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: https://
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 https://
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: https://
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 https://
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 https://
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 https://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 https://
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 https://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 https://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. https://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 https://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: https://
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 https://
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: https://
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 https://
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: https://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: https://
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:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/
idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid
=1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical
Methods papers: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
tech_methods/. 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: https://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: https://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 https://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 https://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
https://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 https://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. https://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 https://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:
https://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 https://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: https://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 https://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: https://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: https://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: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid =1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/. 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: https://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:
https://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