Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program, 13878-13885 [2020-04885]
Download as PDF
13878
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
Renewal of Federal Advisory
Committee.
ACTION:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
The Department of Defense
(DoD) is publishing this notice to
announce that it is renewing the charter
for the Department of Defense Advisory
Committee on Military Personnel
Testing (‘‘the Committee’’).
SUMMARY:
Jim
Freeman, Advisory Committee
Management Officer for the Department
of Defense, 703–692–5952.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The
Committee’s charter is being renewed in
accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C.
Appendix) and 41 CFR 102–3.50(d). The
Committee’s charter and contact
information for the Committee’s
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be
found at https://www.facadatabase.gov/.
The Committee provides the Secretary
of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, through the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
independent advice and
recommendations on matters and
policies relating to military personnel
testing for selection and classification.
The Committee shall be composed of
no more than seven members who are
appointed in accordance with DoD
policies and procedures. All members of
the Committee are appointed to provide
advice on behalf of the Government on
the basis of their best judgment without
representing any particular point of
view and in a manner that is free from
conflict of interest. Except for
reimbursement of official Committeerelated travel and per diem, Committee
members serve without compensation.
The public or interested organizations
may submit written statements to the
Committee membership about the
Committee’s mission and functions.
Written statements may be submitted at
any time or in response to the stated
agenda of planned meeting of the
Committee. All written statements shall
be submitted to the DFO for the
Committee, and this individual will
ensure that the written statements are
provided to the membership for their
consideration.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: March 5, 2020.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2020–04852 Filed 3–9–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Charter Renewal of Department of
Defense Federal Advisory Committees
Department of Defense.
ACTION: Renewal of Federal Advisory
Committee.
Dated: March 5, 2020.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2020–04876 Filed 3–9–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
AGENCY:
The Department of Defense
(DoD) is publishing this notice to
announce that it is renewing the charter
for the Department of Defense Advisory
Committee on Women in the Services
(‘‘the Committee’’).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Freeman, Advisory Committee
Management Officer for the Department
of Defense, 703–692–5952.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Committee’s charter is being renewed in
accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C.
Appendix) and 41 CFR 102–3.50(d). The
Committee’s charter and contact
information for the Committee’s
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be
found at https://www.facadatabase.gov/.
The Committee provides the Secretary
of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, through the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
independent advice and
recommendations on matters and
policies relating to recruitment and
retention, employment, integration,
well-being and treatment of women in
the Armed Forces of the United States.
The Committee shall be composed of
no more than 20 members to include
prominent civilian women and men
who are from academia, industry, public
service and other professions. All
members of the Committee are
appointed to provide advice on behalf of
the Government on the basis of their
best judgment without representing any
particular point of view and in a manner
that is free from conflict of interest.
Except for reimbursement of official
Committee-related travel and per diem,
Committee members serve without
compensation.
The public or interested organizations
may submit written statements to the
Committee membership about the
Committee’s mission and functions.
Written statements may be submitted at
any time or in response to the stated
agenda of planned meeting of the
Committee. All written statements shall
be submitted to the DFO for the
Committee, and this individual will
ensure that the written statements are
provided to the membership for their
consideration.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Magnet
Schools Assistance Program
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) is issuing a notice inviting
applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY)
2020 for the Magnet Schools Assistance
Program (MSAP), Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number
84.165A. This notice relates to the
approved information collection under
OMB control number 1855–0011.
DATES:
Application Available: March 10,
2020.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply:
April 9, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: May 26, 2020.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: July 23, 2020.
Pre-Application Webinar Information:
No later than March 16, 2020, MSAP
will hold a webinar to provide technical
assistance to interested applicants.
Detailed information regarding this
webinar will be provided on the MSAP
web page at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/
office-of-discretionary-grants-supportservices/school-choice-improvementprograms/magnet-school-assistanceprogram-msap/. A recording of this
webinar will be available on the MSAP
web page following the session.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for
obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common
Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary
Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 13, 2019
(84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-201902-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue
SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC
20202–5970. Telephone: (202) 401–
1259. Email: msap.team@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: MSAP,
authorized under title IV, part D of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act, as amended by the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESEA), provides grants to
local educational agencies (LEAs) and
consortia of LEAs to support magnet
schools under an approved, required, or
voluntary desegregation plan.
Under the ESEA, MSAP prioritizes
the creation and replication of evidencebased (as defined in this notice) magnet
programs and magnet schools that seek
to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
minority group isolation by taking into
account socioeconomic diversity.
Grantees may use grant funds for
activities intended to improve students’
academic achievement, including
acquiring books, materials, technology,
and equipment to support a rigorous,
theme-based academic program;
conducting planning and promotional
activities; providing professional
development opportunities for teachers
to implement the academic program;
and paying the salaries of effective
teachers and other instructional
personnel. MSAP also enables LEAs to
support student transportation,
provided the transportation costs are
sustainable and the costs do not
constitute a significant portion of grant
funds.
Background: MSAP seeks to reduce,
eliminate or prevent minority group
isolation by funding projects carried out
by LEAs or consortia of LEAs that
propose to implement magnet schools
with academically challenging,
innovative instructional approaches, or
specialized curricula that are, consistent
with constitutional and statutory
limitations, ‘‘designed to bring students
from different social, economic, ethnic,
and racial backgrounds together.’’ 1
Through the implementation of highdemand programming, using
sophisticated technology and curricula,
magnet schools have often served as a
conduit for innovative, theme-based
instruction. For example, 61 percent of
the 145 schools currently supported by
MSAP grants include science,
technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) themes in their
programming, which aligns with the
Secretary’s Supplemental Priority 6,
Promoting STEM Education.2
1 20
U.S.C. 7231(b)(2).
2 STEM is also a national priority. For more
details, see ‘‘Charting A Course For Success:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
While some grantees have effectively
implemented innovative, theme-based
programming and successfully
diversified their schools, other grantees
have struggled to meet their
desegregation goals. Significant
variations in grantees’ ability to increase
academic achievement also persist.
Therefore, we continue to use selection
criteria to focus on projects that seek to
promote academic achievement and
reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority
group isolation. The Department
encourages applicants to propose
projects of high interest to students and
families that offer rigorous curriculum
with authentic theme-based experiences
and to form integrated partnerships that
will attract and retain students from
different racial and socioeconomic
backgrounds. In this year’s competition
we have added criteria specific to
partnerships. Specifically, we encourage
applicants to propose robust
partnerships that offer relevant
opportunities for students and teachers,
such as mentoring, apprenticeships,
certifications, and theme-related,
industry-specific experiences.
In addition, as part of MSAP’s focus
on improving academic achievement
and reducing, eliminating, or preventing
minority group isolation, consistent
with constitutional and statutory
limitations, we encourage applicants,
through competitive preference points,
to propose projects that would increase
racial integration by taking into account
socioeconomic diversity. Beyond
proposing quality projects that have the
potential to attract students from
various backgrounds, we encourage
applicants to propose a range of
activities that incorporate a focus on
socioeconomic and racial diversity,
such as: Establishing and participating
in a voluntary, inter-district transfer
program for students from varied
neighborhoods; making strategic
decisions regarding magnet school sites
to maximize the potential diversity of
the school given the school’s
neighboring communities; revising
school boundaries, attendance zones, or
feeder patterns to take into account
residential segregation or other related
issues; and formal merging or
coordinating among multiple
educational jurisdictions in order to
pool resources, provide transportation,
and expand high-quality public school
options for lower-income students.
Applicants that choose to address this
priority should identify the criteria they
America’s Strategy For STEM Education,’’
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/
STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf
(December 2018).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13879
intend to use to determine students’
socioeconomic status (e.g., family
income level, education level of the
students’ parent or guardian, other
factors identified by the LEA, or a
combination thereof) and clearly
describe how their approach to
incorporating socioeconomic diversity
is part of their overall effort to
eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority
group isolation.
To encourage systemic and timely
change, the Department is interested in
proposals that establish new school
assignment or admissions policies for
schools that seek to increase the number
of low-income students schools serve
through new student assignment
policies that consider the
socioeconomic status of students’
households, students residing in
neighborhoods experiencing
concentrated poverty, and students from
low-performing schools (among other
factors). As applicable, each applicant
should coordinate with other relevant
government entities—such as housing
and transportation authorities, among
others—given the impact that other
public policies have on the composition
of a school’s student body. Such
proposals may be addressed in response
to Competitive Preference Priority 4.
This NIA also includes a competitive
preference priority for MSAP projects
that would be carried out in areas that
overlap with a Qualified Opportunity
Zone (QOZ). Public Law (Pub. L.) 115–
97 authorized the designation of QOZs
to promote economic development and
job creation in distressed communities
through preferential tax treatment for
investors. A list of QOZs is available at
www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/OpportunityZones.aspx; applicants may also
determine whether a particular area
overlaps with a QOZ using the National
Center of Education Statistics’ map
located at: https://nces.ed.gov/
programs/maped/LocaleLookup/. To
receive competitive preference points
under this priority, applicants must
provide the Department with the census
tract number of the QOZ they plan to
serve and describe the services they will
provide. For the purpose of this
competition, applicants should consider
the area where their LEA is located to
be the area that must overlap with a
QOZ; an LEA may be considered to
overlap with a QOZ even if only one
magnet school included in the current
MSAP grant application is located in a
QOZ.
Lastly, with this year’s competition,
the Department also aims to improve
MSAP’s short- and longer-term
outcomes, as well as generate evidence
to inform future efforts, by encouraging
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
13880
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
applicants to propose (1) projects that
are supported by prior evidence, and (2)
robust evaluations of their proposed
MSAP projects that would yield
promising evidence (as defined in this
notice) from which future MSAP
applicants could learn. Along these
lines, we include selection factors that
encourage applicants to provide a
conceptual framework (logic model) as
part of their applications and propose
evaluations designed to produce
promising evidence. Each proposed
project should be supported by a logic
model with clearly defined outcomes
that will inform the project’s
performance measures and evaluation.
In addition, through Competitive
Preference Priority 2, we encourage
applicants to implement activities that
are evidence-based in their proposed
MSAP project schools and we encourage
applicants to submit supporting
evidence that corresponds to the highest
levels of evidence available.
Priorities: This competition includes
five competitive preference priorities. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii),
Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and
3 are from the MSAP regulations at 34
CFR 280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive Preference
Priorities 2 and 4 are from section 4406
of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231e.
Competitive Preference Priority 5 is
from the notice of final priority
published in the Federal Register on
November 27, 2019 (84 FR 65300)
(Opportunity Zones NFP).
Competitive Preference Priorities:
These priorities are competitive
preference priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(i), we award one additional
point to an application that meets
Competitive Preference Priority 1; up to
two additional points to an application,
depending on how well the application
meets Competitive Preference Priority 2;
up to three additional points to an
application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive
Preference Priority 3; up to two
additional points to an application,
depending on how well the application
meets Competitive Preference Priority 4;
and three additional points to an
application that meets Competitive
Preference Priority 5. Depending on
how well the application meets these
priorities, an application may be
awarded up to a total of 11 additional
points. Applicants may apply under
any, all, or none of the competitive
preference priorities. The maximum
possible points for each competitive
preference priority are indicated in
parentheses following the name of the
priority. These points are in addition to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
any points the application earns under
the selection criteria in this notice.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1—
Need for Assistance (0 or 1 additional
points).
The Secretary evaluates the
applicant’s need for assistance by
considering—
(1) The costs of fully implementing
the magnet schools project as proposed;
(2) The resources available to the
applicant to carry out the project if
funds under the program were not
provided;
(3) The extent to which the costs of
the project exceed the applicant’s
resources; and
(4) The difficulty of effectively
carrying out the approved plan and the
project for which assistance is sought,
including consideration of how the
design of the magnet school project—
e.g., the type of program proposed, the
location of the magnet school within the
LEA—impacts on the applicant’s ability
to successfully carry out the approved
plan.
Competitive Preference Priority 2—
New or Revised Magnet Schools Projects
and Strength of Evidence to Support
Proposed Projects (0 to 2 additional
points).
The Secretary determines the extent
to which the applicant proposes to carry
out a new, evidence-based magnet
school program or significantly revise
an existing magnet school program,
using evidence-based methods and
practices, as available, or replicate an
existing magnet school program that has
a demonstrated record of success in
increasing student academic
achievement and reducing isolation of
minority groups.
Competitive Preference Priority 3—
Selection of Students (0 to 3 additional
points).
The Secretary determines the extent
to which the applicant proposes to
select students to attend magnet schools
by methods such as lottery, rather than
through academic examination.
Competitive Preference Priority 4—
Increasing Racial Integration and
Socioeconomic Diversity (0 to 2
additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent
to which the applicant proposes to
increase racial integration by taking into
account socioeconomic diversity in
designing and implementing magnet
school programs.
Competitive Preference Priority 5—
Spurring Investment in Qualified
Opportunity Zones (0 or 3 additional
points).
Under this priority, an applicant must
demonstrate that the area in which the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
applicant proposes to provide services
overlaps with a QOZ, as designated by
the Secretary of the Treasury under
section 1400Z–1 of the Internal Revenue
Code. An applicant must—
(1) Provide the census tract number of
the QOZ(s) in which it proposes to
provide services; and
(2) Describe how the applicant will
provide services in the QOZ(s).
Definitions: The definition of
‘‘evidence-based’’ is from 20 U.S.C.
7801. The remaining definitions are
from 34 CFR 77.1(c).
Demonstrates a rationale means a key
project component included in the
project’s logic model is informed by
research or evaluation findings that
suggest the project component is likely
to improve relevant outcomes.
Evidence-based means an activity,
strategy, or intervention that—
(i) Demonstrates a statistically
significant effect on improving student
outcomes or other relevant outcomes
based on—
(A) Strong evidence from at least one
well-designed and well-implemented
experimental study;
(B) Moderate evidence from at least
one well-designed and wellimplemented quasi-experimental study;
or
(C) Promising evidence from at least
one well-designed and wellimplemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias; or
(ii)(A) Demonstrates a rationale based
on high-quality research findings or
positive evaluation that such activity,
strategy, or intervention is likely to
improve student outcomes or other
relevant outcomes; and
(B) Includes ongoing efforts to
examine the effects of such activity,
strategy, or intervention.
Experimental study means a study
that is designed to compare outcomes
between two groups of individuals
(such as students) that are otherwise
equivalent except for their assignment
to either a treatment group receiving a
project component or a control group
that does not. Randomized controlled
trials, regression discontinuity design
studies, and single-case design studies
are the specific types of experimental
studies that, depending on their design
and implementation (e.g., sample
attrition in randomized controlled trials
and regression discontinuity design
studies), can meet What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) standards
without reservations as described in the
WWC Handbook:
(i) A randomized controlled trial
employs random assignment of, for
example, students, teachers, classrooms,
or schools to receive the project
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
component being evaluated (the
treatment group) or not to receive the
project component (the control group).
(ii) A regression discontinuity design
study assigns the project component
being evaluated using a measured
variable (e.g., assigning students reading
below a cutoff score to tutoring or
developmental education classes) and
controls for that variable in the analysis
of outcomes.
(iii) A single-case design study uses
observations of a single case (e.g., a
student eligible for a behavioral
intervention) over time in the absence
and presence of a controlled treatment
manipulation to determine whether the
outcome is systematically related to the
treatment.
Logic model (also referred to as a
theory of action) means a framework
that identifies key project components
of the proposed project (i.e., the active
‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to
be critical to achieving the relevant
outcomes) and describes the theoretical
and operational relationships among the
key project components and relevant
outcomes.
Project component means an activity,
strategy, intervention, process, product,
practice, or policy included in a project.
Evidence may pertain to an individual
project component or to a combination
of project components (e.g., training
teachers on instructional practices for
English learners and follow-on coaching
for these teachers).
Promising evidence means that there
is evidence of the effectiveness of a key
project component in improving a
relevant outcome, based on a relevant
finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC
reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ or
‘‘moderate evidence base’’ for the
corresponding practice guide
recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared
by the WWC reporting a ‘‘positive
effect’’ or ‘‘potentially positive effect’’
on a relevant outcome with no reporting
of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or ‘‘potentially
negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome;
or
(iii) A single study assessed by the
Department, as appropriate, that—
(A) Is an experimental study, a quasiexperimental design study, or a welldesigned and well-implemented
correlational study with statistical
controls for selection bias (e.g., a study
using regression methods to account for
differences between a treatment group
and a comparison group); and
(B) Includes at least one statistically
significant and positive (i.e., favorable)
effect on a relevant outcome.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Quasi-experimental design study
means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an
experimental study by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the
treatment group in important respects.
This type of study, depending on design
and implementation (e.g., establishment
of baseline equivalence of the groups
being compared), can meet WWC
standards with reservations, but cannot
meet WWC standards without
reservations, as described in the WWC
Handbook.
Relevant outcome means the student
outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key
project component is designed to
improve, consistent with the specific
goals of the program.
What Works Clearinghouse Handbook
(WWC Handbook) means the standards
and procedures set forth in the WWC
Procedures and Standards Handbook,
Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (incorporated
by reference, see 34 CFR 77.2). Study
findings eligible for review under WWC
standards can meet WWC standards
without reservations, meet WWC
standards with reservations, or not meet
WWC standards. WWC practice guides
and intervention reports include
findings from systematic reviews of
evidence as described in the Handbook
documentation.
Note: The What Works Clearinghouse
Procedures and Standards Handbook
(Version 3.0), as well as the more recent
What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks
released in October 2017 (Version 4.0)
and January 2020 (Version 4.1), are
available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
wwc/Handbooks.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231–7231j.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR
parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 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 regulations for this program in 34
CFR part 280. (e) The Opportunity
Zones NFP.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds:
$23,500,887.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13881
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in FY
2021 from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards:
$700,000–$4,000,000 per budget year.
Maximum Award: We will not make
an award to an LEA or a consortium of
LEAS exceeding $15,000,000 for the
project period. Grantees may not expend
more than 50 percent of the year one
grant funds and not more than 15
percent of year two and three grant
funds on planning activities.
Professional development is not
considered to be a planning activity.
Note: Yearly award amounts may
vary.
Estimated Number of Awards: 7–9.
Note: The Department is not bound by
any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or
consortia of LEAs implementing a
desegregation plan as specified in
section III. 3 of this notice.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
program does not require cost sharing or
matching.
3. Application Requirement: Under
section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA,
applicants must describe how a grant
awarded under this competition will be
used to promote desegregation and
include any available evidence on how
the proposed magnet school programs
will increase interaction among students
of different social, economic, ethnic,
and racial backgrounds. If such
evidence is not available, applicants
must include a rationale, based on
current research, for how the proposed
magnet school programs will increase
interaction among students of different
social, economic, ethnic, and racial
backgrounds. Applicants should address
this application requirement in the
project narrative and, as appropriate, the
logic model.
4. Other: Applicants must submit
with their applications one of the
following types of desegregation plans
to establish eligibility to receive MSAP
assistance: (a) A desegregation plan
required by a court order; (b) a
desegregation plan required by a State
agency or an official of competent
jurisdiction; (c) a desegregation plan
required by the Department’s Office for
Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI); or (d)
a voluntary desegregation plan adopted
by the applicant and submitted to the
Department for approval as part of the
application. Under the MSAP
regulations, applicants are required to
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
13882
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
provide all of the information required
in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g) in order
to satisfy the civil rights eligibility
requirements found in 34 CFR
280.2(a)(2) and (b).
In addition to the particular data and
other items for required and voluntary
desegregation plans described in the
application package, an application
must include—
• Projected enrollment by race and
ethnicity for magnet and feeder schools;
• Signed civil rights assurances
(included in the application package);
and
• An assurance that the desegregation
plan is being implemented or will be
implemented if the application is
funded.
Required Desegregation Plans
1. Desegregation plans required by a
court order. An applicant that submits
a desegregation plan required by a court
order must submit complete and signed
copies of all court documents
demonstrating that the magnet schools
are a part of the approved desegregation
plan. Examples of the types of
documents that would meet this
requirement include a Federal or State
court order that establishes specific
magnet schools, amends a previous
order or orders by establishing
additional or different specific magnet
schools, requires or approves the
establishment of one or more
unspecified magnet schools, or that
authorizes the inclusion of magnet
schools at the discretion of the
applicant.
2. Desegregation plans required by a
State agency or official of competent
jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a
desegregation plan ordered by a State
agency or official of competent
jurisdiction must provide
documentation that shows that the
desegregation plan was ordered based
upon a determination that State law was
violated. In the absence of this
documentation, the applicant should
consider its desegregation plan to be a
voluntary plan and submit the data and
information necessary for voluntary
plans.
3. Desegregation plans required by
Title VI. An applicant that submits a
desegregation plan required by OCR
under Title VI must submit a complete
copy of the desegregation plan
demonstrating that magnet schools are
part of the approved plan or that the
plan authorizes the inclusion of magnet
schools at the discretion of the
applicant.
4. Modifications to required
desegregation plans. A previously
approved desegregation plan that does
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
not include the magnet school or
program for which the applicant is now
seeking assistance must be modified to
include the magnet school component.
The modification to the desegregation
plan must be approved by the court,
agency, or official that originally
approved the plan. An applicant that
wishes to modify a previously approved
OCR Title VI desegregation plan to
include different or additional magnet
schools must submit the proposed
modification for review and approval to
the OCR regional office that approved
its original plan.
An applicant should indicate in its
application if it is seeking to modify its
previously approved desegregation plan.
However, all applicants must submit
proof of approval of all modifications to
their plans to the Department by June
11, 2020. Proof of plan modifications
should be mailed to: Gillian CohenBoyer, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room
3C134, Washington, DC 20202–5970.
Telephone: (202) 401–1259. Email:
msap.team@ed.gov.
Voluntary Desegregation Plans
A voluntary desegregation plan must
be approved by the Department each
time an application is submitted for
funding. Even if the Department has
approved a voluntary desegregation
plan in an LEA in the past, to be
reviewed, the desegregation plan must
be resubmitted with the application, by
the application deadline.
An applicant’s voluntary
desegregation plan must describe how
the LEA defines or identifies minority
group isolation, demonstrate how the
LEA will reduce, eliminate, or prevent
minority group isolation for each
magnet school in the proposed magnet
school application, and, if relevant, at
identified feeder schools, demonstrate
that the proposed voluntary
desegregation plan is adequate under
Title VI.
Complete and accurate enrollment
forms and other information as required
by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f)
and (g) for applicants with voluntary
desegregation plans are critical to the
Department’s determination of an
applicant’s eligibility under a voluntary
desegregation plan (specific
requirements are detailed in the
application package).
Voluntary desegregation plan
applicants must submit documentation
of school board approval or
documentation of other official adoption
of the plan as required by the
regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f)(2) when
submitting their application. LEAs that
were previously under a required
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
desegregation plan, but that have
achieved unitary status and so are
voluntary desegregation plan applicants,
typically would not need to include
court orders. Rather, such applications
should provide the documentation
discussed in this section.
5. Single-Sex Programs: An applicant
proposing to operate a single-sex magnet
school or a coeducational magnet school
that offers single-sex classes or
extracurricular activities, will undergo a
review of its proposed single-sex
educational program to determine
compliance with applicable
nondiscrimination laws, including the
Equal Protection Clause of the U.S.
Constitution (as interpreted in United
States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996),
and other cases) and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 (20
U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its
regulations—including 34 CFR 106.34.
This review may require the applicant
to provide additional fact-specific
information about the single-sex
program. Please see the application
package for additional information
about an application proposing a singlesex magnet school or a coeducational
magnet school offering single-sex
classes or extracurricular activities.
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Application Submission
Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education
Discretionary Grant Programs,
published in the Federal Register on
February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and
available at www.govinfo.gov/content/
pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf,
which contain requirements and
information on how to submit an
application.
2. Submission of Proprietary
Information: Given the types of projects
that may be proposed in applications for
the MSAP, 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).
Because we plan to make successful
applications available to the public, you
may wish to request confidentiality of
business information.
Consistent with Executive Order
12600, please designate in your
application any information that you
believe is exempt from disclosure under
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
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. Intergovernmental Review: This
program 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.
4. Funding Restrictions: We specify
unallowable costs in 34 CFR 280.41. We
reference additional regulations
outlining funding restrictions in the
Applicable Regulations section of this
notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The
application narrative is where you, the
applicant, address the selection criteria
that reviewers use to evaluate your
application. We recommend that you (1)
limit the application narrative to 150
pages and (2) 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, as well as all
text in charts, tables, figures, and
graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or
larger or no smaller than 10 pitch
(characters per inch).
• Use one of the following fonts:
Times New Roman, Courier, Courier
New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not
apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the
narrative budget justification; Part IV,
the assurances, certifications, the
desegregation plan and related
information, and the tables used to
respond to Competitive Preference
Priorities 2 and 3; or the one-page
abstract, the resumes, or letters of
support. However, the recommended
page limit does apply to all of the
application narrative in Part III.
6. Notice of Intent To Apply: The
Department will be able to review grant
applications more efficiently if we know
the approximate number of applicants
that intend to apply. Therefore, we
strongly encourage each potential
applicant to notify the Department of
their intent to submit an application. To
do so, please submit your intent to
apply for funding by completing a webbased form at https://oese.ed.gov/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
offices/office-of-discretionary-grantssupport-services/school-choiceimprovement-programs/magnet-schoolassistance-program-msap/. Applicants
that do not notify the Department of
their intent to apply may still apply for
funding.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection
criteria are from 34 CFR 75.210, 280.30,
and 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405
of the ESEA.
The maximum score for all of the
selection criteria is 100 points. The
maximum score for each criterion is
included in parentheses following the
title of the specific selection criterion.
Each criterion also includes the factors
that reviewers will consider in
determining the extent to which an
applicant meets the criterion.
Points awarded under these selection
criteria are in addition to any points an
applicant earns under the competitive
preference priorities in this notice. The
maximum score that an application may
receive under the competitive
preference priorities and the selection
criteria is 111 points.
(a) Desegregation (30 points).
The Secretary reviews each
application to determine the quality of
the desegregation-related activities and
determines the extent to which the
applicant demonstrates—
(1) The effectiveness of its plan to
recruit students from different social,
economic, ethnic, and racial
backgrounds into the magnet schools.
(34 CFR 280.31)
(2) How it will foster interaction
among students of different social,
economic, ethnic, and racial
backgrounds in classroom activities,
extracurricular activities, or other
activities in the magnet schools (or, if
appropriate, in the schools in which the
magnet school programs operate). (34
CFR 280.31)
(3) How it will ensure equal access
and treatment for eligible project
participants who have been traditionally
underrepresented in courses or
activities offered as part of the magnet
school, e.g., women and girls in
mathematics, science, or technology
courses, and disabled students. (34 CFR
280.31)
(4) The effectiveness of all other
desegregation strategies proposed by the
applicant for the elimination, reduction,
or prevention of minority group
isolation in elementary schools and
secondary schools with substantial
proportions of minority students.
(Section 4401(b)(1) of the ESEA)
(b) Quality of Project Design (30
points).
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13883
The Secretary reviews each
application to determine the quality of
the project design. In determining the
quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The manner and extent to which
the magnet school program will increase
student academic achievement in the
instructional area or areas offered by the
school, including any evidence, or if
such evidence is not available, a
rationale based on current research
findings, to support such description.
(Sections 4405(b)(1)(E)(i) and
4405(b)(1)(B) of the ESEA)
(2) The extent to which the training or
professional development services to be
provided by the proposed project are of
sufficient quality, intensity, and
duration to lead to improvements in
practice among the recipients of those
services. (34 CFR 75.210)
(3) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
involve the collaboration of appropriate
partners for maximizing the
effectiveness of project services. (34 CFR
75.210)
(4) The extent to which there is a
conceptual framework underlying the
proposed research or demonstration
activities and the quality of that
framework. (34 CFR 75.210)
(c) Quality of Management Plan (15
points) (34 CFR 75.210).
The Secretary considers the quality of
the management plan for the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the
management plan for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management
plan to achieve the objectives of the
proposed project on time and within
budget, including clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and
milestones for accomplishing project
tasks.
(2) How the applicant will ensure that
a diversity of perspectives are brought to
bear in the operation of the proposed
project, including those of parents,
teachers, the business community, a
variety of disciplinary and professional
fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate.
(3) The extent to which the applicant
demonstrates that it has the resources to
operate the project beyond the length of
the grant, including a multi-year
financial and operating model and
accompanying plan; the demonstrated
commitment of any partners; evidence
of broad support from stakeholders (e.g.,
State educational agencies, teachers’
unions) critical to the project’s longterm success; or more than one of these
types of evidence.
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
13884
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
(d) Quality of Personnel (5 points) (34
CFR 280.31).
(1) The Secretary reviews each
application to determine the
qualifications of the personnel the
applicant plans to use on the project.
The Secretary determines the extent to
which—
(a) The project director (if one is used)
is qualified to manage the project;
(b) Other key personnel are qualified
to manage the project; and
(c) Teachers who will provide
instruction in participating magnet
schools are qualified to implement the
special curriculum of the magnet
schools.
(2) To determine personnel
qualifications, the Secretary considers
experience and training in fields related
to the objectives of the project,
including the key personnel’s
knowledge of and experience in
curriculum development and
desegregation strategies.
(e) Quality of Project Evaluation (20
points) (34 CFR 75.210).
The Secretary considers the quality of
the evaluation to be conducted of the
proposed project. In determining the
quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation will, if well implemented,
produce promising evidence (as defined
in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) about the project’s
effectiveness.
(2) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation include the use of
objective performance measures that are
clearly related to the intended outcomes
of the project and will produce
quantitative and qualitative data to the
extent possible.
(3) The extent to which the costs are
reasonable in relation to the objectives,
design, and potential significance of the
proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We
remind potential applicants that in
reviewing applications in any
discretionary grant competition, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR
75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the
applicant in carrying out a previous
award, such as the applicant’s use of
funds, achievement of project
objectives, and compliance with grant
conditions. The Secretary 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Risk Assessment and Specific
Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under
this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by
applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the
Secretary may impose specific
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.
4. Integrity and Performance System:
If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that
over the course of the project period
may exceed the simplified acquisition
threshold (currently $250,000) under 2
CFR 200.205(a)(2), we must make a
judgment about your integrity, business
ethics, and record of performance under
Federal awards—that is, the risk posed
by you as an applicant—before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider
any information about you that is in the
integrity and performance system
(currently referred to as the Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS), accessible
through the System for Award
Management. You may review and
comment on any information about
yourself that a Federal agency
previously entered and that is currently
in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of
your currently active grants, cooperative
agreements, and procurement contracts
from the Federal Government exceeds
$10,000,000, the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII,
require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually.
Please review the requirements in 2 CFR
part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant
plus all the other Federal funds you
receive exceed $10,000,000.
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 as well.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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. Open Licensing Requirements:
Unless an exception applies, if you are
awarded a grant under this competition,
you will be required to openly license
to the public grant deliverables created
in whole, or in part, with Department
grant funds. When the deliverable
consists of modifications to pre-existing
works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately
identified and only to the extent that
open licensing is permitted under the
terms of any licenses or other legal
restrictions on the use of pre-existing
works. Additionally, a grantee or
subgrantee that is awarded competitive
grant funds must have a plan to
disseminate these public grant
deliverables. This dissemination plan
can be developed and submitted after
your application has been reviewed and
selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing
requirements, please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20(c).
4. 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) If awarded a grant, applicants that
responded to the selection criterion
(e)(1), Quality of the Project Evaluation,
must also submit a final evaluation
report addressing the study to produce
promising evidence.
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 47 / Tuesday, March 10, 2020 / Notices
5. Performance Measures: We have
established the following five
performance measures for the MSAP:
(a) The number and percentage of
magnet schools receiving assistance
whose student enrollment reduces,
eliminates, or prevents minority group
isolation.
(b) The percentage increase of
students from major racial and ethnic
groups in magnet schools receiving
assistance who score proficient or above
on State assessments in reading/
language arts as compared to previous
year’s data.
(c) The percentage increase of
students from major racial and ethnic
groups in magnet schools receiving
assistance who score proficient or above
on State assessments in mathematics as
compared to previous year’s data.
(d) The percentage of magnet schools
that received assistance that are still
operating magnet school programs three
years after Federal funding ends.
(e) The percentage of magnet schools
that received assistance that meet the
State’s annual measurable objectives
and, for high schools, graduation rate
targets at least three years after Federal
funding ends.
Note: Recognizing that States are no
longer required to report annual
measurable objectives to the Department
under the ESEA, we include this
performance measure in order to ensure
MSAP grantees monitor and report high
school graduation rates. States must
establish and measure against
ambitious, long-term goals; we
encourage MSAP grantees to consider
these State goals and incorporate them
into their annual performance reporting
as appropriate.
6. 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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Mar 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document
and a copy of the application package in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. 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 Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF, you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Dated: March 5, 2020.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020–04885 Filed 3–9–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. EL20–28–000]
Edenton Solar, LLC Complainant, v.
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Respondent; Notice of Complaint
Take notice that on February 28, 2020,
pursuant to section 206 of the Federal
Power Act and Rule 206 of the Rules of
Practice and Procedures of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission), 18 CFR 385.206, Edenton
Solar, LLC (Edenton Solar or
Complainant) filed a complaint against
Virginia Electric and Power Company
(VEPCO or Respondent), requesting the
Commission find that Edenton Solar has
met the requirements for
commencement of service under the
Agreement for the Sale of Electrical
Output to VEPCO dated November 9,
2017, as more fully explained in the
complaint.
The Complainant certifies that copies
of the complaint were served on the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13885
contacts for the Respondent as listed on
the Commission’s list of Corporate
Officials.
Any person desiring to intervene or to
protest this filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of
the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214).
Protests will be considered by the
Commission in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to
the proceeding. Any person wishing to
become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate. All interventions, or
protests must be filed on or before the
comment date.
The Commission encourages
electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the
‘‘eFiling’’ link at https://www.ferc.gov.
Persons unable to fileelectronically
should submit an original and 5 copies
of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE Washington, DC
20426.
This filing is accessible on-line at
https://www.ferc.gov, using the
‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for
electronic review in the Commission’s
Public Reference Room in Washington,
DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on
the website that enables subscribers to
receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC
Online service, please email
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call
(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202) 502–8659.
Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Time on March 13, 2020.
Dated: March 4, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–04873 Filed 3–9–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. ER20–1086–000]
Pegasus Wind A, LLC; Supplemental
Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate
Filing Includes Request for Blanket
Section 204 Authorization
This is a supplemental notice in the
above-referenced proceeding of Pegasus
Wind A, LLC’s application for marketbased rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that
such application includes a request for
E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM
10MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13878-13885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04885]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2020 for the Magnet
Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) number 84.165A. This notice relates to the approved
information collection under OMB control number 1855-0011.
DATES:
Application Available: March 10, 2020.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: April 9, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 26, 2020.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 23, 2020.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than March 16, 2020,
MSAP will hold a webinar to provide technical assistance to interested
applicants. Detailed information regarding this webinar will be
provided on the MSAP web page at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. A recording of this
webinar will be available on the MSAP web page following the session.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1259. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
[[Page 13879]]
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: MSAP, authorized under title IV, part D of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended by the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESEA), provides grants to local educational agencies
(LEAs) and consortia of LEAs to support magnet schools under an
approved, required, or voluntary desegregation plan.
Under the ESEA, MSAP prioritizes the creation and replication of
evidence-based (as defined in this notice) magnet programs and magnet
schools that seek to reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group
isolation by taking into account socioeconomic diversity.
Grantees may use grant funds for activities intended to improve
students' academic achievement, including acquiring books, materials,
technology, and equipment to support a rigorous, theme-based academic
program; conducting planning and promotional activities; providing
professional development opportunities for teachers to implement the
academic program; and paying the salaries of effective teachers and
other instructional personnel. MSAP also enables LEAs to support
student transportation, provided the transportation costs are
sustainable and the costs do not constitute a significant portion of
grant funds.
Background: MSAP seeks to reduce, eliminate or prevent minority
group isolation by funding projects carried out by LEAs or consortia of
LEAs that propose to implement magnet schools with academically
challenging, innovative instructional approaches, or specialized
curricula that are, consistent with constitutional and statutory
limitations, ``designed to bring students from different social,
economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds together.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through the implementation of high-demand programming, using
sophisticated technology and curricula, magnet schools have often
served as a conduit for innovative, theme-based instruction. For
example, 61 percent of the 145 schools currently supported by MSAP
grants include science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
themes in their programming, which aligns with the Secretary's
Supplemental Priority 6, Promoting STEM Education.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ STEM is also a national priority. For more details, see
``Charting A Course For Success: America's Strategy For STEM
Education,'' www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf (December 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While some grantees have effectively implemented innovative, theme-
based programming and successfully diversified their schools, other
grantees have struggled to meet their desegregation goals. Significant
variations in grantees' ability to increase academic achievement also
persist. Therefore, we continue to use selection criteria to focus on
projects that seek to promote academic achievement and reduce,
eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation. The Department
encourages applicants to propose projects of high interest to students
and families that offer rigorous curriculum with authentic theme-based
experiences and to form integrated partnerships that will attract and
retain students from different racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. In
this year's competition we have added criteria specific to
partnerships. Specifically, we encourage applicants to propose robust
partnerships that offer relevant opportunities for students and
teachers, such as mentoring, apprenticeships, certifications, and
theme-related, industry-specific experiences.
In addition, as part of MSAP's focus on improving academic
achievement and reducing, eliminating, or preventing minority group
isolation, consistent with constitutional and statutory limitations, we
encourage applicants, through competitive preference points, to propose
projects that would increase racial integration by taking into account
socioeconomic diversity. Beyond proposing quality projects that have
the potential to attract students from various backgrounds, we
encourage applicants to propose a range of activities that incorporate
a focus on socioeconomic and racial diversity, such as: Establishing
and participating in a voluntary, inter-district transfer program for
students from varied neighborhoods; making strategic decisions
regarding magnet school sites to maximize the potential diversity of
the school given the school's neighboring communities; revising school
boundaries, attendance zones, or feeder patterns to take into account
residential segregation or other related issues; and formal merging or
coordinating among multiple educational jurisdictions in order to pool
resources, provide transportation, and expand high-quality public
school options for lower-income students. Applicants that choose to
address this priority should identify the criteria they intend to use
to determine students' socioeconomic status (e.g., family income level,
education level of the students' parent or guardian, other factors
identified by the LEA, or a combination thereof) and clearly describe
how their approach to incorporating socioeconomic diversity is part of
their overall effort to eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group
isolation.
To encourage systemic and timely change, the Department is
interested in proposals that establish new school assignment or
admissions policies for schools that seek to increase the number of
low-income students schools serve through new student assignment
policies that consider the socioeconomic status of students'
households, students residing in neighborhoods experiencing
concentrated poverty, and students from low-performing schools (among
other factors). As applicable, each applicant should coordinate with
other relevant government entities--such as housing and transportation
authorities, among others--given the impact that other public policies
have on the composition of a school's student body. Such proposals may
be addressed in response to Competitive Preference Priority 4.
This NIA also includes a competitive preference priority for MSAP
projects that would be carried out in areas that overlap with a
Qualified Opportunity Zone (QOZ). Public Law (Pub. L.) 115-97
authorized the designation of QOZs to promote economic development and
job creation in distressed communities through preferential tax
treatment for investors. A list of QOZs is available at
www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/Opportunity-Zones.aspx; applicants may also
determine whether a particular area overlaps with a QOZ using the
National Center of Education Statistics' map located at: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/LocaleLookup/. To receive competitive
preference points under this priority, applicants must provide the
Department with the census tract number of the QOZ they plan to serve
and describe the services they will provide. For the purpose of this
competition, applicants should consider the area where their LEA is
located to be the area that must overlap with a QOZ; an LEA may be
considered to overlap with a QOZ even if only one magnet school
included in the current MSAP grant application is located in a QOZ.
Lastly, with this year's competition, the Department also aims to
improve MSAP's short- and longer-term outcomes, as well as generate
evidence to inform future efforts, by encouraging
[[Page 13880]]
applicants to propose (1) projects that are supported by prior
evidence, and (2) robust evaluations of their proposed MSAP projects
that would yield promising evidence (as defined in this notice) from
which future MSAP applicants could learn. Along these lines, we include
selection factors that encourage applicants to provide a conceptual
framework (logic model) as part of their applications and propose
evaluations designed to produce promising evidence. Each proposed
project should be supported by a logic model with clearly defined
outcomes that will inform the project's performance measures and
evaluation. In addition, through Competitive Preference Priority 2, we
encourage applicants to implement activities that are evidence-based in
their proposed MSAP project schools and we encourage applicants to
submit supporting evidence that corresponds to the highest levels of
evidence available.
Priorities: This competition includes five competitive preference
priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive
Preference Priorities 1 and 3 are from the MSAP regulations at 34 CFR
280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive
Preference Priorities 2 and 4 are from section 4406 of the ESEA, 20
U.S.C. 7231e. Competitive Preference Priority 5 is from the notice of
final priority published in the Federal Register on November 27, 2019
(84 FR 65300) (Opportunity Zones NFP).
Competitive Preference Priorities: These priorities are competitive
preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award one
additional point to an application that meets Competitive Preference
Priority 1; up to two additional points to an application, depending on
how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 2; up to
three additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 3; up to two
additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4; and three
additional points to an application that meets Competitive Preference
Priority 5. Depending on how well the application meets these
priorities, an application may be awarded up to a total of 11
additional points. Applicants may apply under any, all, or none of the
competitive preference priorities. The maximum possible points for each
competitive preference priority are indicated in parentheses following
the name of the priority. These points are in addition to any points
the application earns under the selection criteria in this notice.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Need for Assistance (0 or 1
additional points).
The Secretary evaluates the applicant's need for assistance by
considering--
(1) The costs of fully implementing the magnet schools project as
proposed;
(2) The resources available to the applicant to carry out the
project if funds under the program were not provided;
(3) The extent to which the costs of the project exceed the
applicant's resources; and
(4) The difficulty of effectively carrying out the approved plan
and the project for which assistance is sought, including consideration
of how the design of the magnet school project--e.g., the type of
program proposed, the location of the magnet school within the LEA--
impacts on the applicant's ability to successfully carry out the
approved plan.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--New or Revised Magnet Schools
Projects and Strength of Evidence to Support Proposed Projects (0 to 2
additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to carry out a new, evidence-based magnet school program or
significantly revise an existing magnet school program, using evidence-
based methods and practices, as available, or replicate an existing
magnet school program that has a demonstrated record of success in
increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of
minority groups.
Competitive Preference Priority 3--Selection of Students (0 to 3
additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to select students to attend magnet schools by methods such as lottery,
rather than through academic examination.
Competitive Preference Priority 4--Increasing Racial Integration
and Socioeconomic Diversity (0 to 2 additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic
diversity in designing and implementing magnet school programs.
Competitive Preference Priority 5--Spurring Investment in Qualified
Opportunity Zones (0 or 3 additional points).
Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that the area in
which the applicant proposes to provide services overlaps with a QOZ,
as designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under section 1400Z-1 of
the Internal Revenue Code. An applicant must--
(1) Provide the census tract number of the QOZ(s) in which it
proposes to provide services; and
(2) Describe how the applicant will provide services in the QOZ(s).
Definitions: The definition of ``evidence-based'' is from 20 U.S.C.
7801. The remaining definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1(c).
Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in
the project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation
findings that suggest the project component is likely to improve
relevant outcomes.
Evidence-based means an activity, strategy, or intervention that--
(i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving
student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on--
(A) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented experimental study;
(B) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented quasi-experimental study; or
(C) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection
bias; or
(ii)(A) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research
findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or
intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant
outcomes; and
(B) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such
activity, strategy, or intervention.
Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare
outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are
otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment
group receiving a project component or a control group that does not.
Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies,
and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental
studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g.,
sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression
discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)
standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbook:
(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for
example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the
project
[[Page 13881]]
component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the
project component (the control group).
(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project
component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning
students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental
education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of
outcomes.
(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case
(e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in
the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to
determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the
treatment.
Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to be
critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project
components and relevant outcomes.
Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention,
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).
Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the
effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant
outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a ``strong evidence
base'' or ``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding practice
guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a
``positive effect'' or ``potentially positive effect'' on a relevant
outcome with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate,
that--
(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or
a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression
methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a
comparison group); and
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome.
Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation
(e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being
compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet
WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbook.
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s)
the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the
specific goals of the program.
What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook) means the
standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards
Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (incorporated by reference, see 34
CFR 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can
meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with
reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and
intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of
evidence as described in the Handbook documentation.
Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards
Handbook (Version 3.0), as well as the more recent What Works
Clearinghouse Handbooks released in October 2017 (Version 4.0) and
January 2020 (Version 4.1), are available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 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 regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 280. (e)
The Opportunity Zones NFP.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $23,500,887.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2021 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $700,000-$4,000,000 per budget year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award to an LEA or a consortium
of LEAS exceeding $15,000,000 for the project period. Grantees may not
expend more than 50 percent of the year one grant funds and not more
than 15 percent of year two and three grant funds on planning
activities. Professional development is not considered to be a planning
activity.
Note: Yearly award amounts may vary.
Estimated Number of Awards: 7-9.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or consortia of LEAs implementing a
desegregation plan as specified in section III. 3 of this notice.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Application Requirement: Under section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the
ESEA, applicants must describe how a grant awarded under this
competition will be used to promote desegregation and include any
available evidence on how the proposed magnet school programs will
increase interaction among students of different social, economic,
ethnic, and racial backgrounds. If such evidence is not available,
applicants must include a rationale, based on current research, for how
the proposed magnet school programs will increase interaction among
students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds.
Applicants should address this application requirement in the project
narrative and, as appropriate, the logic model.
4. Other: Applicants must submit with their applications one of the
following types of desegregation plans to establish eligibility to
receive MSAP assistance: (a) A desegregation plan required by a court
order; (b) a desegregation plan required by a State agency or an
official of competent jurisdiction; (c) a desegregation plan required
by the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI); or (d) a voluntary desegregation
plan adopted by the applicant and submitted to the Department for
approval as part of the application. Under the MSAP regulations,
applicants are required to
[[Page 13882]]
provide all of the information required in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g)
in order to satisfy the civil rights eligibility requirements found in
34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) and (b).
In addition to the particular data and other items for required and
voluntary desegregation plans described in the application package, an
application must include--
Projected enrollment by race and ethnicity for magnet and
feeder schools;
Signed civil rights assurances (included in the
application package); and
An assurance that the desegregation plan is being
implemented or will be implemented if the application is funded.
Required Desegregation Plans
1. Desegregation plans required by a court order. An applicant that
submits a desegregation plan required by a court order must submit
complete and signed copies of all court documents demonstrating that
the magnet schools are a part of the approved desegregation plan.
Examples of the types of documents that would meet this requirement
include a Federal or State court order that establishes specific magnet
schools, amends a previous order or orders by establishing additional
or different specific magnet schools, requires or approves the
establishment of one or more unspecified magnet schools, or that
authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the
applicant.
2. Desegregation plans required by a State agency or official of
competent jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a desegregation plan
ordered by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction must
provide documentation that shows that the desegregation plan was
ordered based upon a determination that State law was violated. In the
absence of this documentation, the applicant should consider its
desegregation plan to be a voluntary plan and submit the data and
information necessary for voluntary plans.
3. Desegregation plans required by Title VI. An applicant that
submits a desegregation plan required by OCR under Title VI must submit
a complete copy of the desegregation plan demonstrating that magnet
schools are part of the approved plan or that the plan authorizes the
inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.
4. Modifications to required desegregation plans. A previously
approved desegregation plan that does not include the magnet school or
program for which the applicant is now seeking assistance must be
modified to include the magnet school component. The modification to
the desegregation plan must be approved by the court, agency, or
official that originally approved the plan. An applicant that wishes to
modify a previously approved OCR Title VI desegregation plan to include
different or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed
modification for review and approval to the OCR regional office that
approved its original plan.
An applicant should indicate in its application if it is seeking to
modify its previously approved desegregation plan. However, all
applicants must submit proof of approval of all modifications to their
plans to the Department by June 11, 2020. Proof of plan modifications
should be mailed to: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202-5970.
Telephone: (202) 401-1259. Email: [email protected].
Voluntary Desegregation Plans
A voluntary desegregation plan must be approved by the Department
each time an application is submitted for funding. Even if the
Department has approved a voluntary desegregation plan in an LEA in the
past, to be reviewed, the desegregation plan must be resubmitted with
the application, by the application deadline.
An applicant's voluntary desegregation plan must describe how the
LEA defines or identifies minority group isolation, demonstrate how the
LEA will reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation for
each magnet school in the proposed magnet school application, and, if
relevant, at identified feeder schools, demonstrate that the proposed
voluntary desegregation plan is adequate under Title VI.
Complete and accurate enrollment forms and other information as
required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f) and (g) for applicants
with voluntary desegregation plans are critical to the Department's
determination of an applicant's eligibility under a voluntary
desegregation plan (specific requirements are detailed in the
application package).
Voluntary desegregation plan applicants must submit documentation
of school board approval or documentation of other official adoption of
the plan as required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f)(2) when
submitting their application. LEAs that were previously under a
required desegregation plan, but that have achieved unitary status and
so are voluntary desegregation plan applicants, typically would not
need to include court orders. Rather, such applications should provide
the documentation discussed in this section.
5. Single-Sex Programs: An applicant proposing to operate a single-
sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school that offers single-
sex classes or extracurricular activities, will undergo a review of its
proposed single-sex educational program to determine compliance with
applicable nondiscrimination laws, including the Equal Protection
Clause of the U.S. Constitution (as interpreted in United States v.
Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), and other cases) and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its
regulations--including 34 CFR 106.34. This review may require the
applicant to provide additional fact-specific information about the
single-sex program. Please see the application package for additional
information about an application proposing a single-sex magnet school
or a coeducational magnet school offering single-sex classes or
extracurricular activities.
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which
contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.
2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the MSAP, 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).
Because we plan to make successful applications available to the
public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business
information.
Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure
under
[[Page 13883]]
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. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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.
4. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR
280.41. We reference additional regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to 150 pages and (2) 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, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover
sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances, certifications, the
desegregation plan and related information, and the tables used to
respond to Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 3; or the one-page
abstract, the resumes, or letters of support. However, the recommended
page limit does apply to all of the application narrative in Part III.
6. Notice of Intent To Apply: The Department will be able to review
grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number
of applicants that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage
each potential applicant to notify the Department of their intent to
submit an application. To do so, please submit your intent to apply for
funding by completing a web-based form at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. Applicants
that do not notify the Department of their intent to apply may still
apply for funding.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria are from 34 CFR
75.210, 280.30, and 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405 of the ESEA.
The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points.
The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses
following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion
also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining
the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.
Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to
any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference
priorities in this notice. The maximum score that an application may
receive under the competitive preference priorities and the selection
criteria is 111 points.
(a) Desegregation (30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the desegregation-related activities and determines the extent to which
the applicant demonstrates--
(1) The effectiveness of its plan to recruit students from
different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds into the
magnet schools. (34 CFR 280.31)
(2) How it will foster interaction among students of different
social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in classroom
activities, extracurricular activities, or other activities in the
magnet schools (or, if appropriate, in the schools in which the magnet
school programs operate). (34 CFR 280.31)
(3) How it will ensure equal access and treatment for eligible
project participants who have been traditionally underrepresented in
courses or activities offered as part of the magnet school, e.g., women
and girls in mathematics, science, or technology courses, and disabled
students. (34 CFR 280.31)
(4) The effectiveness of all other desegregation strategies
proposed by the applicant for the elimination, reduction, or prevention
of minority group isolation in elementary schools and secondary schools
with substantial proportions of minority students. (Section 4401(b)(1)
of the ESEA)
(b) Quality of Project Design (30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the project design. In determining the quality of the design of the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The manner and extent to which the magnet school program will
increase student academic achievement in the instructional area or
areas offered by the school, including any evidence, or if such
evidence is not available, a rationale based on current research
findings, to support such description. (Sections 4405(b)(1)(E)(i) and
4405(b)(1)(B) of the ESEA)
(2) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services. (34 CFR 75.210)
(3) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for
maximizing the effectiveness of project services. (34 CFR 75.210)
(4) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework. (34 CFR 75.210)
(c) Quality of Management Plan (15 points) (34 CFR 75.210).
The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(2) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate.
(3) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates that it has the
resources to operate the project beyond the length of the grant,
including a multi-year financial and operating model and accompanying
plan; the demonstrated commitment of any partners; evidence of broad
support from stakeholders (e.g., State educational agencies, teachers'
unions) critical to the project's long-term success; or more than one
of these types of evidence.
[[Page 13884]]
(d) Quality of Personnel (5 points) (34 CFR 280.31).
(1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the
qualifications of the personnel the applicant plans to use on the
project. The Secretary determines the extent to which--
(a) The project director (if one is used) is qualified to manage
the project;
(b) Other key personnel are qualified to manage the project; and
(c) Teachers who will provide instruction in participating magnet
schools are qualified to implement the special curriculum of the magnet
schools.
(2) To determine personnel qualifications, the Secretary considers
experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the
project, including the key personnel's knowledge of and experience in
curriculum development and desegregation strategies.
(e) Quality of Project Evaluation (20 points) (34 CFR 75.210).
The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well
implemented, produce promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))
about the project's effectiveness.
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
(3) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary 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
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
3474.10, the Secretary may impose specific 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.
4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000) under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2), we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
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
as well.
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. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables.
This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements, please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20(c).
4. 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) If awarded a grant, applicants that responded to the selection
criterion (e)(1), Quality of the Project Evaluation, must also submit a
final evaluation report addressing the study to produce promising
evidence.
[[Page 13885]]
5. Performance Measures: We have established the following five
performance measures for the MSAP:
(a) The number and percentage of magnet schools receiving
assistance whose student enrollment reduces, eliminates, or prevents
minority group isolation.
(b) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in reading/language arts as
compared to previous year's data.
(c) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in mathematics as compared to
previous year's data.
(d) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that
are still operating magnet school programs three years after Federal
funding ends.
(e) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that
meet the State's annual measurable objectives and, for high schools,
graduation rate targets at least three years after Federal funding
ends.
Note: Recognizing that States are no longer required to report
annual measurable objectives to the Department under the ESEA, we
include this performance measure in order to ensure MSAP grantees
monitor and report high school graduation rates. States must establish
and measure against ambitious, long-term goals; we encourage MSAP
grantees to consider these State goals and incorporate them into their
annual performance reporting as appropriate.
6. 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. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to
the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. 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 Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: March 5, 2020.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-04885 Filed 3-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P