and foster such diversity in schools. The Department seeks to invest in 
projects that focus concurrently on increasing diversity and school 
quality in areas where schools are acutely impacted by segregation 
while closing gaps in academic performance between socioeconomic and 
racial groups. The Department also encourages all applicants to 
carefully consider their evaluation design as the Department is keenly 
interested in developing a body of evidence on how classrooms, schools, 
and districts can better integrate their student bodies across racial 
and socioeconomic lines and produce outstanding outcomes for all 
students.
    Second, we include an absolute priority for projects designed to 
implement and support the transition to internationally benchmarked, 
college- and career-ready academic content standards and associated 
assessments. Many States have raised the expectations for what schools 
should teach and their students should learn and do across the K-12 
grade span by adopting new, more rigorous standards and assessments 
aligned to the demands of college and careers. Emerging research 
confirms that these exams are aligned to more rigorous standards.\7\ 
Educators are now faced with the important task of effectively 
implementing these higher standards and ensuring their students are 
adequately prepared for the associated assessments, in order to ensure 
that all students are ready for post-secondary opportunities and their 
careers. Furthermore, throughout this continuing transition to higher 
standards and new assessments, schools and school districts need to 
continue to develop evidence-based approaches to increase the rigor of 
teaching and learning across various academic settings. For example, 
efforts are underway in districts across the country to provide 
teachers and school leaders with rich, student-specific information 
based on formative and summative assessments to help educators 
understand why students might be struggling--thereby enabling them to 
better align their subsequent instruction. Through this priority, the 
Department seeks to invest in strategies that leverage data and results 
from internationally benchmarked, college- and career-ready assessments 
to inform instruction and, ultimately, to support and improve student 
achievement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Doorey, N., and Polikoff, M. Evaluating the Content and 
Quality of Next Generation Assessments (2016). Washington, DC: 
Thomas Fordham Institute. Retrieved from http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/%2802.09%20-%20Final%20Published%29%20Evaluating%20the%20Content%20and%20Quality%20of%20Next%20Generation%20Assessments.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, we include an absolute priority to improve school climate. 
Under this priority, the Department seeks to support innovative 
alternatives to exclusionary discipline and other positive 
interventions that can help address the negative and often disparate 
impact of classroom removals by promoting safe schools that have a 
positive culture for all students. When students feel engaged and 
supported in school, their academic performance improves; this type of 
engagement and support is particularly important for students with 
disabilities and students of color (especially African-American male 
students) who suffer

[[Page 24073]]

disproportionately under typical school discipline policies. Research 
has shown that implementing alternative disciplinary policies and 
behavioral supports can support both improved academic and non-academic 
outcomes for students.\8\ The Department expects successful applicants 
to identify and address the root causes of discipline-related 
disparities, and develop and implement alternative practices. To date, 
some schools and school systems have begun to take on these challenges, 
resulting in positive outcomes for school communities \9\ Under this 
priority, the Department is particularly interested in investing in 
projects that demonstrate viable alternatives to removing students from 
classroom activities, while ensuring a positive and inclusive school 
culture for students and educators alike.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Flay, B., Acock, A., Vuchinich, S., and Beets, M. (2006). 
Progress Report of the Randomized Trial of Positive Action in 
Hawaii: End of Third Year of Intervention. Twin Falls, ID: Positive 
Action, Inc.; Flay, B.R., and Allred, C.G. (2003). ``Long-term 
Effects of the Positive Action Program.'' American Journal of 
Healthy Behavior, 27(1), 6-21.
    \9\ Hui, T. Keung, (2015). ``Wake County Presents Plan for 
Equitable Student Discipline.'' The News & Observer, May 11, 2015, 
www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article20709030.html. 
Fabelo, T., Thompson, M.D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, 
M.P. III, and Booth E.A. (2011). Breaking schools' rules: A 
statewide study of how school discipline relates to students' 
success and juvenile justice involvement. New York, NY; College 
Station, TX: Council of State Governments Justice Center; Public 
Policy Research Institute of Texas A&M University. http://justicecenter.csg.org/files/Breaking_Schools_Rules_Report_Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, we include an absolute priority on influencing the 
development of non-cognitive factors. Non-cognitive factors may 
encompass many skills and behaviors, including but not limited to 
academic behaviors, academic mindset, perseverance, self-regulation, 
social and emotional skills, and approaches toward learning 
strategies.\10\ A promising body of research suggests that non-
cognitive factors play an important role in students' academic, career, 
and life outcomes.\11\ Notably, some initial interventions focused on 
enhancing these skills and behaviors are seemingly scalable and lower-
cost as compared to more conventional education interventions--and have 
a positive impact on students most in need.\12\ As interest in this 
area grows, we think it is important to identify solutions and build 
evidence to determine effective ways to help students develop such 
skills and behaviors (e.g., interventions that directly target 
students, support changes in educators' instructional practices, or 
redesign learning environments), as well as how to measure such skills 
and behaviors in valid and reliable ways, and to demonstrate how 
improvement in such skills and behaviors affects overall student 
outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The University of Chicago Consortium of Chicago School 
Research (June 2015). Foundations for Young Adult Success: A 
Developmental Framework. Retrieved from https://consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Wallace%20Report.pdf.
    \11\ The University of Chicago Consortium of Chicago School 
Research (June 2012). Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The 
Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Performance. 
Available at: https://ccsr.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Noncognitive%20Report.pdf.
    \12\ Walton, G.M., and Cohen, G.L. (2011). ``A Brief Social-
Belonging Intervention Improves Academic and Health Outcomes of 
Minority Students.'' Science, 331 (6023): 1447-1451; and Cohen, 
G.L., Garcia, J., Purdie-Vaugns, V., Apfel, N., and Brzustoski, P. 
(2009). ``Recursive Processes in Self-affirmation: Intervening to 
Close the Minority Achievement Gap.'' Science, 324, 400-403.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fifth, we include an absolute priority that focuses on serving 
rural communities. Students living in rural communities face unique 
challenges. Applicants applying under this priority must also address 
one of the other four absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 
i3 Development competition, while serving students enrolled in rural 
LEAs (as defined in this notice).
    We also include one competitive preference priority in the FY 2016 
Development competition. To expand the reach of the i3 program and 
encourage entities that have not previously received an i3 grant to 
apply, the Department includes a competitive preference priority for 
novice i3 applicants. A novice i3 applicant is an applicant that has 
never received a grant under the i3 program. An applicant must identify 
whether it is a novice applicant when completing the applicant 
information sheet. Instructions on how to complete the applicant 
information sheet are included in the application package.
    In summary, applications must address one of the first four 
absolute priorities for this competition and propose projects designed 
to implement practices that serve students who are in grades K-12 at 
some point during the funding period. If an applicant chooses to also 
address the absolute priority regarding students in rural LEAs, that 
applicant must also address one of the other four absolute priorities 
established for the FY 2016 i3 Development competition, while serving 
students enrolled in rural LEAs (as defined in this notice). Applicants 
must be able to demonstrate that the proposed process, product, 
strategy, or practice included in their applications is supported by 
either evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong 
theory (as defined in this notice). Applicants should carefully review 
all of the application requirements and the requirements in the 
Eligibility Information section of this notice for instructions on how 
to demonstrate the proposed project is supported by evidence of promise 
(as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in this 
notice) and for information on the other eligibility and program 
requirements.
    To meet the eligibility requirement regarding the applicant's 
record of improvement, an applicant must provide, in its application, 
sufficient supporting data or other information to allow the Department 
to determine whether the applicant has met the eligibility 
requirements. Note that, to address the statutory eligibility 
requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b) of the statutory 
eligibility requirements (provided in the Eligibility Information 
section), applicants must provide data that demonstrate a change due to 
the work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In other words, 
applicants must provide data for at least two definitive points in time 
when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their applications. 
Additional information for this requirement can be found under the 
Eligibility Information section of this notice.
    The i3 program includes a statutory requirement for a private-
sector match for all i3 grantees. For Development grants, an applicant 
must obtain matching funds or in-kind donations from the private sector 
equal to at least 15 percent of its grant award. Each highest-rated 
applicant, as identified by the Department following peer review of the 
applications, must submit evidence of at least 50 percent of the 
required private-sector match prior to the awarding of an i3 grant. An 
applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 percent of the 
required private-sector match no later than three months after the 
project start date (i.e., for the FY 2016 competition, three months 
after January 1, 2017, or by April 1, 2017). The grant will be 
terminated if the grantee does not secure its private-sector match by 
the established deadline. This notice also includes selection criteria 
for the FY 2016 Development competition that are designed to ensure 
that the applications that peer reviewers recommend for funding have 
the best potential to generate substantial improvements in student 
achievement (and other key outcomes), and include well-articulated 
plans for the implementation and evaluation of the

[[Page 24074]]

proposed projects. Applicants should review the selection criteria and 
submission instructions carefully to ensure their applications address 
this year's criteria.
    An entity that submits a full application for a Development grant 
should include the following information in its application: An 
estimate of the number of students to be served by the project; 
evidence of the applicant's ability to implement and appropriately 
evaluate the proposed project; and information about its capacity 
(e.g., management capacity, financial resources, qualified personnel) 
to implement the project at the proposed level of scale. We recognize 
that LEAs are not typically responsible for taking their processes, 
products, strategies, or practices to scale; however, all applicants 
can and should develop plans to potentially take them to scale, as well 
as partner with others to disseminate their effective processes, 
products, strategies, and practices.
    The Department will screen applications that are submitted for 
Development grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice 
and determine which applications meet eligibility and other 
requirements. Peer reviewers will review all applications for 
Development grants that are submitted by the established deadline.
    Applicants should note, however, that we may screen for eligibility 
at multiple points during the competition process, including before and 
after peer review; and applicants that are determined to be ineligible 
will not receive a grant award regardless of peer reviewer scores or 
comments. If we determine that a Development grant application is not 
supported by evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) or a 
strong theory (as defined in this notice), or that the applicant does 
not demonstrate the required prior record of improvement, or does not 
meet any other i3 requirement, the application will not be considered 
for funding.
    Please note that on December 10, 2015, the Every Student Succeeds 
Act (ESSA), which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965, was signed into law. ESSA establishes the Education 
Innovation and Research Program (EIR), a new program that builds on the 
work led by the i3 program and its grantees. Accordingly, this FY 2016 
i3 competition will be the final i3 competition under current statute 
and regulations. Pending congressional appropriations, the Department 
will launch the first EIR competition in FY 2017.
    Priorities: This competition includes five absolute priorities, one 
competitive preference priority, and one invitational priority. 
Absolute Priorities 1, 2, 3, and 4 are from the Department's notice of 
final supplemental priorities and definitions for Discretionary 
Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 
73425) (Supplemental Priorities). Absolute Priority 5 and the 
competitive preference priority are from the notice of final 
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this 
program, published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2013 (78 FR 
18681) (the ``2013 i3 NFP'').
    Absolute Priorities: For FY 2016 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 one of these 
priorities.
    Under the Development grant competition, each of the five absolute 
priorities constitutes its own funding category. The Secretary intends 
to award grants under each absolute priority for which applications of 
sufficient quality are submitted.
    Applicants must address one of the first five absolute priorities 
in their pre-applications and full applications. An applicant that 
addresses Absolute Priority 5, Serving Rural Communities, must also 
address one of the first four absolute priorities. Because applications 
will be rank ordered by absolute priority, applicants must clearly 
identify the specific absolute priority that the proposed project 
addresses. Applications submitted under Absolute Priority 5 will be 
ranked with other applications under Absolute Priority 5, and not 
included in the ranking for the additional priority that the applicant 
identified. This design helps us ensure that applications under 
Absolute Priority 5 receive an ``apples to apples'' comparison with 
other applicants addressing the Serving Rural Communities priority.
    These priorities are:
    Absolute Priority 1--Promoting Diversity.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to prepare students for success in an increasingly diverse 
workforce and society by increasing the diversity, including racial, 
ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity, of students enrolled in individual 
schools or postsecondary programs; or, in the case of preschool, 
elementary, or secondary programs, decreasing the racial, ethnic, or 
socioeconomic isolation of students who are served by the project.
    Within this absolute priority, we are particularly interested in 
applications that address the following invitational priority.
    Invitational Priority: Under 34 CFR.105(c)(1) we do not give an 
application that meets this invitational priority a competitive or 
absolute preference over other applications.
    This priority is:
    Designing and implementing intra-district, inter-district, 
community, or regional programs that improve student outcomes by 
increasing socioeconomic diversity. Such programs may include one or 
more of the following:
     Giving students increased choices in selecting a high-
quality public school (e.g., centralized enrollment application process 
that utilizes weighted lotteries for students from low-income 
households, students from low-performing schools, or students residing 
in neighborhoods experiencing concentrated poverty), and providing 
ongoing support to ensure their academic success in such schools.
     Policies designed to attract and enroll substantial 
proportions of students from low-income households in schools that have 
relatively fewer students from low-income households in those schools, 
enrolling such students, and providing school-level support to promote 
equitable academic success within such schools.
     Establishing magnet schools, theme-based schools, or other 
schools of choice (e.g., charter schools) that attract students who 
will reduce, eliminate, or prevent socioeconomic segregation of 
students from low-income households.
     Providing targeted academic and socio-emotional 
interventions to retain economically disadvantaged children within 
schools, and to support their academic success.
     Restructuring programs for high-achieving students such as 
honors programs, gifted and talented programs, or Advanced Placement or 
International Baccalaureate courses, so that they include students from 
low-income households and support their academic success.
    Please note that evaluations of these programs should pay special 
attention to creating measurable outcomes for high-need students.
    Absolute Priority 2--Implementing Internationally Benchmarked 
College- and Career-Ready Standards and Assessments.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to support the implementation of, and transition to, 
internationally

[[Page 24075]]

benchmarked college- and career-ready standards and assessments, 
including developing and implementing strategies that use the standards 
and information from assessments to inform classroom practices that 
meet the needs of all students.
    Absolute Priority 3--Improving School Climate, Behavioral Supports, 
and Correctional Education.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to improve student outcomes through reducing or eliminating 
disparities in school disciplinary practices for particular groups of 
students, including minority students and students with disabilities, 
or reducing or eliminating the use of exclusionary discipline (such as 
suspensions, expulsions, and unnecessary placements in alternative 
education programs) by identifying and addressing the root causes of 
those disparities or uses and promoting alternative disciplinary 
practices that address the disparities or uses.
    Absolute Priority 4--Influencing the Development of Non-Cognitive 
Factors.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to improve students' mastery of non-cognitive skills and 
behaviors (such as academic behaviors, academic mindset, perseverance, 
self-regulation, social and emotional skills, and approaches toward 
learning strategies) and enhance student motivation and engagement in 
learning.
    Absolute Priority 5--Serving Rural Communities.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address 
one of the absolute priorities established for the 2016 Development i3 
competition and under which the majority of students to be served are 
enrolled in rural local educational agencies (as defined in this 
notice).
    Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2016 and any subsequent 
year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications 
from this competition, this priority is a competitive preference 
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional three 
points to an application that meets the competitive preference 
priority.
    The priority is:
    Competitive Preference Priority--Supporting Novice i3 Applicants (0 
or 3 points).
    Eligible applicants that have never directly received a grant under 
this program.
    Definitions: The definitions of ``evidence of promise,'' ``logic 
model,'' ``national level,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' 
``randomized controlled trial,'' ``regional level,'' ``relevant 
outcome,'' ``strong theory,'' and ``What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) 
Evidence Standards'' are from 34 CFR 77.1. All other definitions are 
from the 2013 i3 NFP. We may apply these definitions in any year in 
which this program is in effect.
    Consortium of schools means two or more public elementary or 
secondary schools acting collaboratively for the purpose of applying 
for and implementing an i3 grant jointly with an eligible nonprofit 
organization.
    Evidence of promise means there is empirical evidence to support 
the theoretical linkage(s) between at least one critical component and 
at least one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the 
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. Specifically, 
evidence of promise means the conditions in both paragraphs (i) and 
(ii) of this definition are met:
    (i) There is at least one study that is a--
    (A) Correlational study with statistical controls for selection 
bias;
    (B) Quasi-experimental design study that meets the What Works 
Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations; or
    (C) Randomized controlled trial that meets the What Works 
Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with or without reservations.
    (ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) of this definition found 
a statistically significant or substantively important (defined as a 
difference of 0.25 standard deviations or larger) favorable association 
between at least one critical component and one relevant outcome 
presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, 
strategy, or practice.
    High-minority school is defined by a school's LEA in a manner 
consistent with the corresponding State's Teacher Equity Plan, as 
required by section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The applicant must provide, 
in its i3 application, the definition(s) used.
    High-need student means a student at risk of educational failure or 
otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as students 
who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools (as defined 
in this notice), who are far below grade level, who have left school 
before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at risk of not 
graduating with a diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster 
care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are 
English learners.
    High school graduation rate means a four-year adjusted cohort 
graduation rate consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and may also 
include an extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate consistent 
with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if the State in which the proposed project 
is implemented has been approved by the Secretary to use such a rate 
under Title I of the ESEA.
    Independent evaluation means that the evaluation is designed and 
carried out independent of, but in coordination with, any employees of 
the entities who develop a process, product, strategy, or practice and 
are implementing it.
    Innovation means a process, product, strategy, or practice that 
improves (or is expected to improve) significantly upon the outcomes 
reached with status quo options and that can ultimately reach 
widespread effective usage.
    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.
    National level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a 
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to be effective in 
a wide variety of communities, including rural and urban areas, as well 
as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and 
ethnic groups, migrant populations, individuals with disabilities, 
English learners, and individuals of each gender).
    Nonprofit organization means an entity that meets the definition of 
``nonprofit'' under 34 CFR 77.1(c), or an institution of higher 
education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 
1965, as amended.
    Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that 
attempts to approximate an experimental design by identifying a 
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important 
respects. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can 
meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations (but 
not What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations).
    Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random 
assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or 
districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment 
group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The 
estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between

[[Page 24076]]

the average outcomes for the treatment group and for the control group. 
These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What 
Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations.
    Regional level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a 
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to serve a variety 
of communities within a State or multiple States, including rural and 
urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically 
disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations, 
individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of 
each gender). For an LEA-based project to be considered a regional-
level project, a process, product, strategy, or practice must serve 
students in more than one LEA, unless the process, product, strategy, 
or practice is implemented in a State in which the State educational 
agency is the sole educational agency for all schools.
    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.
    Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency 
(LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) 
program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized 
under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine 
whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to 
information on the Department's Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html.
    Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product, 
strategy, or practice that includes a logic model (as defined in this 
notice).
    Student achievement means--
    (a) For grades and subjects in which assessments are required under 
ESEA section 1111(b)(3): (1) A student's score on such assessments and 
may include (2) other measures of student learning, such as those 
described in paragraph (b), provided they are rigorous and comparable 
across schools within an LEA.
    (b) For grades and subjects in which assessments are not required 
under ESEA section 1111(b)(3): Alternative measures of student learning 
and performance such as student results on pre-tests, end-of-course 
tests, and objective performance-based assessments; student learning 
objectives; student performance on English language proficiency 
assessments; and other measures of student achievement that are 
rigorous and comparable across schools within an LEA.
    Student growth means the change in student achievement (as defined 
in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in 
time. An applicant may also include other measures that are rigorous 
and comparable across classrooms.
    What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set 
forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook 
(Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link: 
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19.
    Program Authority: ARRA, Division A, Section 14007, Public Law 111-
5.
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 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. (c) The Uniform 
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements 
for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as 
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The 2013 i3 NFP. 
(e) The Supplemental Priorities.

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


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

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreements or discretionary grants.
    Estimated Available Funds: $103,100,000.
    These estimated available funds are the total available for all 
three types of grants under the i3 program (Development, Validation, 
and Scale-up grants). Contingent upon the availability of funds and the 
quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 or 
later years from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition.
    Estimated Range of Awards:
    Development grants: Up to $3,000,000.
    Validation grants: Up to $12,000,000.
    Scale-up grants: Up to $20,000,000.

    Note: The upper limit of the range of awards (e.g., $3,000,000 
for Development grants) is referred to as the ``maximum amount of 
awards'' under Other in section III of this notice.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards:
    Development grants: $3,000,000.
    Validation grants: $11,500,000.
    Scale-up grants: $19,000,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards:
    Development grants: 9-11 awards.
    Validation grants: 2-3 awards.
    Scale-up grants: 0-2 awards.

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

    Project Period: 36-60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Innovations that Improve Achievement for High-Need Students: All 
grantees must implement practices that are designed to improve student 
achievement (as defined in this notice) or student growth (as defined 
in this notice), close achievement gaps, decrease dropout rates, 
increase high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice), or 
increase college enrollment and completion rates for high-need students 
(as defined in this notice).
    2. Innovations that Serve Kindergarten-through-Grade-12 (K-12) 
Students: All grantees must implement practices that serve students who 
are in grades K-12 at some point during the funding period. To meet 
this requirement, projects that serve early learners (i.e., infants, 
toddlers, or preschoolers) must provide services or supports that 
extend into kindergarten or later years, and projects that serve 
postsecondary students must provide services or supports during the 
secondary grades or earlier.
    3. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for i3 grants 
include either of the following:
    (a) An LEA.
    (b) A partnership between a nonprofit organization and--
    (1) One or more LEAs; or
    (2) A consortium of schools.
    Statutory Eligibility Requirements: Except as specifically set 
forth in the Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that 
Includes a Nonprofit Organization that follows, to be eligible for an 
award, an eligible applicant must--
    (a)(1) Have significantly closed the achievement gaps between 
groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA 
(economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and 
ethnic groups, students with limited English proficiency, students with 
disabilities); or
    (2) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student

[[Page 24077]]

academic achievement for all groups of students described in that 
section;
    (b) Have made significant improvements in other areas, such as high 
school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) or increased 
recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and principals, as 
demonstrated with meaningful data;
    (c) Demonstrate that it has established one or more partnerships 
with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, 
and that organizations in the private sector will provide matching 
funds in order to help bring results to scale; and
    (d) In the case of an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit 
organization, provide in the application the names of the LEAs with 
which the nonprofit organization will partner, or the names of the 
schools in the consortium with which it will partner. If an eligible 
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization intends to partner 
with additional LEAs or schools that are not named in the application, 
it must describe in the application the demographic and other 
characteristics of these LEAs and schools and the process it will use 
to select them.

    Note:  An entity submitting an application should provide, in 
Appendix C, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its application, 
information addressing the eligibility requirements described in 
this section. An applicant must provide, in its application, 
sufficient supporting data or other information to allow the 
Department to determine whether the applicant has met the 
eligibility requirements. Note that, to address the statutory 
eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b), 
applicants must provide data that demonstrate a change due to the 
work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In other words, 
applicants must provide data for at least two definitive points in 
time when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their 
applications. For further guidance, please refer to the definition 
of ``student achievement'' in this notice; and the question and 
answer Webinar for FY 2016 i3 Development Full Applications for 
further guidance. Additionally, information on the statutory 
eligibility requirements can be found on the i3 Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. 
If the Department determines that an applicant provided insufficient 
information in its application, the applicant will not have an 
opportunity to provide additional information.


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


    Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a 
Nonprofit Organization: The authorizing statute specifies that an 
eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization meets the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the eligibility 
requirements for this program if the nonprofit organization has a 
record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, 
or retention. For an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit 
organization, the nonprofit organization must demonstrate that it 
has a record of significantly improving student achievement, 
attainment, or retention through its record of work with an LEA or 
schools. Therefore, an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit 
organization does not necessarily need to include as a partner for 
its i3 grant an LEA or a consortium of schools that meets the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the eligibility 
requirements in this notice.

    In addition, the authorizing statute specifies that an eligible 
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization meets the requirements 
of paragraph (c) of the eligibility requirements in this notice if the 
eligible applicant demonstrates that it will meet the requirement for 
private-sector matching.
    4. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an 
applicant must demonstrate that one or more private-sector 
organizations, which may include philanthropic organizations, will 
provide matching funds in order to help bring project results to scale. 
An eligible Development applicant must obtain matching funds, or in-
kind donations, equal to at least 15 percent of its Federal grant 
award. The highest-rated eligible applicants must submit evidence of 50 
percent of the required private-sector matching funds following the 
peer review of applications. A Federal i3 award will not be made unless 
the applicant provides adequate evidence that the 50 percent of the 
required private-sector match has been committed or the Secretary 
approves the eligible applicant's request to reduce the matching-level 
requirement. An applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 
percent of required private-sector match three months after the project 
start date.
    The Secretary may consider decreasing the matching requirement on a 
case-by-case basis, and only in the most exceptional circumstances. An 
eligible applicant that anticipates being unable to meet the full 
amount of the private-sector matching requirement must include in its 
application a request that the Secretary reduce the matching-level 
requirement, along with a statement of the basis for the request.

    Note: An applicant that does not provide a request for a 
reduction of the matching-level requirement in its full application 
may not submit that request at a later time.

    5. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for 
the i3 program. These requirements are from the 2013 i3 NFP. We may 
apply these requirements in any year in which the program is in effect.
     Evidence Standards: To be eligible for an award, an 
application for a Development grant must be supported by evidence of 
promise (as defined in this notice) or a strong theory (as defined in 
this notice).
    Applicants must identify in Appendix D and the Applicant 
Information Sheet if their evidence is supported by evidence of promise 
or a strong theory.

    Note: In Appendix D, under the ``Other Attachments Form,'' an 
entity that submits a full application should provide information 
addressing one of the required evidence standards for Development 
grants. This information should include a description of the 
intervention(s) the applicant plans to implement and the intended 
student outcomes that the intervention(s) attempts to impact.

    Applicants must identify in Appendix D and the Applicant 
Information Sheet if their evidence is supported by evidence of promise 
or a strong theory. An applicant submitting its Development grant 
application under the evidence of promise standard should identify up 
to two study citations to be reviewed for the purposes of meeting the 
i3 evidence standard requirement and include those citations in 
Appendix D. In addition, the applicant should specify the intervention 
that they plan to implement, the findings within the citations that the 
applicant is requesting be considered as evidence of promise, including 
page number(s) of specific tables if applicable. The Department will 
not consider a study citation that an applicant fails to clearly 
identify for review.
    An applicant must either ensure that all evidence is available to 
the Department from publicly available sources and provide links or 
other guidance indicating where it is available; or, in the full 
application, include copies of evidence in Appendix D. If the 
Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient 
information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide 
additional information at a later time. However, for applicants 
applying under evidence of promise, if the WWC determines that a study 
does not provide enough information on key aspects of the study design, 
such as sample attrition or equivalence of intervention and comparison 
groups, the WWC will submit a query to the study author(s) to gather 
information for use in determining a study rating. Authors are asked to 
respond to queries within ten business days. Should the author query

[[Page 24078]]

remain incomplete within 14 days of the initial contact to the study 
author(s), the study will be deemed ineligible under the grant 
competition. After the grant competition closes, the WWC will continue 
to include responses to author queries and will make updates to study 
reviews as necessary. However, the competition can only take into 
account information that is available at the time the competition is 
open.

    Note: The evidence standards apply to the prior research that 
supports the effectiveness of the proposed project. The i3 program 
does not restrict the source of prior research providing evidence 
for the proposed project. As such, an applicant could cite prior 
research in Appendix D for studies that were conducted by another 
entity (i.e., an entity that is not the applicant) so long as the 
prior research studies cited in the application are relevant to the 
effectiveness of the proposed project. If an applicant applies under 
the evidence of promise standard but does not meet it, their 
application will not be reviewed under the strong theory standard.

     Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered for an 
award only for the type of i3 grant (i.e., Development, Validation, and 
Scale-up grants) for which it applies. An applicant may not submit an 
application for the same proposed project under more than one type of 
grant.
     Limit on Grant Awards: (a) No grantee may receive more 
than two new grant awards of any type under the i3 program in a single 
year; (b) in any two-year period, no grantee may receive more than one 
new Scale-up or Validation grant; and (c) no grantee may receive in a 
single year new i3 grant awards that total an amount greater than the 
sum of the maximum amount of funds for a Scale-up grant and the maximum 
amount of funds for a Development grant for that year. For example, in 
a year when the maximum award value for a Scale-up grant is $20 million 
and the maximum award value for a Development grant is $3 million, no 
grantee may receive in a single year new grants totaling more than $23 
million.
     Subgrants: In the case of an eligible applicant that is a 
partnership between a nonprofit organization and (1) one or more LEAs 
or (2) a consortium of schools, the partner serving as the applicant 
and, if funded, as the grantee, may make subgrants to one or more 
entities in the partnership.
     Evaluation: The grantee must conduct an independent 
evaluation (as defined in this notice) of its project. This evaluation 
must estimate the impact of the i3-supported practice (as implemented 
at the proposed level of scale) on a relevant outcome (as defined in 
this notice). The grantee must make broadly available digitally and 
free of charge, through formal (e.g., peer-reviewed journals) or 
informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, the results of any evaluations 
it conducts of its funded activities.
    In addition, the grantee and its independent evaluator must agree 
to cooperate with any technical assistance provided by the Department 
or its contractor and comply with the requirements of any evaluation of 
the program conducted by the Department. This includes providing to the 
Department, within 100 days of a grant award, an updated comprehensive 
evaluation plan in a format and using such tools as the Department may 
require. Grantees must update this evaluation plan at least annually to 
reflect any changes to the evaluation. All of these updates must be 
consistent with the scope and objectives of the approved application.
     Communities of Practice: Grantees must participate in, 
organize, or facilitate, as appropriate, communities of practice for 
the i3 program. A community of practice is a group of grantees that 
agrees to interact regularly to solve a persistent problem or improve 
practice in an area that is important to them.
     Management Plan: Within 100 days of a grant award, the 
grantee must provide an updated comprehensive management plan for the 
approved project in a format and using such tools as the Department may 
require. This management plan must include detailed information about 
implementation of the first year of the grant, including key 
milestones, staffing details, and other information that the Department 
may require. It must also include a complete list of performance 
metrics, including baseline measures and annual targets. The grantee 
must update this management plan at least annually to reflect 
implementation of subsequent years of the project.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an 
application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications 
Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following 
address: http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call: ED 
Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 
22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.
    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at 
its email address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
    If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to 
identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.411P (for pre-
applications) or 84.411C (for full applications).
    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 person or team listed under 
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
    2. a. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements 
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you 
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 
2016.
    We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing 
grant applications if we know the approximate number of applicants that 
intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the 
Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify us of 
the applicant's intent to submit a pre-application by completing a Web-
based form. When completing this form, applicants will provide (1) the 
applicant organization's name and address and (2) the absolute priority 
the applicant intends to address. Applicants may access this form 
online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Q97PKP8. Applicants that do 
not complete this form may still submit a pre-application.
    Page Limit: For the pre-application, the project narrative is where 
you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use 
to evaluate your pre-application. For the full application, the project 
narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, 
address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your full 
application.
    Pre-Application page limit: Applicants should limit the pre-
application narrative to no more than seven pages. Aside from the 
required forms, applicants should not include appendices in their pre-
applications.
    Full-Application page limit: Applicants submitting a full 
application should limit the application narrative for a Development 
grant application to no more than 25 pages. Applicants are also 
strongly encouraged not to include lengthy appendices for the full

[[Page 24079]]

application that contain information that they were unable to include 
in the narrative.
    Applicants for both pre- and full applications should use the 
following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.
     Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller 
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
     Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, 
Courier New, or Arial.
    The page limit for the full application does not apply to Part I, 
the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative 
budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or 
the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of 
support for the full application. However, the page limit does apply to 
all of the application narrative section of the full application.
    b. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of 
projects that may be proposed in applications for the i3 program, your 
application may include business information that you consider 
proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define ``business information'' and 
describe the process we use in determining whether any of that 
information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under 
Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as 
amended).
    Consistent with the process followed in the prior i3 competitions, 
we plan on posting the project narrative section of funded i3 
applications on the Department's Web site. Accordingly, you may wish to 
request confidentiality of business information. Identifying 
proprietary information in the submitted application will help 
facilitate this public disclosure process.
    Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your 
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure 
under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your 
application, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' please list the page 
number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional 
information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
    3. Submission Dates and Times:
    Pre-Applications Available: April 27, 2016.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Pre-Application: May 10, 
2016.
    Informational Meetings: The i3 program intends to hold Webinars 
designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants for 
all three types of grants. Detailed information regarding these 
meetings will be provided on the i3 Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Pre-Applications: May 25, 2016.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Full Applications: The Department will 
announce on its Web site the deadline date for transmission of full 
applications for Development grants. Under the pre-application process, 
peer reviewers will read and score the shorter pre-application against 
an abbreviated set of selection criteria, and entities that submit 
highly rated pre-applications will be invited to submit full 
applications for a Development grant. Other pre-applicants may choose 
to submit a full application.
    Pre- and full applications for Development 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 Other Submission Requirements 
in section IV 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 of Full Applications: October 
17, 2016.
    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 
competition.
    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference 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), 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 at the 
following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number 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 you enter into the SAM database. 
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, it may be 24 to 48 
hours before you can access the information in, and 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

[[Page 24080]]

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: http://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 for the 
i3 program must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an 
exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in 
this section.
    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
    Applications (both pre- and full applications) for Development 
grants under the i3 program, CFDA number 84.411P (pre-applications) and 
CFDA number 84.411C (full applications), 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 the i3 program 
at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application 
package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the 
CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.411, not 
84.411P or 84.411C).
    Please note the following:
     When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find 
information about submitting an application electronically through the 
site, as well as the hours of operation.
     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. In addition, for specific guidance and 
procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please 
refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.
     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 read-only, non-modifiable 
Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or 
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, 
non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a 
password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note 
that this could result in your application not being considered for 
funding because the material in question--for example, the project 
narrative--is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For 
that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload 
all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material 
from other formats to PDF.
     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. Grants.gov 
will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all 
the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors 
(such as submission of your application by someone other than a 
registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an 
attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will 
be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you 
must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.
    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the 
Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you 
an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.
    These emails do not mean that your application is without any 
disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully 
validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application 
requirements as specified in this notice and in the application 
instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure 
to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to 
submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant 
eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your 
submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.
     We may request that you provide us original signatures on 
forms at a later date.

[[Page 24081]]

    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues 
with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting 
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov 
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a 
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your 
application on the application deadline date because of technical 
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension 
until 4:30:00 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 the 
problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will 
contact you after we determine 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: Kelly Terpak, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W312, 
Washington, DC 20202. FAX: (202) 401-4123.
    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 84.411P or 84.411C), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260,
    Note: Entities submitting pre-applications for Development grants 
will use CFDA number 84.411P, and entities submitting full applications 
for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411C.
    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.
    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.
    We will not consider applications postmarked after the application 
deadline date.
    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 84.411P or 84.411C), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, 
Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
    Note: Entities submitting pre-applications for Development grants 
will use CFDA number 84.411P, and entities submitting full applications 
for Development grants will use CFDA number 84.411C.
    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: This competition has separate selection 
criteria for pre-applications and full applications. The selection 
criteria for the Development competition are from the 2013 i3 NFP and 
34 CFR 75.210, and are listed below.
    The points assigned to each criterion are indicated in the 
parentheses next to the criterion. An applicant may earn up to a total 
of 20 points based on the selection criteria for the pre-application. 
An applicant may earn up to a total of 100 points based on the 
selection criteria for the full application.

[[Page 24082]]

    Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Pre-Application:
    A. Significance (up to 10 points).
    In determining the significance of the project, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the proposed project involves the 
development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, 
or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (34 CFR 75.210)
    B. Quality of Project Design (up to 10 points).
    In determining the quality of the proposed project design, the 
Secretary considers the extent to which the goals, objectives, and 
outcomes to be achieved by the project are clearly specified and 
measured. (34 CFR 75.210)
    Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Full Application:
    A. Significance (up to 35 points).
    In determining the significance of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (1) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the 
proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The extent to which the proposed project involves the 
development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, 
or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project addresses the absolute 
priority the applicant is seeking to meet. (2013 i3 NFP)
    B. Quality of the Project Design and Management Plan (up to 45 
points).
    In determining the quality of the proposed project design, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the project are clearly specified and measurable. (34 CFR 
75.210)
    (2) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (3) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous 
improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (4) The mechanisms the applicant will use to broadly disseminate 
information on its project so as to support further development or 
replication. (34 CFR 75.210)
    C. Quality of Project Evaluation (up to 20 points).
    In determining the quality of the project evaluation to be 
conducted, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The clarity and importance of the key questions to be addressed 
by the project evaluation, and the appropriateness of the methods for 
how each question will be addressed. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well-
implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness that 
would meet the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with 
reservations. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes 
sufficient resources to carry out the project evaluation effectively. 
(2013 i3 NFP)
    Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical 
assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and Standards 
Handbook: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid =1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: 
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/. In addition, applicants may view 
two optional Webinar recordings that were hosted by the Institute of 
Education Sciences. The first Webinar discussed strategies for 
designing and executing well-designed quasi-experimental design studies 
and is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=23. 
The second Webinar focused on more rigorous evaluation designs and 
discussed strategies for designing and executing studies that meet WWC 
evidence standards without reservations. This Webinar is available at: 
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=18.
    2. Review and Selection Process: To receive an i3 Development 
grant, an entity must submit a pre-application. The pre-application 
will be reviewed and scored by peer reviewers using the two selection 
criteria established in this notice. We will inform the entities that 
submitted pre-applications of the results of the peer review process. 
Entities with highly rated pre-applications will be invited to submit 
full applications. Other pre-applicants may choose to submit a full 
application. Scores received on pre-applications will not carry over to 
the review of the full application.
    Before making awards, we will screen applications submitted in 
accordance with the requirements in this notice to determine which 
applications have met eligibility and other statutory requirements. 
This screening process may occur at various stages of the pre-
application and full application processes; applicants that are 
determined ineligible will not receive a grant, regardless of peer 
reviewer scores or comments.
    For the pre- and full application review processes, we will use 
independent peer reviewers with varied backgrounds and professions 
including pre-kindergarten through grade 12 teachers and principals, 
college and university educators, researchers and evaluators, social 
entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grant makers and managers, and 
others with education expertise. All reviewers will be thoroughly 
screened for conflicts of interest to ensure a fair and competitive 
review process.
    Peer reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation of, and 
score the assigned pre-applications and full applications, using the 
respective selection criteria provided in this notice. For Development 
grant pre-applications, peer reviewers will review and score the 
applications based on the two selection criteria for pre-applications 
listed in the Selection Criteria for the Development Grant Pre-
Application section of this notice. For full applications submitted for 
Development grants, peer reviewers will review and score the 
applications based on the three selection criteria for full 
applications listed in the Selection Criteria for the Development Grant 
Full Application section of this notice. If an eligible applicant 
addresses the competitive preference priority (Supporting Novice i3 
Applicants), the Department will review its list of previous i3 
grantees in scoring this competitive preference priority.
    We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in 
any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 
34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying 
out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement 
of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The 
Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a 
timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable 
quality.
    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary 
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. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 
200.205, before awarding grants under this program the Department 
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants.

[[Page 24083]]

Under 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 multiyear 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.
    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee 
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In 
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
    4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the i3 program is 
to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative 
practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on improving student 
achievement or student growth for high-need students. We have 
established several performance measures for the i3 Development grants.
    Short-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees 
whose projects are being implemented with fidelity to the approved 
design; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies 
supported by a Development grant with ongoing evaluations that provide 
evidence of their promise for improving student outcomes; (3) the 
percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a 
Development grant with ongoing evaluations that are providing high-
quality implementation data and performance feedback that allow for 
periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes; and 
(4) the cost per student actually served by the grant.
    Long-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of programs, 
practices, or strategies supported by a Development grant with a 
completed evaluation that provides evidence of their promise for 
improving student outcomes; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, 
or strategies supported by a Development grant with a completed 
evaluation that provides information about the key elements and 
approach of the project so as to facilitate further development, 
replication, or testing in other settings; and (3) the cost per student 
for programs, practices, or strategies that were proven promising at 
improving educational outcomes for students.
    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award 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 award, the Secretary also considers 
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in 
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil 
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities 
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

VII. Agency Contact

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4CW312, Washington, DC 20202. 
Telephone: (202) 453-7122. FAX: (202) 401-4123 or by email: i3@ed.gov.
    If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service, 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 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: April 19, 2016.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2016-09436 Filed 4-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4000-01-P