Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund-Scale-Up Grants, 30267-30279 [2016-11531]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD
Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center
Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09,
Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.
Dated: May 11, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016–11467 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards;
Investing in Innovation Fund—ScaleUp Grants
Office of Innovation and
Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Overview Information:
Investing in Innovation Fund—Scaleup Grants.
Notice inviting applications for new
awards for fiscal year (FY) 2016.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411A
(Scale-up Grants).
Dates:
Applications Available: May 18, 2016.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply:
June 6, 2016.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: July 15, 2016.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: September 13, 2016.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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.
This notice invites applications for
Scale-up grants only. The notice
inviting applications for Validation
grants is published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register. The notice
inviting applications for Development
grants was published in the Federal
Register on April 25, 2016 (81 FR
24070) and is available at https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/F-2016-04-25/
pdf/2016-09436.pdf.
Scale-up grants provide funding to
support expansion of projects supported
by strong evidence of effectiveness (as
defined in this notice) to the national
level (as defined in this notice). In
addition, as Scale-up projects seek to
improve outcomes for students in highneed schools, they also generate
important information about an
intervention’s effectiveness and the
contexts for which a practice is most
effective. We expect that Scale-up grants
will increase practitioners’ and
policymakers’ understanding of the
implementation of proven practices and
help identify effective approaches to
expanding such practices while also
maintaining or increasing their
effectiveness across contexts.
All Scale-up grantees must evaluate
the effectiveness of the i3-supported
practice that the project implements and
expands. The evaluation of a Scale-up
project must identify the core elements
of, and codify, the i3-supported practice
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30267
that the project implements in order to
support adoption or replication by other
entities. We also expect that evaluations
of Scale-up grants will be conducted in
a variety of contexts and for a variety of
students in order to determine the
context(s) and population(s) for which
the i3-supported practice is most
effective.
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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30268
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
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
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.
All i3 grantees are expected to
improve academic outcomes for highneed students (as defined in this notice).
The FY 2016 Scale-up competition
includes four absolute priorities. These
absolute priorities, as described below,
identify persistent challenges in public
education for which there are solutions
that are supported by rigorous and
generalizable evidence. We are
particularly interested in supporting
such efforts in rural areas. As such, and
consistent with the past three
competitions, applicants applying under
the Serving Rural Communities priority
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
(Absolute Priority 4) must also address
one of the other three absolute priorities
established for the FY 2016 i3 Scale-up
competition. This structure has resulted
in a strong set of grantees that are
addressing the unique challenges in
rural communities. We also include two
competitive preference priorities for i3
applicants, as described below.
First, 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.2 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.
Second, we include an absolute
priority aimed at improving science,
technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) education.
Ensuring that all students can access
and excel in STEM fields—which
2 Doorey, N., and Polikoff, M. Evaluating the
Content and Quality of Next Generation
Assessments (2016). Thomas Fordham Institute.
1016 16th St. NW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC
20036. https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/
%2802.09%20-%20Final%20Published%29%20
Evaluating%20the%20Content
%20and%20Quality%20of%20Next
%20Generation%20Assessments.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
include coding and computer science—
is essential to meeting the needs of our
Nation’s economy and encouraging our
future prosperity.3 For example, the
President highlights computer science
specifically in his Computer Science for
All Initiative.4 Careers in STEM fields
are growing as are the knowledge and
skills required to compete for and
succeed in these specialized jobs.5
Recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data
shows that, between 2010 and 2020,
employment in STEM occupations is
expected to expand faster than
employment in non-STEM occupations
(by 17 versus 14 percent).6 Also, by
2018, 51 percent of STEM jobs are
projected to be in computer sciencerelated fields.7 Moreover, STEM-related
skills, such as data analysis and
computational and technical literacy,
are relevant to a wide array of
postsecondary educational and
professional pursuits. As such, the
Department seeks to provide students
with increased access to rigorous and
engaging STEM programs and
instruction across the K–12 grade span.
Third, we include an absolute priority
focused on improving low-performing
schools. The Department desires to
support whole-school models and
strategies that lead to significant and
sustained improvement in individual
3 Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B.,
and Doms, M. U.S. Department of Commerce
Economics and Statistics Administration. STEM:
Good Jobs Now and for the Future (July 2011). ESA
Issue Brief #03–11. Available at: www.esa.doc.gov/
sites/default/files/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf.
4 Smith, Megan. Computer Science for All
(January 2016). https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/
2016/01/30/computer-science-all.
5 Chairman’s Staff of the Joint Economic
Committee. Calculations using data from the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. Employment Projections: 2010–
20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment and Job
Openings Data, Projected 2010–20, and Worker
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at:
https://iedse.org/temp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/
www.iedse_.org_documents_STEM-EducationPreparing-for-the-Jobs-of-the-Future-.pdf. For the
purposes of this calculation, STEM occupations are
defined as in the U.S. Department of Commerce’s
Economics and Statistics Administration report,
STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the Future. ESA
Issue Brief #03–11. July 2011.
6 Chairman’s Staff of the Joint Economic
Committee. Calculations using data from the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. Employment Projections: 2010–
20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment and Job
Openings Data, Projected 2010–20, and Worker
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at:
https://bls.gov/emp/. For the purposes of this
calculation, STEM occupations are defined as in the
U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economics and
Statistics Administration report, STEM: Good Jobs
Now and for the Future. ESA Issue Brief #03–11.
July 2011.
7 Carnevale, A., Smith, N., Melton, M. Center on
Education and the Workforce, Georgetown
University. Science Technology Engineering
Mathematics (2014). Available at: https://
cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/
stem-complete.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
student performance and overall school
performance and culture. Thousands of
schools do not adequately prepare
students to achieve at grade level and
struggle to overcome the gaps in student
performance across socioeconomic and
racial groups.8 Research shows that the
greatest portion of the gap in
performance between Black and White
students comes from the differences
within a school as opposed to
differences across school settings.9
Furthermore, while graduation rates
have been steadily improving
nationwide, in 17 States, less than 70
percent of students from economically
disadvantaged backgrounds graduate
from high school.10 While considerable
attention has been paid to these schools
in recent years, the pace of progress
continues to be slow and school
turnaround successes tend to be isolated
rather than systematic. Whole-school
models that successfully transform
school culture and student outcomes
can be comprised of a range of
strategies, such as harnessing teacher
leadership,11 creating small learning
communities, academic interventions,
and school redesign. Overall, we seek to
support projects that work across
schools and districts in multiple regions
to transform the learning environment
by instituting a range of evidence-based
practices.
Finally, we include an absolute
priority for serving rural communities.
Students living in rural communities
face unique challenges, such as lack of
access to specialized courses or college
advising. Applicants applying under
this priority must also address one of
the other three absolute priorities
established for the FY 2016 i3 Scale-up
competition, while serving students
enrolled in rural local educational
agencies (as defined in this notice).
We also include two competitive
preference priorities in the FY 2016
Scale-up competition. First, we include
a competitive preference priority for
projects that enable the broad adoption
of effective practices. This competitive
8 PISA Results from 2012. Country Note: United
States. www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012results-US.pdf.
9 Bohrnstedt, G., Kitmitto, S., Ogut, B., Sherman,
D., and Chan, D. (2015). School Composition and
the Black-White Achievement Gap (NCES 2015–
018). U.S. Department of Education, Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Retrieved September 24, 2015 from https://
nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
10 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (NCES): https://nces.ed.gov/
ccd/tables/ACGR_RE_and_characteristics_201314.asp.
11 School Turnarounds: How Successful
Principals Use Teacher Leadership. (March 2016).
https://publicimpact.com/school-turnarounds-howsuccessful-principals-use-teacher-leadership/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
preference priority awards extra points
to applicants that will implement
systematic methods for identifying and
supporting the expansion of these
practices. While all Scale-up grantees
must codify the core elements of their
i3-supported practices, we are interested
in projects that focus particularly on the
documentation, dissemination, and
replication of practices that have been
demonstrated to be effective. We are
particularly eager to support innovative
partnership models to help share,
disseminate, and scale effective
practices among non-i3 grantees. In
addition, practitioners and
policymakers need access to strong,
reliable data to make informed decisions
about adopting effective practices,
particularly to replace less effective
alternatives. This competitive
preference priority supports strategies
that identify key elements of effective
practices and that capture lessons
learned about the implementation of
these practices. In addition, an
applicant addressing this priority must
commit to implementing its approach in
multiple settings and locations in order
to ensure that the practice can be
successfully replicated in different
contexts.
Second, 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.
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
strong evidence of effectiveness and for
information on the other eligibility and
program requirements. In summary,
applications must address one of the
first three 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 three
absolute priorities established for the FY
2016 i3 Scale-up competition, while
serving students enrolled in rural LEAs
(as defined in this notice). Additionally,
applicants must be able to show strong
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30269
evidence of effectiveness (as defined in
this notice) for the proposed process,
product, strategy, or practice included
in their applications. 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)
(provided in the statutory eligibility
requirements 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 Scale-up grants,
an applicant must obtain matching
funds or in-kind donations from the
private sector equal to at least five
percent of its grant award. Each highestrated application, as identified by the
Department following peer review of the
applications, must submit evidence of at
least 50 percent of the required privatesector 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 includes selection criteria
for the FY 2016 Scale-up competition
that are designed to ensure that
applications selected for funding have
the potential to generate substantial
improvements in student achievement
(and other key outcomes), and include
well-articulated plans for the
implementation and evaluation of the
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 an application
for a Scale-up grant should include the
following information in its application:
An estimate of the number of students
to be served by the project; evidence of
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30270
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
the applicant’s ability to implement and
appropriately evaluate the proposed
project; and information about its
capacity (e.g., management capacity,
financial resources, and qualified
personnel) to implement the project at
a national level, working directly or
through partners. We recognize that
LEAs are not typically responsible for
taking their practices, strategies, or
programs to scale; however, all
applicants can and should partner with
others to disseminate their effective
practices, strategies, and programs and
take them to scale.
The Department will screen
applications that are submitted for
Scale-up grants in accordance with the
requirements in this notice and
determine which applications meet the
eligibility and other requirements. Peer
reviewers will review all applications
for Scale-up 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;
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 Scaleup grant application is not supported by
strong evidence of effectiveness, 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
four absolute priorities and two
competitive preference priorities.
Absolute Priority 1 is from the
Department’s notice of final
supplemental priorities and definitions
for discretionary grant programs,
published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425)
(Supplemental Priorities). Absolute
Priorities 2, 3, and 4 and both
competitive preference priorities are
from the notice of final priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
criteria for this program, published in
the Federal Register on March 27, 2013
(78 FR 18681) (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.
Applicants must address one of the
first four absolute priorities. An
applicant that addresses Absolute
Priority 4, Serving Rural Communities,
must also address one of the first three
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 4 will be ranked with other
applications under Absolute Priority 4,
and not included in the ranking for the
additional priority that the applicant
identified. This design helps us ensure
that applications under Absolute
Priority 4 receive an ‘‘apples to apples’’
comparison with other applicants
addressing the Serving Rural
Communities priority.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1—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
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 2—Improving
Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Education.
Under this priority, we provide
funding to projects addressing pressing
needs for improving STEM education.
Absolute Priority 3—Improving LowPerforming Schools.
Under this priority, we provide
funding to projects that address
designing whole-school models and
implementing processes that lead to
significant and sustained improvement
in individual student performance and
overall school performance and culture.
These models may incorporate such
strategies as providing strong school
leadership; strengthening the
instructional program; embedding
professional development that provides
teachers with frequent feedback to
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
increase the rigor and effectiveness of
their instructional practice; redesigning
the school day, week, or year; using data
to inform instruction and improvement;
establishing a school environment that
promotes a culture of high expectations;
addressing non-academic factors that
affect student achievement; and
providing ongoing mechanisms for
parent and family engagement.
Other requirements related to Priority
3:
To meet this priority, a project must
serve schools among (1) the lowestperforming schools in the State on
academic performance measures; (2)
schools in the State with the largest
within-school performance gaps
between student subgroups described in
section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA; or (3)
secondary schools in the State with the
lowest graduation rate over a number of
years or the largest within-school gaps
in graduation rates between student
subgroups described in section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA. Additionally,
projects funded under this priority must
complement the broader turnaround
efforts of the school(s), LEA(s), or
State(s) where the projects will be
implemented.
Absolute Priority 4—Serving Rural
Communities.
Under this priority, we provide
funding to projects that address one of
the absolute priorities established for
the FY 2016 Scale-up 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 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
competitive preference priorities. Under
34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award five
additional points to applications that
meet the requirements of the first
competitive preference priority and we
award three additional points to
applications that meet the requirements
of the second competitive preference
priority.
Applicants may address both
competitive preference priorities. An
applicant must identify in the project
narrative section of its application the
priority or priorities it wishes the
Department to consider for purposes of
earning competitive preference priority
points. The Department will not review
or award points under any competitive
preference priority that the applicant
fails to clearly identify.
These priorities are:
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
Competitive Preference Priority 1—
Enabling Broad Adoption of Effective
Practices (0 or 5 points).
Under this priority, we provide
funding to projects that enable broad
adoption of effective practices. An
application proposing to address this
priority must, as part of its application:
(a) Identify the practice or practices
that the application proposes to prepare
for broad adoption, including
formalizing the practice (i.e., establish
and define key elements of the practice),
codifying (i.e., develop a guide or tools
to support the dissemination of
information on key elements of the
practice), and explaining why there is a
need for formalization and codification.
(b) Evaluate different forms of the
practice to identify the critical
components of the practice that are
crucial to its success and sustainability,
including the adaptability of critical
components to different teaching and
learning environments and to diverse
learners.
(c) Provide a coherent and
comprehensive plan for developing
materials, training, toolkits, or other
supports that other entities would need
in order to implement the practice
effectively and with fidelity.
(d) Commit to assessing the
replicability and adaptability of the
practice by supporting the
implementation of the practice in a
variety of locations during the project
period using the materials, training,
toolkits, or other supports that were
developed for the i3-supported practice.
Competitive Preference Priority 2—
Supporting Novice i3 Applicants (0 or 3
points).
Eligible applicants that have never
directly received a grant under this
program.
Definitions:
The definitions of ‘‘large sample,’’
‘‘logic model,’’ ‘‘multi-site sample,’’
‘‘national level,’’ ‘‘quasi-experimental
design study,’’ ‘‘randomized controlled
trial,’’ ‘‘regional level,’’ ‘‘relevant
outcome,’’ ‘‘strong evidence of
effectiveness,’’ 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.
High-minority school is defined by a
school’s LEA in a manner consistent
with the corresponding State’s Teacher
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
Equity Plan, as required by section
1111(b)(8)(C) of the 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.
Large sample means an analytic
sample of 350 or more students (or other
single analysis units), or 50 or more
groups (such as classrooms or schools)
that contain 10 or more students (or
other single analysis units).
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.
Multi-site sample means more than
one site, where site can be defined as an
LEA, locality, or State.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30271
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
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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30272
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
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 evidence of effectiveness
means one of the following conditions
is met:
(i) There is at least one study of the
effectiveness of the process, product,
strategy, or practice being proposed that
meets the What Works Clearinghouse
Evidence Standards without
reservations, found a statistically
significant favorable impact on a
relevant outcome (with no statistically
significant and overriding unfavorable
impacts on that outcome for relevant
populations in the study or in other
studies of the intervention reviewed by
and reported on by the What Works
Clearinghouse), includes a sample that
overlaps with the populations and
settings proposed to receive the process,
product, strategy, or practice, and
includes a large sample and a multi-site
sample. (Note: Multiple studies can
cumulatively meet the large and multisite sample requirements as long as each
study meets the other requirements in
this paragraph).
(ii) There are at least two studies of
the effectiveness of the process, product,
strategy, or practice being proposed,
each of which: Meets the What Works
Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with
reservations, found a statistically
significant favorable impact on a
relevant outcome (with no statistically
significant and overriding unfavorable
impacts on that outcome for relevant
populations in the studies or in other
studies of the intervention reviewed by
and reported on by the What Works
Clearinghouse), includes a sample that
overlaps with the populations and
settings proposed to receive the process,
product, strategy, or practice, and
includes a large sample and a multi-site
sample.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Note: The upper limit of the range of
awards (e.g., $20,000,000 for Scale-up 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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
(2) Have demonstrated success in
significantly increasing student
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
Scale-up and Validation Applications.
Additionally, information on the statutory
eligibility requirements can be found on the
i3 Web site at https://innovation.ed.gov/whatwe-do/innovation/investing-in-innovationi3/. If the Department determines that an
applicant has 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 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
Scale-up applicant must obtain
matching funds, or in-kind donations,
equal to at least five 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 application may not
submit that request at a later time.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30273
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 this
program is in effect.
• Evidence Standards: To be eligible
for an award, an application for a Scaleup grant must be supported by strong
evidence of effectiveness (as defined in
this notice).
Note: An applicant should identify up to
four study citations to be reviewed against
What Works Clearinghouse Evidence
Standards for the purposes of meeting the i3
evidence standard requirement. An applicant
should clearly identify these citations in
Appendix D, under the ‘‘Other Attachments
Form,’’ of its application. The Department
will not review a study citation that an
applicant fails to clearly identify for review.
In addition to the four study citations,
applicants 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 in Appendix D.
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, 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 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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
30274
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
research studies cited in the application are
relevant to the effectiveness of the proposed
project.
• Funding Categories: An applicant
will be considered for an award only for
the type of i3 grant (i.e., Development,
Validation, and Scale-up grant) 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
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. For Scale-up and
Validation grants, the grantee must also
ensure that the data from its evaluation
are made available to third-party
researchers consistent with applicable
privacy requirements.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
84.411A.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 Application: June 6, 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 an 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/KDJQ3B3.
Applicants that do not complete this
form may still submit an application.
Page Limit: The application narrative
(part III of the application) is where you,
the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate
your application. Applicants should
limit the application narrative for a
Scale-up grant application to no more
than 50 pages. Applicants are also
strongly encouraged not to include
lengthy appendices that contain
information that they were unable to
include within the page limits for the
narrative. Applicants should use the
following standards:
• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side
only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom,
and both sides.
• Double space (no more than three
lines per vertical inch) all text in the
application narrative, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations,
references, and captions.
• 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 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 of
the application. However, the page limit
does apply to all of the application
narrative section of the application.
b. Submission of Proprietary
Information:
Given the types of projects that may
be proposed in applications for the i3
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
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:
Applications Available: May 18, 2016.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to
Submit Applications: June 6, 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
Applications: July 15, 2016.
Applications for grants under this
competition must be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov
Apply site (Grants.gov). For information
(including dates and times) about how
to submit your application
electronically, or in paper format by
mail or hand delivery if you qualify for
an exception to the electronic
submission requirement, please refer to
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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: September 13, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30275
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
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 for grants under the i3
program, CFDA number 84.411A (Scaleup grants), must be submitted
electronically using the
Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site
at www.Grants.gov. Through this site,
you will be able to download a copy of
the application package, complete it
offline, and then upload and submit
your application. You may not email an
electronic copy of a grant application to
us.
We will reject your application if you
submit it in paper format unless, as
described elsewhere in this section, you
qualify for one of the exceptions to the
electronic submission requirement and
submit, no later than two weeks before
the application deadline date, a written
statement to the Department that you
qualify for one of these exceptions.
Further information regarding
calculation of the date that is two weeks
before the application deadline date is
provided later in this section under
Exception to Electronic Submission
Requirement.
You may access the electronic grant
application for the i3 program at
www.Grants.gov. You must search for
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30276
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
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 84.411A).
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
• 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,
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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. 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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
• 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 84.411A) LBJ Basement
Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20202–4260.
You must show proof of mailing
consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the
date of mailing stamped by the U.S.
Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or
receipt from a commercial carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing
acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Education.
If you mail your application through
the U.S. Postal Service, we do not
accept either of the following as proof
of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by
the U.S. Postal Service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 84.411A), 550 12th
Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260.
The Application Control Center
accepts hand deliveries daily between
8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington,
DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays,
and Federal holidays.
Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper
Applications: If you mail or hand deliver
your application to the Department—
(1) You must indicate on the envelope
and—if not provided by the Department—in
Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number,
including suffix letter, if any, of the
competition under which you are submitting
your application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will
mail to you a notification of receipt of your
grant application. If you do not receive this
notification within 15 business days from the
application deadline date, you should call
the U.S. Department of Education
Application Control Center at (202) 245–
6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection
criteria for the Scale-up 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 100 points based on the
selection criteria for the application.
A. Significance (up to 10 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 represents an exceptional
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30277
approach to the priority or priorities
established for the competition. (34 CFR
75.210)
B. Strategy to Scale (up to 35 points).
In determining the applicant’s
capacity to scale the proposed project,
the Secretary considers the following
factors:
(1) The extent to which the applicant
demonstrates there is unmet demand for
the process, product, strategy, or
practice that will enable the applicant to
reach the level of scale that is proposed
in the application. (34 CFR 75.210)
(2) The extent to which the applicant
will use grant funds to address a
particular barrier or barriers that
prevented the applicant, in the past,
from reaching the level of scale
proposed in the application. (2013 i3
NFP)
C. Quality of the Project Design and
Management Plan (up to 35 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 proposed 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. (34 CFR 75.210)
(3) The clarity and coherence of the
applicant’s multi-year financial and
operating model and accompanying
plan to operate the project at a national
or regional level (as defined in this
notice) during the project period. (2013
i3 NFP)
(4) The adequacy of procedures for
ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the
proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210)
D. Quality of the 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 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 without reservations. (34 CFR
75.210)
(2) 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)
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
30278
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
(3) The extent to which the evaluation
will study the project at the proposed
level of scale, including, where
appropriate, generating information
about potential differential effectiveness
of the project in diverse settings and for
diverse student population groups.
(2013 i3 NFP)
(4) The extent to which the evaluation
plan includes a clear and credible
analysis plan, including a proposed
sample size and minimum detectable
effect size that aligns with the expected
project impact, and an analytic
approach for addressing the research
questions. (2013 i3 NFP)
(5) The extent to which the evaluation
plan clearly articulates the key
components and outcomes of the
project, as well as a measurable
threshold for acceptable
implementation. (2013 i3 NFP)
(6) The extent to which the proposed
project plan includes sufficient
resources to carry out the project
evaluation effectively. (2013 i3 NFP)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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, discussing 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:
Before making awards, we will screen
applications submitted in accordance
with the requirements in this notice to
determine whether applications have
met eligibility and other requirements.
This screening process may occur at
various stages of the process; applicants
that are determined to be ineligible will
not receive a grant, regardless of peer
reviewer scores or comments.
For the application review process,
we will use independent peer reviewers
with varied backgrounds and
professions including pre-kindergartengrade 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 applications, using the
selection criteria provided in this
notice. For Scale-up grant applications
we intend to conduct a single-tier
review. If an eligible applicant
addresses the first competitive
preference priority (Enabling Broad
Adoption of Effective Practices),
reviewers will review and score this
competitive preference priority. If
competitive preference priority points
are awarded, those points will be
included in the eligible applicant’s
overall score. If an eligible applicant
addresses the second 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 Scaleup grants.
Short-term performance measures: (1)
The percentage of grantees that reach
their annual target number of students
as specified in the application; (2) the
percentage of programs, practices, or
strategies supported by a Scale-up grant
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Notices
with ongoing well-designed and
independent evaluations that will
provide evidence of their effectiveness
at improving student outcomes at scale;
(3) the percentage of programs,
practices, or strategies supported by a
Scale-up 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 grantees that reach
the targeted number of students
specified in the application; (2) the
percentage of programs, practices, or
strategies supported by a Scale-up grant
that implement a completed welldesigned, well-implemented, and
independent evaluation that provides
evidence of their effectiveness at
improving student outcomes at scale; (3)
the percentage of programs, practices, or
strategies supported by a Scale-up grant
with a completed well-designed, wellimplemented, and independent
evaluation that provides information
about the key elements and the
approach of the project so as to facilitate
replication or testing in other settings;
and (4) the cost per student for
programs, practices, or strategies that
were proven to be effective 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 4W312 Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453–7122. FAX: (202)
401–4123 or by email: i3@ed.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:48 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 either 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: May 11, 2016.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and
Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2016–11531 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards;
Investing in Innovation Fund—
Validation Grants
Office of Innovation and
Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Overview Information
Investing in Innovation Fund—
Validation Grants
Notice inviting applications for new
awards for fiscal year (FY) 2016.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411B
(Validation Grants).
DATES: Applications Available: May 18,
2016. Deadline for Notice of Intent to
Apply: June 6, 2016. Deadline for
Transmittal of Applications: July 15,
2016. Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: September 13, 2016.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30279
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.
This notice invites applications for
Validation grants only. The notice
inviting applications for Scale-up grants
is published elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register. The notice inviting
applications for Development grants
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30267-30279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11531]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund--Scale-
Up Grants
AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview Information:
Investing in Innovation Fund--Scale-up Grants.
Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY)
2016.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411A
(Scale-up Grants).
Dates:
Applications Available: May 18, 2016.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 6, 2016.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 15, 2016.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 13, 2016.
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.
This notice invites applications for Scale-up grants only. The
notice inviting applications for Validation grants is published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. The notice inviting
applications for Development grants was published in the Federal
Register on April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24070) and is available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/F-2016-04-25/pdf/2016-09436.pdf.
Scale-up grants provide funding to support expansion of projects
supported by strong evidence of effectiveness (as defined in this
notice) to the national level (as defined in this notice). In addition,
as Scale-up projects seek to improve outcomes for students in high-need
schools, they also generate important information about an
intervention's effectiveness and the contexts for which a practice is
most effective. We expect that Scale-up grants will increase
practitioners' and policymakers' understanding of the implementation of
proven practices and help identify effective approaches to expanding
such practices while also maintaining or increasing their effectiveness
across contexts.
All Scale-up grantees must evaluate the effectiveness of the i3-
supported practice that the project implements and expands. The
evaluation of a Scale-up project must identify the core elements of,
and codify, the i3-supported practice that the project implements in
order to support adoption or replication by other entities. We also
expect that evaluations of Scale-up grants will be conducted in a
variety of contexts and for a variety of students in order to determine
the context(s) and population(s) for which the i3-supported practice is
most effective.
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
[[Page 30268]]
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 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.
All i3 grantees are expected to improve academic outcomes for high-
need students (as defined in this notice). The FY 2016 Scale-up
competition includes four absolute priorities. These absolute
priorities, as described below, identify persistent challenges in
public education for which there are solutions that are supported by
rigorous and generalizable evidence. We are particularly interested in
supporting such efforts in rural areas. As such, and consistent with
the past three competitions, applicants applying under the Serving
Rural Communities priority (Absolute Priority 4) must also address one
of the other three absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3
Scale-up competition. This structure has resulted in a strong set of
grantees that are addressing the unique challenges in rural
communities. We also include two competitive preference priorities for
i3 applicants, as described below.
First, 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.\2\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Doorey, N., and Polikoff, M. Evaluating the Content and
Quality of Next Generation Assessments (2016). Thomas Fordham
Institute. 1016 16th St. NW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036.
https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/%2802.09%20-%20Final%20Published%29%20Evaluating%20the%20Content%20and%20Quality%20of%20Next%20Generation%20Assessments.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, we include an absolute priority aimed at improving science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Ensuring
that all students can access and excel in STEM fields--which include
coding and computer science--is essential to meeting the needs of our
Nation's economy and encouraging our future prosperity.\3\ For example,
the President highlights computer science specifically in his Computer
Science for All Initiative.\4\ Careers in STEM fields are growing as
are the knowledge and skills required to compete for and succeed in
these specialized jobs.\5\ Recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows
that, between 2010 and 2020, employment in STEM occupations is expected
to expand faster than employment in non-STEM occupations (by 17 versus
14 percent).\6\ Also, by 2018, 51 percent of STEM jobs are projected to
be in computer science-related fields.\7\ Moreover, STEM-related
skills, such as data analysis and computational and technical literacy,
are relevant to a wide array of postsecondary educational and
professional pursuits. As such, the Department seeks to provide
students with increased access to rigorous and engaging STEM programs
and instruction across the K-12 grade span.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., and Doms,
M. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics
Administration. STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the Future (July 2011).
ESA Issue Brief #03-11. Available at: www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf.
\4\ Smith, Megan. Computer Science for All (January 2016).
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/30/computer-science-all.
\5\ Chairman's Staff of the Joint Economic Committee.
Calculations using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Employment Projections: 2010-20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment
and Job Openings Data, Projected 2010-20, and Worker
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at: https://iedse.org/temp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/www.iedse_.org_documents_STEM-Education-Preparing-for-the-Jobs-of-the-Future-.pdf. For the purposes of this calculation, STEM
occupations are defined as in the U.S. Department of Commerce's
Economics and Statistics Administration report, STEM: Good Jobs Now
and for the Future. ESA Issue Brief #03-11. July 2011.
\6\ Chairman's Staff of the Joint Economic Committee.
Calculations using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Employment Projections: 2010-20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment
and Job Openings Data, Projected 2010-20, and Worker
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at: https://bls.gov/emp/. For the purposes of this calculation, STEM occupations are
defined as in the U.S. Department of Commerce's Economics and
Statistics Administration report, STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the
Future. ESA Issue Brief #03-11. July 2011.
\7\ Carnevale, A., Smith, N., Melton, M. Center on Education and
the Workforce, Georgetown University. Science Technology Engineering
Mathematics (2014). Available at: https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/stem-complete.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, we include an absolute priority focused on improving low-
performing schools. The Department desires to support whole-school
models and strategies that lead to significant and sustained
improvement in individual
[[Page 30269]]
student performance and overall school performance and culture.
Thousands of schools do not adequately prepare students to achieve at
grade level and struggle to overcome the gaps in student performance
across socioeconomic and racial groups.\8\ Research shows that the
greatest portion of the gap in performance between Black and White
students comes from the differences within a school as opposed to
differences across school settings.\9\ Furthermore, while graduation
rates have been steadily improving nationwide, in 17 States, less than
70 percent of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds
graduate from high school.\10\ While considerable attention has been
paid to these schools in recent years, the pace of progress continues
to be slow and school turnaround successes tend to be isolated rather
than systematic. Whole-school models that successfully transform school
culture and student outcomes can be comprised of a range of strategies,
such as harnessing teacher leadership,\11\ creating small learning
communities, academic interventions, and school redesign. Overall, we
seek to support projects that work across schools and districts in
multiple regions to transform the learning environment by instituting a
range of evidence-based practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ PISA Results from 2012. Country Note: United States.
www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-US.pdf.
\9\ Bohrnstedt, G., Kitmitto, S., Ogut, B., Sherman, D., and
Chan, D. (2015). School Composition and the Black-White Achievement
Gap (NCES 2015-018). U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved September 24,
2015 from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
\10\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES): https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/tables/ACGR_RE_and_characteristics_2013-14.asp.
\11\ School Turnarounds: How Successful Principals Use Teacher
Leadership. (March 2016). https://publicimpact.com/school-turnarounds-how-successful-principals-use-teacher-leadership/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we include an absolute priority for serving rural
communities. Students living in rural communities face unique
challenges, such as lack of access to specialized courses or college
advising. Applicants applying under this priority must also address one
of the other three absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3
Scale-up competition, while serving students enrolled in rural local
educational agencies (as defined in this notice).
We also include two competitive preference priorities in the FY
2016 Scale-up competition. First, we include a competitive preference
priority for projects that enable the broad adoption of effective
practices. This competitive preference priority awards extra points to
applicants that will implement systematic methods for identifying and
supporting the expansion of these practices. While all Scale-up
grantees must codify the core elements of their i3-supported practices,
we are interested in projects that focus particularly on the
documentation, dissemination, and replication of practices that have
been demonstrated to be effective. We are particularly eager to support
innovative partnership models to help share, disseminate, and scale
effective practices among non-i3 grantees. In addition, practitioners
and policymakers need access to strong, reliable data to make informed
decisions about adopting effective practices, particularly to replace
less effective alternatives. This competitive preference priority
supports strategies that identify key elements of effective practices
and that capture lessons learned about the implementation of these
practices. In addition, an applicant addressing this priority must
commit to implementing its approach in multiple settings and locations
in order to ensure that the practice can be successfully replicated in
different contexts.
Second, 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.
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 strong
evidence of effectiveness and for information on the other eligibility
and program requirements. In summary, applications must address one of
the first three 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 three
absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 Scale-up
competition, while serving students enrolled in rural LEAs (as defined
in this notice). Additionally, applicants must be able to show strong
evidence of effectiveness (as defined in this notice) for the proposed
process, product, strategy, or practice included in their applications.
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) (provided in the statutory
eligibility requirements 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 Scale-up grants, an applicant
must obtain matching funds or in-kind donations from the private sector
equal to at least five percent of its grant award. Each highest-rated
application, 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 includes selection criteria for the FY 2016 Scale-up
competition that are designed to ensure that applications selected for
funding have the potential to generate substantial improvements in
student achievement (and other key outcomes), and include well-
articulated plans for the implementation and evaluation of the 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 an application for a Scale-up grant should
include the following information in its application: An estimate of
the number of students to be served by the project; evidence of
[[Page 30270]]
the applicant's ability to implement and appropriately evaluate the
proposed project; and information about its capacity (e.g., management
capacity, financial resources, and qualified personnel) to implement
the project at a national level, working directly or through partners.
We recognize that LEAs are not typically responsible for taking their
practices, strategies, or programs to scale; however, all applicants
can and should partner with others to disseminate their effective
practices, strategies, and programs and take them to scale.
The Department will screen applications that are submitted for
Scale-up grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice and
determine which applications meet the eligibility and other
requirements. Peer reviewers will review all applications for Scale-up
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; 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 Scale-up grant application is not
supported by strong evidence of effectiveness, 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 four absolute priorities and
two competitive preference priorities. Absolute Priority 1 is from the
Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions
for discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425) (Supplemental Priorities). Absolute
Priorities 2, 3, and 4 and both competitive preference priorities 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) (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.
Applicants must address one of the first four absolute priorities.
An applicant that addresses Absolute Priority 4, Serving Rural
Communities, must also address one of the first three 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 4 will be ranked with other applications under
Absolute Priority 4, and not included in the ranking for the additional
priority that the applicant identified. This design helps us ensure
that applications under Absolute Priority 4 receive an ``apples to
apples'' comparison with other applicants addressing the Serving Rural
Communities priority.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--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 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 2--Improving Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Mathematics (STEM) Education.
Under this priority, we provide funding to projects addressing
pressing needs for improving STEM education.
Absolute Priority 3--Improving Low-Performing Schools.
Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address
designing whole-school models and implementing processes that lead to
significant and sustained improvement in individual student performance
and overall school performance and culture. These models may
incorporate such strategies as providing strong school leadership;
strengthening the instructional program; embedding professional
development that provides teachers with frequent feedback to increase
the rigor and effectiveness of their instructional practice;
redesigning the school day, week, or year; using data to inform
instruction and improvement; establishing a school environment that
promotes a culture of high expectations; addressing non-academic
factors that affect student achievement; and providing ongoing
mechanisms for parent and family engagement.
Other requirements related to Priority 3:
To meet this priority, a project must serve schools among (1) the
lowest-performing schools in the State on academic performance
measures; (2) schools in the State with the largest within-school
performance gaps between student subgroups described in section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA; or (3) secondary schools in the State with the
lowest graduation rate over a number of years or the largest within-
school gaps in graduation rates between student subgroups described in
section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA. Additionally, projects funded under
this priority must complement the broader turnaround efforts of the
school(s), LEA(s), or State(s) where the projects will be implemented.
Absolute Priority 4--Serving Rural Communities.
Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address
one of the absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 Scale-up 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 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 competitive preference
priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award five additional
points to applications that meet the requirements of the first
competitive preference priority and we award three additional points to
applications that meet the requirements of the second competitive
preference priority.
Applicants may address both competitive preference priorities. An
applicant must identify in the project narrative section of its
application the priority or priorities it wishes the Department to
consider for purposes of earning competitive preference priority
points. The Department will not review or award points under any
competitive preference priority that the applicant fails to clearly
identify.
These priorities are:
[[Page 30271]]
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Enabling Broad Adoption of
Effective Practices (0 or 5 points).
Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that enable
broad adoption of effective practices. An application proposing to
address this priority must, as part of its application:
(a) Identify the practice or practices that the application
proposes to prepare for broad adoption, including formalizing the
practice (i.e., establish and define key elements of the practice),
codifying (i.e., develop a guide or tools to support the dissemination
of information on key elements of the practice), and explaining why
there is a need for formalization and codification.
(b) Evaluate different forms of the practice to identify the
critical components of the practice that are crucial to its success and
sustainability, including the adaptability of critical components to
different teaching and learning environments and to diverse learners.
(c) Provide a coherent and comprehensive plan for developing
materials, training, toolkits, or other supports that other entities
would need in order to implement the practice effectively and with
fidelity.
(d) Commit to assessing the replicability and adaptability of the
practice by supporting the implementation of the practice in a variety
of locations during the project period using the materials, training,
toolkits, or other supports that were developed for the i3-supported
practice.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--Supporting Novice i3 Applicants
(0 or 3 points).
Eligible applicants that have never directly received a grant under
this program.
Definitions:
The definitions of ``large sample,'' ``logic model,'' ``multi-site
sample,'' ``national level,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,''
``randomized controlled trial,'' ``regional level,'' ``relevant
outcome,'' ``strong evidence of effectiveness,'' 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.
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 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.
Large sample means an analytic sample of 350 or more students (or
other single analysis units), or 50 or more groups (such as classrooms
or schools) that contain 10 or more students (or other single analysis
units).
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.
Multi-site sample means more than one site, where site can be
defined as an LEA, locality, or State.
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
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
[[Page 30272]]
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 evidence of effectiveness means one of the following
conditions is met:
(i) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the
process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the
What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations, found
a statistically significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome
(with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts
on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other
studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What
Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the
populations and settings proposed to receive the process, product,
strategy, or practice, and includes a large sample and a multi-site
sample. (Note: Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large and
multi-site sample requirements as long as each study meets the other
requirements in this paragraph).
(ii) There are at least two studies of the effectiveness of the
process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed, each of which:
Meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with
reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact on a
relevant outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding
unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the
studies or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and
reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that
overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive the
process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a large sample
and a multi-site sample.
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., $20,000,000
for Scale-up 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
[[Page 30273]]
(2) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student
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 Scale-up and Validation Applications.
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/ i3/. If the Department
determines that an applicant has 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 Scale-up applicant must obtain matching funds, or in-kind
donations, equal to at least five 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 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 this program is in
effect.
Evidence Standards: To be eligible for an award, an
application for a Scale-up grant must be supported by strong evidence
of effectiveness (as defined in this notice).
Note: An applicant should identify up to four study citations to
be reviewed against What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards for
the purposes of meeting the i3 evidence standard requirement. An
applicant should clearly identify these citations in Appendix D,
under the ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its application. The
Department will not review a study citation that an applicant fails
to clearly identify for review. In addition to the four study
citations, applicants 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 in
Appendix D.
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, 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 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
[[Page 30274]]
research studies cited in the application are relevant to the
effectiveness of the proposed project.
Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered for an
award only for the type of i3 grant (i.e., Development, Validation, and
Scale-up grant) 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. For Scale-up and Validation
grants, the grantee must also ensure that the data from its evaluation
are made available to third-party researchers consistent with
applicable privacy requirements.
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 84.411A.
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 Application: June 6, 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 an 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/KDJQ3B3. Applicants that do
not complete this form may still submit an application.
Page Limit: The application narrative (part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. Applicants should limit the
application narrative for a Scale-up grant application to no more than
50 pages. Applicants are also strongly encouraged not to include
lengthy appendices that contain information that they were unable to
include within the page limits for the narrative. Applicants should use
the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.
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 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 of the application. However, the page limit does apply to all
of the application narrative section of the application.
b. Submission of Proprietary Information:
Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications
for the i3
[[Page 30275]]
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:
Applications Available: May 18, 2016.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Applications: June 6, 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 Applications: July 15, 2016.
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your
application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, please refer to 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: September 13, 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 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 for grants under the i3 program, CFDA number 84.411A
(Scale-up grants), must be submitted electronically using the
Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this
site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package,
complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You
may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.
We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
You may access the electronic grant application for the i3 program
at www.Grants.gov. You must search for
[[Page 30276]]
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 84.411A).
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. 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
[[Page 30277]]
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 84.411A) LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
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 84.411A), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.
Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by
the Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including
suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are
submitting your application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a
notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not
receive this notification within 15 business days from the
application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of
Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for the Scale-up
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 100 points based on the selection criteria for the application.
A. Significance (up to 10 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 represents an
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities established for the
competition. (34 CFR 75.210)
B. Strategy to Scale (up to 35 points).
In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates there is unmet
demand for the process, product, strategy, or practice that will enable
the applicant to reach the level of scale that is proposed in the
application. (34 CFR 75.210)
(2) The extent to which the applicant will use grant funds to
address a particular barrier or barriers that prevented the applicant,
in the past, from reaching the level of scale proposed in the
application. (2013 i3 NFP)
C. Quality of the Project Design and Management Plan (up to 35
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 proposed 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. (34 CFR 75.210)
(3) The clarity and coherence of the applicant's multi-year
financial and operating model and accompanying plan to operate the
project at a national or regional level (as defined in this notice)
during the project period. (2013 i3 NFP)
(4) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210)
D. Quality of the 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 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 without
reservations. (34 CFR 75.210)
(2) 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)
[[Page 30278]]
(3) The extent to which the evaluation will study the project at
the proposed level of scale, including, where appropriate, generating
information about potential differential effectiveness of the project
in diverse settings and for diverse student population groups. (2013 i3
NFP)
(4) The extent to which the evaluation plan includes a clear and
credible analysis plan, including a proposed sample size and minimum
detectable effect size that aligns with the expected project impact,
and an analytic approach for addressing the research questions. (2013
i3 NFP)
(5) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the
key components and outcomes of the project, as well as a measurable
threshold for acceptable implementation. (2013 i3 NFP)
(6) 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, discussing 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: Before making awards, we will
screen applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in
this notice to determine whether applications have met eligibility and
other requirements. This screening process may occur at various stages
of the process; applicants that are determined to be ineligible will
not receive a grant, regardless of peer reviewer scores or comments.
For the application review process, we will use independent peer
reviewers with varied backgrounds and professions including pre-
kindergarten-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 applications, using the selection criteria provided
in this notice. For Scale-up grant applications we intend to conduct a
single-tier review. If an eligible applicant addresses the first
competitive preference priority (Enabling Broad Adoption of Effective
Practices), reviewers will review and score this competitive preference
priority. If competitive preference priority points are awarded, those
points will be included in the eligible applicant's overall score. If
an eligible applicant addresses the second 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. 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 Scale-up grants.
Short-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees
that reach their annual target number of students as specified in the
application; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies
supported by a Scale-up grant
[[Page 30279]]
with ongoing well-designed and independent evaluations that will
provide evidence of their effectiveness at improving student outcomes
at scale; (3) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies
supported by a Scale-up 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 grantees that
reach the targeted number of students specified in the application; (2)
the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a
Scale-up grant that implement a completed well-designed, well-
implemented, and independent evaluation that provides evidence of their
effectiveness at improving student outcomes at scale; (3) the
percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Scale-
up grant with a completed well-designed, well-implemented, and
independent evaluation that provides information about the key elements
and the approach of the project so as to facilitate replication or
testing in other settings; and (4) the cost per student for programs,
practices, or strategies that were proven to be effective 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 4W312 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
either 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: May 11, 2016.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2016-11531 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P