Postsecondary Student Success Grant, 48517-48523 [2024-12502]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
B. Information Collection by Vessel
Owner or Operator for Submission to
the Coast Guard, EPA, or Both
(1) Do you recommend any specific
improvements for completing the
vessel’s ballast water management
reporting form for submission to the
NBIC and why? Please provide details.
(2) Based on your current experience
with collecting information for the
EPA’s VGP via the Electronic Notice of
Intent (eNOI) application, do you
recommend any specific improvements
to a potential future compliance and
enforcement data system and why?
Please provide details.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
C. Compiling Data and Preparing
Reports by Vessel Owner or Operator for
Submission to the Coast Guard, EPA, or
Both
(1) Based on your current user
experience with the instructions
provided on the vessel’s VGP annual
report and the vessel’s ballast water
management reporting form, what
improvements to a potential future
compliance and enforcement data
system do you recommend? Please
provide details.
(2) Based on your current user
experience with completing the vessel’s
VGP annual report and the vessel’s
ballast water management reporting
form, what improvements to a potential
future compliance and enforcement data
system do you recommend? Please
provide details.
(3) Are there any other types of
software, in addition to using Microsoft
Office file formats, that you use for
compiling EPA’s VGP information?
Please provide details.
(4) Does your vessel owner or operator
prepare the vessel’s VGP annual report,
including DMR data, locally or is
information compiled using other
means and forwarded to a central
location or separate office? Please
provide details.
(5) Based on your current user
experience with compiling and
preparing information for submission to
either the EPA’s VGP eNOI application
or to the NBIC, are there any specific
improvements to any potential future
compliance and enforcement data
system you recommend? Please provide
details.
D. Submission of Reports by Vessel
Owner or Operators to the Coast Guard
or EPA
(1) What improvements with
submitting the vessel’s ballast water
management reporting form do you
recommend? Please provide details.
(2) Are there are any specific
improvements you suggest for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
submitting information to the NBIC
website? Please provide details and
examples of what works well and data
fields that could be improved for ease of
submission.
(3) Based on your user experience
with completing and submitting the
vessel’s VGP annual report, including
any DMR data, what recommendations
do you have for any potential future
compliance and enforcement data
system? Please provide details.
(4) Based on your user experience
with the EPA’s VGP eNOI system and
the submission process (including data
verification) for the annual report, what
recommendations do you have for any
potential future compliance and
enforcement data system? Please
provide details and examples of what
works well.
Dated: June 4, 2024.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and
Standards.
[FR Doc. 2024–12572 Filed 6–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
[ED–2024–OPE–0069]
Postsecondary Student Success Grant
Office of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) proposes priorities,
requirements, and definitions for use in
the Postsecondary Student Success
Grant (PSSG) program, Assistance
Listing Number 84.116M. The
Department may use one or more of
these priorities, requirements, and
definitions for competitions in fiscal
year (FY) 2024 and later years. We
intend for these priorities, requirements,
and definitions to support projects that
equitably improve postsecondary
student outcomes, including retention,
upward transfer, and completions of
value, by leveraging data and
implementing, scaling, and rigorously
evaluating evidence-based activities to
support data-driven decisions and
actions that lead to credentials that
support economic success and further
education.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before July 8, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be
submitted via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at www.regulations.gov. However,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48517
if you require an accommodation or
cannot otherwise submit your
comments via www.regulations.gov,
please contact the program contact
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. The Department
will not accept comments submitted by
fax or by email, or comments submitted
after the comment period closes. To
ensure the Department does not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your
comments only once. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket, is available on the
site under ‘‘FAQ.’’
Note: The Department’s policy is
generally to make comments received
from members of the public available for
public viewing in their entirety on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only
information that they wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nemeka Mason-Clercin, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC
20202–4260. Telephone: (202) 987–
1340. Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, Room 5C127, Washington,
DC 20202–4260. Telephone: (202) 453–
7953. Email: PSSG@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you
to submit comments regarding the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions. To ensure that your
comments have maximum effect in
developing the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions, we urge
you to clearly identify the specific
section of the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions that each
comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 14094 and their
overall requirement of reducing
regulatory burden that might result from
these proposed priorities, requirements,
and definitions. Please let us know of
any further ways we could reduce
potential costs or increase potential
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
48518
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
benefits while preserving the effective
and efficient administration of the
program.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect public comments about
the proposed priorities, requirements,
and definitions by accessing
Regulations.gov. To inspect comments
in person, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Assistance to Individuals with
Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will
provide an appropriate accommodation
or auxiliary aid to an individual with a
disability who needs assistance to
review the comments or other
documents in the public rulemaking
record for these proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions. If you
want to schedule an appointment for
this type of accommodation or auxiliary
aid, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the PSSG program is to equitably
improve postsecondary student
outcomes, including retention, upward
transfer, and completions of value, by
leveraging data and implementing,
scaling, and rigorously evaluating
evidence-based activities to support
data-driven decisions and actions that
lead to credentials that support
economic success and further
education.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138–
1138d.
Proposed Priorities
We propose five priorities. We may
use one or more of these priorities in
any year in which this program is in
effect.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Background
In today’s economy, 67 percent of
U.S. jobs require a postsecondary
credential, and by 2031, this percentage
is projected to grow to 71 percent.1 Data
show that as educational attainment
increases, median earnings steadily
increase.2 One in three first-time
students at two-year colleges, and two
in three first-time students at four-year
colleges, graduate from the first
institution they attend within three and
1 Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Van Der Werf, M., &
Quinn, M.C. (2023). After Everything: Projections of
jobs, education, and training requirements through
2031. Georgetown University—Georgetown Public
Policy Institute Center on Education and the
Workforce.
2 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2023, September
6). Education pays—Earnings and unemployment
rates by educational attainment, 2023.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
six years respectively.3 Students from
low-income backgrounds, firstgeneration students, students of color,
adult students, students with
disabilities, veterans, and other students
who have been historically underserved
in postsecondary education often fare
worse.4 It is critical for institutions of
higher education (IHEs) to provide
student support systems to improve
retention, progression, and completion
rates for all students, while decreasing
economic and social equity gaps for
students of color and students from lowincome backgrounds.
Students of color and students from
low-income backgrounds still face
barriers to successfully enrolling in and
completing college.5 6 Between 2018 and
2022, there was a seven percent
decrease in undergraduate enrollment
overall, but larger decreases for Black (8
percent), American Indian/Alaska
Native (10 percent) students, and Pacific
Islander students (13 percent). From
2018 to 2022, there also has been a
decrease in enrollment for Pell Grant
recipients (13 percent).7 In addition,
while graduation rates (within 6 years
after entry) have increased in four-year
institutions overall (5.2 percentage
points) since 2015 (2009 cohort),
double-digit graduation rate gaps
between some underrepresented
students of color and White students
remain (e.g., 22 percentage point gap for
Black students), and there is a 17
percentage point gap in completers
(within 8 years after entry) between Pell
and non-Pell full-time, first-time
students in public four-year
institutions.8 The same issues are
3 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/
dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics (2024).
Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/
digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.20.asp.
4 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020237.pdf.
5 Thiem, K.C., & Dasgupta, N. (2022). From
precollege to career: Barriers facing historically
marginalized students and evidence-based
solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review, 16(1),
212–251.
6 Rabourn, K.E., BrckaLorenz, A., & Shoup, R.
(2018). Reimagining student engagement: How
nontraditional adult learners engage in traditional
postsecondary environments. The Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 22–33.
7 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/
dt23_306.10.asp and College Board. (2023,
October). Trends in Higher Education Series:
Trends in Student Aid 2023.
8 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/
dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics (2023).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
occurring in two-year institutions, with
a modest overall graduation rate (within
3 years after entry) increase (3.1
percentage points) since 2012 (2009
cohort), but declining rates for Black
and Hispanic students, which has
increased the graduation gap between
White students and some
underrepresented students of color.9
Furthermore, as more underserved
students attend college, additional and
different resources are often required to
support them in successfully
completing their credentials. Today, 25
percent of postsecondary students are
age 25 or older,10 about 70 percent of
students work while enrolled,11 and 22
percent of students are parents.12 At
public, 2-year degree-granting
institutions, 31 percent of students
enrolled are age 25 or older,13 and 42
percent of all student parents attend
community colleges.14
Research has found that IHEs can
employ a multifaceted and integrated
approach and mitigate the barriers that
hinder students in their educational
trajectories, by addressing academic,
financial, and other challenges.15
Moreover, IHEs that have improved
completion rates, including for
underserved students, use timely,
disaggregated, actionable data to
identify institutional barriers to student
success, implement interventions, and
evaluate impact on an ongoing basis.16
Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?
query=&query2=&resultType=all&page
=1&sortBy=date_desc&surveyComponents=
Outcome%20Measures%20(OM)&collection
Years=2021-22&sources=Tables%20Library
&overlayTableId=36029.
9 U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics (2024). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/
dt23_326.20.asp.
10 National Center for Education Statistics (2022).
Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/
digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
11 Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Melton, M., & Price,
E.W. (2015). Learning while earning: The new
normal. Georgetown University—Georgetown Public
Policy Institute Center on Education and the
Workforce.
12 Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D.,
& Polk, P. (2019). Parents in College: By the
Numbers. Institute for Women’s Policy Research.
13 National Center for Education Statistics (2022).
Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/
digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
14 Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D.,
& Polk, P. (2019). Parents in College: By the
Numbers. Institute for Women’s Policy Research.
15 Scrivener, S., Weiss, M.J., Ratledge, A., Rudd,
T., Sommo, C., & Fresques, H. (2015). Doubling
Graduation Rates: Three-Year Effects of CUNY’s
Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP)
for Developmental Education Students. New York:
MDRC.
16 Phillips, B.C., & Horowitz, J.E. (2013).
Maximizing data use: A focus on the completion
agenda. In Special Issue: The College Completion
Agenda-Practical Approaches for Reaching the Big
Goal. New Directions for Community Colleges,
2013(164), 17–25.
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Institutional leadership is critical to
ensure that the student experience is
intentionally designed to increase
student retention, progression, and
completion rates.17
The first three proposed priorities in
this document would establish a
multitier structure to enable the
Department to link the amount of
funding an applicant may receive to the
quality of evidence supporting the
efficacy of a proposed project and to the
proposed project’s plan to scale the
evidence-based strategy. This approach
would enable the Department to meet
the congressional intent outlined in the
House Report 117–403 and the
explanatory statement accompanying
Division H of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023 (117 Pub. L.
328) to execute the grant program as a
tiered-evidence competition in the same
structure as the Education Innovation
and Research (EIR) program. Congress
continued this directive to the
Department through the explanatory
statement accompanying Division D of
the Further Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2024 (118 Pub. L.
47). The first proposed priority would
give the Department the flexibility to
select either Demonstrates a Rationale or
Promising Evidence as the applicable
evidence standard for Early Phase grants
in a particular competition. The second
and third proposed priorities would
establish the applicable evidence and
scale requirements for Mid Phase and
Expansion Phase grants. The
Department is particularly interested in
receiving comments on our proposed
scale requirements under these two
priorities, which have been determined
by taking into consideration prior
grantee awards.
The fourth proposed priority would
establish a priority for applicants who
use data for continuous improvement in
their programs. The fifth proposed
priority would incentivize strategies
that focus on credentials that lead to
career outcomes that support graduates’
economic success.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Proposed Priorities
Proposed Priority 1—Early Phase.
Projects that are designed to improve
postsecondary success for underserved
students, including retention, upward
transfer, and completions of value that
lead to economic success and/or further
education, and are supported by
evidence that meets the definition of
Demonstrates a Rationale (as defined in
17 McNair, T.B., Albertine, S., McDonald, N.,
Major Jr., T., & Cooper, M.A. (2022). Becoming a
student-ready college: A new culture of leadership
for student success (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
34 CFR 77.1) or Promising Evidence (as
defined in 34 CFR 77.1).
Proposed Priority 2—Mid-Phase:
Projects Supported by Moderate
Evidence.
Projects that are designed to improve
success for underserved students,
including retention, upward transfer,
and completions of value that lead to
economic success and/or further
education, and are supported by
evidence that meets the definition of
Moderate Evidence (as defined in 34
CFR 77.1). Projects under this priority
must be implemented at multiple
institutions of higher education or
multiple campuses of the same
institution and propose to serve at least
2,000 students.
Proposed Priority 3—Expansion:
Projects Supported by Strong Evidence.
Projects that are designed to improve
postsecondary success for underserved
students, including retention, upward
transfer, and completions of value that
lead to economic success and/or further
education, and are supported by
evidence that meets the definition of
Strong Evidence (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1). Projects under this priority must
be implemented at multiple institutions
of higher education and propose to
serve at least 10,000 students.
Proposed Priority 4—Using Data for
Continuous Improvement.
Projects that propose to build upon
demonstrated progress toward improved
student outcomes, or that propose a
plan to improve student outcomes, for
underserved students by using data to
continually assess and improve the
outcomes associated with funded
activities and sustain data-driven
continuous improvement processes at
the institution after the grant period.
Applicants addressing this priority
must—
(a) Identify, or describe how they will
develop, the performance and outcome
measures they will use to monitor and
evaluate implementation of the
intervention(s), including baseline data,
intermediate and annual targets, and
disaggregation by student subgroups;
(b) Describe how they will assess and
address gaps in current data systems,
tools, and capacity, and how they will
monitor and respond to performance
and outcome data to improve
implementation of the intervention(s)
on an ongoing basis and as part of
formative and summative evaluation of
the intervention(s); and
(c) Describe how institutional
leadership will be involved with, and
supportive of, project leadership and
how the project relates to the
institution’s broader student success
priorities and improvement processes.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48519
Proposed Priority 5—Projects That
Support College-to-Career Pathways and
Supports.
Projects that propose to build upon
demonstrated progress toward
integrating, or that propose a plan to
integrate, career-connected learning and
advising support into their
postsecondary success strategies to
ensure students earn credentials of
value that lead to economic success
and/or further education that leads to
career progression. Projects may include
aligning academic coursework with
career pathways and outcomes;
developing and implementing programlevel credential maps to create collegeto-career pathways, including across
institutions via transfer; integrating
career planning, counseling, and
coaching into holistic advising support;
offering work-based learning
opportunities aligned with students’
programs of study; and providing
navigation support to help graduates
transition from college to career.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each
priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority, we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
The Department proposes the
following program requirements for this
program. We may apply one or more of
these requirements in any year in which
this program is in effect and may limit
the application of these requirements to
one or more of the proposed priorities.
The Department will announce within
the notice inviting applications the final
requirements that will apply to a
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
48520
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
particular grant competition, and
whether those requirements will apply
to grantees applying under each
proposed priority for this program.
Proposed Requirement–1—Uses of
Funds.
Background: PSSG is funded under
the Fund for the Improvement of
Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)
authority and was first authorized in FY
2023 as described in the explanatory
statement accompanying Division H of
the Consolidated Appropriation Act,
2023 (117 Pub. L. 328). In order to fully
implement this program in the manner
that Congress has directed, the
Department proposes Uses of Funds to
clarify to applicants and grantees
flexibility, where applicable, and also
specificity about the allowable activities
under this program. The Department
believes each of these activities would
support the overall goal of the PSSG
program.
Proposed Requirement 1 would also
clarify flexibility around using PSSG
funding to provide financial assistance
to students. Many of the strategies that
meet the Moderate and Strong Evidence
standard, including the evidence-based
interventions explicitly mentioned in
the explanatory statement, include
financial assistance as a key project
component. The Department believes
that this program cannot fulfill
congressional intent without providing
the flexibility to use funding for this
activity. We do, however, note that
under section 741(d) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended
(HEA) these funds cannot be used to
provide direct financial assistance to
students who do not meet the eligibility
requirements of section 484(a).
Proposed Requirement
Program funds must be used for one
or more of the following allowable uses
of funds:
(a) Developing and using data
systems, tools, and training to
implement data-driven processes and
interventions as part of a comprehensive
continuous improvement effort; and
(b) Implementing student success
strategies, including whole-college
improvement models such as Guided
Pathways; course redesign to implement
co-requisite remediation or careerconnected math pathways; intensive,
integrated advising models including
program maps with progress checks,
case management approaches, and
coaching; financial support, including
need-based aid, emergency aid, and
basic needs and behavioral health
support and services; transfer support
(as applicable), including four-year
transfer maps, co-enrollment and co-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
advising across institutions, and
regional transfer partnerships; career
support, including integrated career
planning, counseling, and coaching,
work-based learning opportunities, and
college-to-career navigation support; or
other evidence-based student success
strategies.
Proposed Requirement 2—Indirect
Cost Rate Information.
Background: To maximize the grant
resources that support direct costs, the
Department is proposing to limit
indirect costs to eight percent of a
modified total direct cost base.
Proposed Requirement
A grantee’s indirect cost
reimbursement is limited to eight
percent of a modified total direct cost
base. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated
indirect cost rate, please see
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/
intro.html.
Proposed Requirement 3—Matching
Requirements and Exceptions.
Background: The Department
proposes to require that grantees
provide a ten percent match of nonFederal to Federal contributions. This
proposed requirement is intended to
leverage the Federal funds and to ensure
alignment of such activities to the
institution’s strategic plan. The
Department also proposes waiver
authority so that institutions located in
high-poverty areas, that enroll high
numbers of low-income students, or that
are otherwise under-resourced such that
complying with this matching
requirement would be overly
burdensome, can still benefit from this
program.
Proposed Requirement 3:
(a) Matching Requirement. Grantees
must provide a ten percent match,
which may include in-kind donations.
(b) Waiver Authority. The Secretary
may waive the matching requirement on
a case-by-case basis upon a showing of
any of the following exceptional
circumstances:
(1) The difficulty of raising matching
funds for a program to serve as an area
with high rates of poverty in the lead
applicant’s geographic location, defined
as a Census tract, a set of contiguous
Census tracts, an American Indian
Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal Statistical
Area (as defined by the U.S. Census
Bureau), Alaska Native Village
Statistical Area or Alaska Native
Regional Corporation Area, Native
Hawaiian Homeland Area, or other
Tribal land or county that has a poverty
rate of at least 25 percent as determined
every 5 years using American
Community Survey 5-Year data;
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(2) Serving a significant population of
students from low-income backgrounds
at the lead applicant location, defined as
at least 50 percent (or the eligibility
threshold for the appropriate
institutional sector available at https://
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/
idues/eligibility.html#app) of degreeseeking enrolled students receiving
need-based grant aid under title IV of
the HEA; or
(3) Significant economic hardship as
demonstrated by low average
educational and general expenditures
per full-time equivalent undergraduate
student at the lead applicant institution,
in comparison with the average
educational and general expenditures
per full-time equivalent undergraduate
student of institutions that offer similar
instruction without need of a waiver, as
determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the annual process of
designation of title III and title V
institutions.
Proposed Requirement 4: Limitation
on Grant Awards.
Background: The Department
proposes to allow the Secretary, in a
given PSSG competition, to limit
eligibility for new awards to applicants
without current active grants under this
program. The Department believes that
this proposed requirement is necessary
to support the program’s evidencebuilding objective by ensuring the
integrity of the project evaluations
funded under this program. Supporting
multiple PSSG projects for the same
grantee could introduce bias that would
negatively impact the quality of the
evaluations. For example, if project
participants receive support under
multiple PSSG grants, the evaluation of
the PSSG-supported strategies may
overstate the results of a specific project.
Similarly, if students in the comparison
group for one PSSG project are receiving
services under a separate PSSG project,
then the evaluation of the initial project
could understate the impact of the
intervention.
Proposed Requirement
The Department will make awards to
only applicants that are not the
individual or lead applicant in a current
active grant from the PSSG grant
program.
Proposed Requirement 5:
Supplement-not-Supplant.
Background: The Department
recognizes that many institutions are
engaged in efforts to increase
postsecondary success for their students
using both Federal and non-Federal
funding. To ensure that the PSSG
funding does not either duplicate or
replace, but instead augments such
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
efforts, we are proposing a supplementnot-supplant requirement.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Proposed Requirement
Grant funds must be used so that they
supplement and, to the extent practical,
increase the funds that would otherwise
be available for the activities to be
carried out under the grant and in no
case supplant those funds.
Proposed Requirement 6: Independent
Evaluation.
Background: The Department
proposes to require grantees to conduct
an independent evaluation of the project
and submit the evaluation report to
ERIC, the Department of Education’s
comprehensive bibliographic and fulltext database of education research and
information, sponsored by the Institute
of Education Sciences (IES). ERIC is
available at https://eric.ed.gov. This
proposed requirement would enable the
Department to meet the congressional
intent outlined in the House Report
117–403 and the Explanatory Statement
accompanying Division H of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023
(Pub. L. 117–328) that all grantees carry
out rigorous independent evaluations of
their projects. By requiring timely
sharing of the evaluations with IES so
that the evaluations can be reviewed by
the What Works Clearinghouse, the
Department would meet its goals of both
supporting the implementation of
evidence-based interventions and
building the evidence base about what
works to improve retention, upward
transfer, and completions of value that
lead to economic success and/or further
education.
Proposed Requirement
Grantees must conduct an
independent evaluation of the
effectiveness of the project and submit
the evaluation report to ERIC, available
at https://eric.ed.gov/, in a timely
manner.
Proposed Requirement 7: Eligible
Entities.
Background: The Department
proposes limiting eligibility to
institutions that are designated as
eligible under the HEA titles III and V
programs, nonprofits that are not IHEs
or associated with an IHE in partnership
with institutions that are designated as
eligible under the HEA titles III and V
programs, States in partnerships with
institutions that are designated as
eligible under the HEA titles III and V
programs, and systems of public
institutions of higher education.
Institutions designated as eligible under
titles III and V include Historically
Black Colleges or Universities (HBCUs),
Tribally Controlled Colleges or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
Universities (TCCUs), Minority-Serving
Institutions (MSIs), and other
institutions with high enrollment of
needy students and below average fulltime equivalent (FTE) expenditures,
including community colleges. The
Department believes that targeting
funding to these IHEs is the best use of
the available funding because these
institutions disproportionately enroll
students from groups who are
underrepresented among college
completers, such as low-income
students. Supporting retention, upward
transfer, and completion strategies at
these institutions offers the greatest
potential to close gaps in postsecondary
outcomes and to increase economic
mobility in this country. Additionally,
these under-resourced institutions are
most in need of Federal assistance to
implement and evaluate evidence-based
postsecondary college retention, upward
transfer, and completion interventions.
Proposed Requirement
Eligible entities are title III or V
institutions; nonprofits in partnership
with title III or V institutions; States in
partnership with title III or V
institutions; or systems of public
institutions of higher education.
Proposed Definitions
The Department proposes the
following definitions for this program.
We propose to define ‘‘English learner,’’
‘‘Historically Black College or
University,’’ ‘‘minority-serving
institution,’’ ‘‘Tribal College or
University,’’ and ‘‘underserved student’’
similarly to the definitions in the
Secretary’s Supplemental Priorities and
Definitions for Discretionary Grant
Programs published in the Federal
Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR
70612). The Department also proposes a
novel definition of ‘‘students with
disabilities’’ which we believe would be
less burdensome for eligible applicants
to administer while providing full
coverage for the range of students with
disabilities enrolled at an institution of
higher education who may benefit from
receiving support services under this
program. We may apply these
definitions in any year in which this
program is in effect.
Completions of value means
credentials that lead to further
education through upward transfer or
graduate education and/or that lead to
economic mobility through earning
enough to experience a premium over
high school graduates and earning
enough to recoup investment in
postsecondary education.
Continuous improvement means
using plans for collecting and analyzing
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48521
data about a project component’s
implementation and outcomes
(including the pace and extent to which
project outcomes are being met) to
inform necessary changes throughout
the project. These plans may include
strategies to gather ongoing feedback
from participants and stakeholders on
the implementation of the project
component.
English learner means an individual
who is an English learner as defined in
section 8101(2) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended, or an individual who is an
English language learner as defined in
section 203(7) of the Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act.
Historically Black College or
University means an institution that
meets the eligibility requirements under
section 322(2) of the HEA.
Independent evaluation means an
evaluation of a project component that
is designed and carried out
independently of, but in coordination
with, the entities that develop or
implement the project component.
Minority-serving institution means an
institution that is eligible to receive
assistance under sections 317 through
320 of part A of title III, or under title
V of the HEA.
Student with a disability means any
student enrolled at an institution of
higher education (including those
accepted for dual enrollment) who
meets the definition of an individual
with a disability as defined in section 3
of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102).
Tribal College or University has the
meaning ascribed it in section 316(b)(3)
of the HEA.
Underserved student means a student
in one or more of the following
subgroups:
(a) A student who is living in poverty
or is served by schools with high
concentrations of students living in
poverty.
(b) A student of color.
(c) A student who is a member of a
federally recognized Indian Tribe.
(d) An English learner.
(e) A student with a disability.
(f) A student experiencing
homelessness or housing insecurity.
(g) A lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, queer or questioning, or
intersex (LGBTQI+) student.
(h) A pregnant, parenting, or
caregiving student.
(i) A student who is the first in their
family to attend postsecondary
education.
(j) A student enrolling in or seeking to
enroll in postsecondary education for
the first time at the age of 20 or older.
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
48522
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(k) A student who is working full-time
while enrolled in postsecondary
education.
(l) A student who is enrolled in, or is
seeking to enroll in, postsecondary
education who is eligible for a Pell
Grant.
(m) An adult student in need of
improving their basic skills or an adult
student with limited English
proficiency.
Final Priorities, Requirements, and
Definitions
We will announce the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions in a
document in the Federal Register. We
will determine the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions after
considering public comments on the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions and other information
available to the Department. This
document does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities,
requirements, definitions, or selection
criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we
choose to use one or more of these
priorities, requirements, and definitions,
we invite applications through a notice
in the Federal Register.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of
the Executive order and subject to
review by OMB. Section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094, defines a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an
action likely to result in a rule that
may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $200 million or more
(adjusted every three years by the
Administrator of Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for
changes in gross domestic product); or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, territorial, or Tribal
governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
(4) Raise legal or policy issues for
which centralized review would
meaningfully further the President’s
priorities, or the principles set forth in
this Executive order, as specifically
authorized in a timely manner by the
Administrator of OIRA in each case.
This proposed regulatory action is not
a significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094.
We have also reviewed this proposed
regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing these proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
only on a reasoned determination that
their benefits would justify their costs.
In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, we selected
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
those approaches that would maximize
net benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that
this regulatory action is consistent with
the principles in Executive Order 13563.
The potential costs associated with
these priorities, requirements, and
definitions would be minimal, while the
potential benefits are significant. The
Department believes that this proposed
regulatory action would not impose
significant costs on eligible entities.
Participation in this program is
voluntary, and the costs imposed on
applicants by this regulatory action
would be limited to paperwork burden
related to preparing an application. The
potential benefits of implementing the
program would outweigh the costs
incurred by applicants, and the costs of
carrying out activities associated with
the application would be paid for with
program funds. For these reasons, we
have determined that the costs of
implementation would not be
burdensome for eligible applicants,
including small entities.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action would not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with these Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the
Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain
Language in Government Writing’’
require each agency to write regulations
that are easy to understand. The
Secretary invites comments on how to
make these proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions easier to
understand, including answers to
questions such as the following:
• Are the requirements in the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions clearly stated?
• Do the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions contain
technical terms or other wording that
interferes with their clarity?
• Does the format of the proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
(grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or
reduce their clarity?
• Would the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions be easier
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Proposed Rules
to understand if we divided them into
more (but shorter) sections?
• Could the description of the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this preamble be
more helpful in making the proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
easier to understand? If so, how?
• What else could we do to make the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions easier to understand?
To send any comments that concern
how the Department could make these
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions easier to understand, see the
instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The small entities that this proposed
regulatory action would affect are
institutions that meet the applicable
eligibility requirements. The Secretary
believes that the costs imposed on
applicants by the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions would be
limited to paperwork burden related to
preparing an application and that the
benefits would outweigh any costs
incurred by applicants.
Participation in this program is
voluntary. For this reason, the proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
would impose no burden on small
entities unless they applied for funding
under the program. We expect that in
determining whether to apply for PSSG
program funds, an eligible applicant
would evaluate the requirements of
preparing an application and any
associated costs and weigh them against
the benefits likely to be achieved by
receiving PSSG funds. Eligible
applicants most likely would apply only
if they determine that the likely benefits
exceed the costs of preparing an
application. The likely benefits include
the potential receipt of a grant as well
as other benefits that may accrue to an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
entity through its development of an
application.
This proposed regulatory action
would not have a significant economic
impact on any small entity once it
receives a grant because it would be able
to meet the costs of compliance using
the funds provided under this program.
We invite comments from eligible small
entities as to whether they believe this
proposed regulatory action would have
a significant economic impact on them
and, if so, request evidence to support
that belief.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions do not
contain any information collection
requirements.
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document in an accessible format.
The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or other accessible format.
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.
Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary
Education.
[FR Doc. 2024–12502 Filed 6–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48523
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2024–0024; FRL–11529–
01–R3]
Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania;
Attainment Plan for the Indiana
Nonattainment Area for the 2010 1Hour Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient
Air Quality Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
state implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania). This
revision pertains to the attainment plan
for the Indiana, Pennsylvania (PA)
nonattainment area for the 2010 1-Hour
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). This
action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before July 8, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2024–0024 at
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
goold.megan@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
confidential business information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM
07JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48517-48523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-12502]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
[ED-2024-OPE-0069]
Postsecondary Student Success Grant
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) proposes priorities,
requirements, and definitions for use in the Postsecondary Student
Success Grant (PSSG) program, Assistance Listing Number 84.116M. The
Department may use one or more of these priorities, requirements, and
definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2024 and later years.
We intend for these priorities, requirements, and definitions to
support projects that equitably improve postsecondary student outcomes,
including retention, upward transfer, and completions of value, by
leveraging data and implementing, scaling, and rigorously evaluating
evidence-based activities to support data-driven decisions and actions
that lead to credentials that support economic success and further
education.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 8, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at www.regulations.gov. However, if you require an accommodation
or cannot otherwise submit your comments via www.regulations.gov,
please contact the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. The Department will not accept comments submitted
by fax or by email, or comments submitted after the comment period
closes. To ensure the Department does not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit
your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov,
including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting
comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under
``FAQ.''
Note: The Department's policy is generally to make comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nemeka Mason-Clercin, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 987-1340. Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5C127, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7953. Email: [email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. To ensure that
your comments have maximum effect in developing the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions, we urge you to clearly identify the
specific section of the proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 and their
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result
from these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. Please
let us know of any further ways we could reduce potential costs or
increase potential
[[Page 48518]]
benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of
the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect public
comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions
by accessing Regulations.gov. To inspect comments in person, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for these proposed priorities, requirements,
and definitions. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type
of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the PSSG program is to equitably
improve postsecondary student outcomes, including retention, upward
transfer, and completions of value, by leveraging data and
implementing, scaling, and rigorously evaluating evidence-based
activities to support data-driven decisions and actions that lead to
credentials that support economic success and further education.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d.
Proposed Priorities
We propose five priorities. We may use one or more of these
priorities in any year in which this program is in effect.
Background
In today's economy, 67 percent of U.S. jobs require a postsecondary
credential, and by 2031, this percentage is projected to grow to 71
percent.\1\ Data show that as educational attainment increases, median
earnings steadily increase.\2\ One in three first-time students at two-
year colleges, and two in three first-time students at four-year
colleges, graduate from the first institution they attend within three
and six years respectively.\3\ Students from low-income backgrounds,
first-generation students, students of color, adult students, students
with disabilities, veterans, and other students who have been
historically underserved in postsecondary education often fare
worse.\4\ It is critical for institutions of higher education (IHEs) to
provide student support systems to improve retention, progression, and
completion rates for all students, while decreasing economic and social
equity gaps for students of color and students from low-income
backgrounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Van Der Werf, M., & Quinn, M.C.
(2023). After Everything: Projections of jobs, education, and
training requirements through 2031. Georgetown University--
Georgetown Public Policy Institute Center on Education and the
Workforce.
\2\ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2023, September 6).
Education pays--Earnings and unemployment rates by educational
attainment, 2023.
\3\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics (2024). Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.20.asp.
\4\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020237.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Students of color and students from low-income backgrounds still
face barriers to successfully enrolling in and completing
college.5 6 Between 2018 and 2022, there was a seven percent
decrease in undergraduate enrollment overall, but larger decreases for
Black (8 percent), American Indian/Alaska Native (10 percent) students,
and Pacific Islander students (13 percent). From 2018 to 2022, there
also has been a decrease in enrollment for Pell Grant recipients (13
percent).\7\ In addition, while graduation rates (within 6 years after
entry) have increased in four-year institutions overall (5.2 percentage
points) since 2015 (2009 cohort), double-digit graduation rate gaps
between some underrepresented students of color and White students
remain (e.g., 22 percentage point gap for Black students), and there is
a 17 percentage point gap in completers (within 8 years after entry)
between Pell and non-Pell full-time, first-time students in public
four-year institutions.\8\ The same issues are occurring in two-year
institutions, with a modest overall graduation rate (within 3 years
after entry) increase (3.1 percentage points) since 2012 (2009 cohort),
but declining rates for Black and Hispanic students, which has
increased the graduation gap between White students and some
underrepresented students of color.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Thiem, K.C., & Dasgupta, N. (2022). From precollege to
career: Barriers facing historically marginalized students and
evidence[hyphen]based solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review,
16(1), 212-251.
\6\ Rabourn, K.E., BrckaLorenz, A., & Shoup, R. (2018).
Reimagining student engagement: How nontraditional adult learners
engage in traditional postsecondary environments. The Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 22-33.
\7\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_306.10.asp and College Board. (2023,
October). Trends in Higher Education Series: Trends in Student Aid
2023.
\8\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from
nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?query=&query2=&resultType=all&page=1&sortBy=date_desc&surveyComponents=Outcome%20Measures%20(OM)&collectionYears=2021-
22&sources=Tables%20Library&overlayTableId=36029.
\9\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics (2024). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.20.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, as more underserved students attend college,
additional and different resources are often required to support them
in successfully completing their credentials. Today, 25 percent of
postsecondary students are age 25 or older,\10\ about 70 percent of
students work while enrolled,\11\ and 22 percent of students are
parents.\12\ At public, 2-year degree-granting institutions, 31 percent
of students enrolled are age 25 or older,\13\ and 42 percent of all
student parents attend community colleges.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ National Center for Education Statistics (2022). Retrieved
from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
\11\ Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Melton, M., & Price, E.W.
(2015). Learning while earning: The new normal. Georgetown
University--Georgetown Public Policy Institute Center on Education
and the Workforce.
\12\ Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D., & Polk, P.
(2019). Parents in College: By the Numbers. Institute for Women's
Policy Research.
\13\ National Center for Education Statistics (2022). Retrieved
from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
\14\ Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D., & Polk, P.
(2019). Parents in College: By the Numbers. Institute for Women's
Policy Research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research has found that IHEs can employ a multifaceted and
integrated approach and mitigate the barriers that hinder students in
their educational trajectories, by addressing academic, financial, and
other challenges.\15\ Moreover, IHEs that have improved completion
rates, including for underserved students, use timely, disaggregated,
actionable data to identify institutional barriers to student success,
implement interventions, and evaluate impact on an ongoing basis.\16\
[[Page 48519]]
Institutional leadership is critical to ensure that the student
experience is intentionally designed to increase student retention,
progression, and completion rates.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Scrivener, S., Weiss, M.J., Ratledge, A., Rudd, T., Sommo,
C., & Fresques, H. (2015). Doubling Graduation Rates: Three-Year
Effects of CUNY's Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) for
Developmental Education Students. New York: MDRC.
\16\ Phillips, B.C., & Horowitz, J.E. (2013). Maximizing data
use: A focus on the completion agenda. In Special Issue: The College
Completion Agenda-Practical Approaches for Reaching the Big Goal.
New Directions for Community Colleges, 2013(164), 17-25.
\17\ McNair, T.B., Albertine, S., McDonald, N., Major Jr., T., &
Cooper, M.A. (2022). Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture
of leadership for student success (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first three proposed priorities in this document would
establish a multitier structure to enable the Department to link the
amount of funding an applicant may receive to the quality of evidence
supporting the efficacy of a proposed project and to the proposed
project's plan to scale the evidence-based strategy. This approach
would enable the Department to meet the congressional intent outlined
in the House Report 117-403 and the explanatory statement accompanying
Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (117 Pub. L.
328) to execute the grant program as a tiered-evidence competition in
the same structure as the Education Innovation and Research (EIR)
program. Congress continued this directive to the Department through
the explanatory statement accompanying Division D of the Further
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (118 Pub. L. 47). The first
proposed priority would give the Department the flexibility to select
either Demonstrates a Rationale or Promising Evidence as the applicable
evidence standard for Early Phase grants in a particular competition.
The second and third proposed priorities would establish the applicable
evidence and scale requirements for Mid Phase and Expansion Phase
grants. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments
on our proposed scale requirements under these two priorities, which
have been determined by taking into consideration prior grantee awards.
The fourth proposed priority would establish a priority for
applicants who use data for continuous improvement in their programs.
The fifth proposed priority would incentivize strategies that focus on
credentials that lead to career outcomes that support graduates'
economic success.
Proposed Priorities
Proposed Priority 1--Early Phase.
Projects that are designed to improve postsecondary success for
underserved students, including retention, upward transfer, and
completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further
education, and are supported by evidence that meets the definition of
Demonstrates a Rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) or Promising
Evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1).
Proposed Priority 2--Mid-Phase: Projects Supported by Moderate
Evidence.
Projects that are designed to improve success for underserved
students, including retention, upward transfer, and completions of
value that lead to economic success and/or further education, and are
supported by evidence that meets the definition of Moderate Evidence
(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1). Projects under this priority must be
implemented at multiple institutions of higher education or multiple
campuses of the same institution and propose to serve at least 2,000
students.
Proposed Priority 3--Expansion: Projects Supported by Strong
Evidence.
Projects that are designed to improve postsecondary success for
underserved students, including retention, upward transfer, and
completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further
education, and are supported by evidence that meets the definition of
Strong Evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1). Projects under this
priority must be implemented at multiple institutions of higher
education and propose to serve at least 10,000 students.
Proposed Priority 4--Using Data for Continuous Improvement.
Projects that propose to build upon demonstrated progress toward
improved student outcomes, or that propose a plan to improve student
outcomes, for underserved students by using data to continually assess
and improve the outcomes associated with funded activities and sustain
data-driven continuous improvement processes at the institution after
the grant period.
Applicants addressing this priority must--
(a) Identify, or describe how they will develop, the performance
and outcome measures they will use to monitor and evaluate
implementation of the intervention(s), including baseline data,
intermediate and annual targets, and disaggregation by student
subgroups;
(b) Describe how they will assess and address gaps in current data
systems, tools, and capacity, and how they will monitor and respond to
performance and outcome data to improve implementation of the
intervention(s) on an ongoing basis and as part of formative and
summative evaluation of the intervention(s); and
(c) Describe how institutional leadership will be involved with,
and supportive of, project leadership and how the project relates to
the institution's broader student success priorities and improvement
processes.
Proposed Priority 5--Projects That Support College-to-Career
Pathways and Supports.
Projects that propose to build upon demonstrated progress toward
integrating, or that propose a plan to integrate, career-connected
learning and advising support into their postsecondary success
strategies to ensure students earn credentials of value that lead to
economic success and/or further education that leads to career
progression. Projects may include aligning academic coursework with
career pathways and outcomes; developing and implementing program-level
credential maps to create college-to-career pathways, including across
institutions via transfer; integrating career planning, counseling, and
coaching into holistic advising support; offering work-based learning
opportunities aligned with students' programs of study; and providing
navigation support to help graduates transition from college to career.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
The Department proposes the following program requirements for
this program. We may apply one or more of these requirements in any
year in which this program is in effect and may limit the application
of these requirements to one or more of the proposed priorities. The
Department will announce within the notice inviting applications the
final requirements that will apply to a
[[Page 48520]]
particular grant competition, and whether those requirements will apply
to grantees applying under each proposed priority for this program.
Proposed Requirement-1--Uses of Funds.
Background: PSSG is funded under the Fund for the Improvement of
Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) authority and was first authorized in
FY 2023 as described in the explanatory statement accompanying Division
H of the Consolidated Appropriation Act, 2023 (117 Pub. L. 328). In
order to fully implement this program in the manner that Congress has
directed, the Department proposes Uses of Funds to clarify to
applicants and grantees flexibility, where applicable, and also
specificity about the allowable activities under this program. The
Department believes each of these activities would support the overall
goal of the PSSG program.
Proposed Requirement 1 would also clarify flexibility around using
PSSG funding to provide financial assistance to students. Many of the
strategies that meet the Moderate and Strong Evidence standard,
including the evidence-based interventions explicitly mentioned in the
explanatory statement, include financial assistance as a key project
component. The Department believes that this program cannot fulfill
congressional intent without providing the flexibility to use funding
for this activity. We do, however, note that under section 741(d) of
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA) these funds cannot
be used to provide direct financial assistance to students who do not
meet the eligibility requirements of section 484(a).
Proposed Requirement
Program funds must be used for one or more of the following
allowable uses of funds:
(a) Developing and using data systems, tools, and training to
implement data-driven processes and interventions as part of a
comprehensive continuous improvement effort; and
(b) Implementing student success strategies, including whole-
college improvement models such as Guided Pathways; course redesign to
implement co-requisite remediation or career-connected math pathways;
intensive, integrated advising models including program maps with
progress checks, case management approaches, and coaching; financial
support, including need-based aid, emergency aid, and basic needs and
behavioral health support and services; transfer support (as
applicable), including four-year transfer maps, co-enrollment and co-
advising across institutions, and regional transfer partnerships;
career support, including integrated career planning, counseling, and
coaching, work-based learning opportunities, and college-to-career
navigation support; or other evidence-based student success strategies.
Proposed Requirement 2--Indirect Cost Rate Information.
Background: To maximize the grant resources that support direct
costs, the Department is proposing to limit indirect costs to eight
percent of a modified total direct cost base.
Proposed Requirement
A grantee's indirect cost reimbursement is limited to eight percent
of a modified total direct cost base. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
Proposed Requirement 3--Matching Requirements and Exceptions.
Background: The Department proposes to require that grantees
provide a ten percent match of non-Federal to Federal contributions.
This proposed requirement is intended to leverage the Federal funds and
to ensure alignment of such activities to the institution's strategic
plan. The Department also proposes waiver authority so that
institutions located in high-poverty areas, that enroll high numbers of
low-income students, or that are otherwise under-resourced such that
complying with this matching requirement would be overly burdensome,
can still benefit from this program.
Proposed Requirement 3:
(a) Matching Requirement. Grantees must provide a ten percent
match, which may include in-kind donations.
(b) Waiver Authority. The Secretary may waive the matching
requirement on a case-by-case basis upon a showing of any of the
following exceptional circumstances:
(1) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program to serve
as an area with high rates of poverty in the lead applicant's
geographic location, defined as a Census tract, a set of contiguous
Census tracts, an American Indian Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal
Statistical Area (as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau), Alaska Native
Village Statistical Area or Alaska Native Regional Corporation Area,
Native Hawaiian Homeland Area, or other Tribal land or county that has
a poverty rate of at least 25 percent as determined every 5 years using
American Community Survey 5-Year data;
(2) Serving a significant population of students from low-income
backgrounds at the lead applicant location, defined as at least 50
percent (or the eligibility threshold for the appropriate institutional
sector available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.html#app) of degree-seeking enrolled students receiving
need-based grant aid under title IV of the HEA; or
(3) Significant economic hardship as demonstrated by low average
educational and general expenditures per full-time equivalent
undergraduate student at the lead applicant institution, in comparison
with the average educational and general expenditures per full-time
equivalent undergraduate student of institutions that offer similar
instruction without need of a waiver, as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the annual process of designation of title III and
title V institutions.
Proposed Requirement 4: Limitation on Grant Awards.
Background: The Department proposes to allow the Secretary, in a
given PSSG competition, to limit eligibility for new awards to
applicants without current active grants under this program. The
Department believes that this proposed requirement is necessary to
support the program's evidence-building objective by ensuring the
integrity of the project evaluations funded under this program.
Supporting multiple PSSG projects for the same grantee could introduce
bias that would negatively impact the quality of the evaluations. For
example, if project participants receive support under multiple PSSG
grants, the evaluation of the PSSG-supported strategies may overstate
the results of a specific project. Similarly, if students in the
comparison group for one PSSG project are receiving services under a
separate PSSG project, then the evaluation of the initial project could
understate the impact of the intervention.
Proposed Requirement
The Department will make awards to only applicants that are not the
individual or lead applicant in a current active grant from the PSSG
grant program.
Proposed Requirement 5: Supplement-not-Supplant.
Background: The Department recognizes that many institutions are
engaged in efforts to increase postsecondary success for their students
using both Federal and non-Federal funding. To ensure that the PSSG
funding does not either duplicate or replace, but instead augments such
[[Page 48521]]
efforts, we are proposing a supplement-not-supplant requirement.
Proposed Requirement
Grant funds must be used so that they supplement and, to the extent
practical, increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the
activities to be carried out under the grant and in no case supplant
those funds.
Proposed Requirement 6: Independent Evaluation.
Background: The Department proposes to require grantees to conduct
an independent evaluation of the project and submit the evaluation
report to ERIC, the Department of Education's comprehensive
bibliographic and full-text database of education research and
information, sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES).
ERIC is available at https://eric.ed.gov. This proposed requirement
would enable the Department to meet the congressional intent outlined
in the House Report 117-403 and the Explanatory Statement accompanying
Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328) that all grantees carry out rigorous independent evaluations of
their projects. By requiring timely sharing of the evaluations with IES
so that the evaluations can be reviewed by the What Works
Clearinghouse, the Department would meet its goals of both supporting
the implementation of evidence-based interventions and building the
evidence base about what works to improve retention, upward transfer,
and completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further
education.
Proposed Requirement
Grantees must conduct an independent evaluation of the
effectiveness of the project and submit the evaluation report to ERIC,
available at https://eric.ed.gov/, in a timely manner.
Proposed Requirement 7: Eligible Entities.
Background: The Department proposes limiting eligibility to
institutions that are designated as eligible under the HEA titles III
and V programs, nonprofits that are not IHEs or associated with an IHE
in partnership with institutions that are designated as eligible under
the HEA titles III and V programs, States in partnerships with
institutions that are designated as eligible under the HEA titles III
and V programs, and systems of public institutions of higher education.
Institutions designated as eligible under titles III and V include
Historically Black Colleges or Universities (HBCUs), Tribally
Controlled Colleges or Universities (TCCUs), Minority-Serving
Institutions (MSIs), and other institutions with high enrollment of
needy students and below average full-time equivalent (FTE)
expenditures, including community colleges. The Department believes
that targeting funding to these IHEs is the best use of the available
funding because these institutions disproportionately enroll students
from groups who are underrepresented among college completers, such as
low-income students. Supporting retention, upward transfer, and
completion strategies at these institutions offers the greatest
potential to close gaps in postsecondary outcomes and to increase
economic mobility in this country. Additionally, these under-resourced
institutions are most in need of Federal assistance to implement and
evaluate evidence-based postsecondary college retention, upward
transfer, and completion interventions.
Proposed Requirement
Eligible entities are title III or V institutions; nonprofits in
partnership with title III or V institutions; States in partnership
with title III or V institutions; or systems of public institutions of
higher education.
Proposed Definitions
The Department proposes the following definitions for this program.
We propose to define ``English learner,'' ``Historically Black College
or University,'' ``minority-serving institution,'' ``Tribal College or
University,'' and ``underserved student'' similarly to the definitions
in the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for
Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612). The Department also proposes a novel
definition of ``students with disabilities'' which we believe would be
less burdensome for eligible applicants to administer while providing
full coverage for the range of students with disabilities enrolled at
an institution of higher education who may benefit from receiving
support services under this program. We may apply these definitions in
any year in which this program is in effect.
Completions of value means credentials that lead to further
education through upward transfer or graduate education and/or that
lead to economic mobility through earning enough to experience a
premium over high school graduates and earning enough to recoup
investment in postsecondary education.
Continuous improvement means using plans for collecting and
analyzing data about a project component's implementation and outcomes
(including the pace and extent to which project outcomes are being met)
to inform necessary changes throughout the project. These plans may
include strategies to gather ongoing feedback from participants and
stakeholders on the implementation of the project component.
English learner means an individual who is an English learner as
defined in section 8101(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual who is an English language
learner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act.
Historically Black College or University means an institution that
meets the eligibility requirements under section 322(2) of the HEA.
Independent evaluation means an evaluation of a project component
that is designed and carried out independently of, but in coordination
with, the entities that develop or implement the project component.
Minority-serving institution means an institution that is eligible
to receive assistance under sections 317 through 320 of part A of title
III, or under title V of the HEA.
Student with a disability means any student enrolled at an
institution of higher education (including those accepted for dual
enrollment) who meets the definition of an individual with a disability
as defined in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(42 U.S.C. 12102).
Tribal College or University has the meaning ascribed it in section
316(b)(3) of the HEA.
Underserved student means a student in one or more of the following
subgroups:
(a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools with
high concentrations of students living in poverty.
(b) A student of color.
(c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian
Tribe.
(d) An English learner.
(e) A student with a disability.
(f) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.
(g) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, or
intersex (LGBTQI+) student.
(h) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.
(i) A student who is the first in their family to attend
postsecondary education.
(j) A student enrolling in or seeking to enroll in postsecondary
education for the first time at the age of 20 or older.
[[Page 48522]]
(k) A student who is working full-time while enrolled in
postsecondary education.
(l) A student who is enrolled in, or is seeking to enroll in,
postsecondary education who is eligible for a Pell Grant.
(m) An adult student in need of improving their basic skills or an
adult student with limited English proficiency.
Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions
We will announce the final priorities, requirements, and
definitions in a document in the Federal Register. We will determine
the final priorities, requirements, and definitions after considering
public comments on the proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions and other information available to the Department. This
document does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities,
requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting
applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, requirements,
and definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094, defines a ``significant regulatory
action'' as an action likely to result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more
(adjusted every three years by the Administrator of Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic
product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or Tribal
governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would
meaningfully further the President's priorities, or the principles set
forth in this Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely
manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order
14094. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires
that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes
that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
The potential costs associated with these priorities, requirements,
and definitions would be minimal, while the potential benefits are
significant. The Department believes that this proposed regulatory
action would not impose significant costs on eligible entities.
Participation in this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on
applicants by this regulatory action would be limited to paperwork
burden related to preparing an application. The potential benefits of
implementing the program would outweigh the costs incurred by
applicants, and the costs of carrying out activities associated with
the application would be paid for with program funds. For these
reasons, we have determined that the costs of implementation would not
be burdensome for eligible applicants, including small entities.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand. The Secretary invites comments
on how to make these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions
easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the
following:
Are the requirements in the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions clearly stated?
Do the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions
contain technical terms or other wording that interferes with their
clarity?
Does the format of the proposed priorities, requirements,
and definitions (grouping and order of sections, use of headings,
paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
Would the proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions be easier
[[Page 48523]]
to understand if we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
Could the description of the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this preamble be more helpful in making the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions easier to understand?
To send any comments that concern how the Department could make
these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions easier to
understand, see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would
affect are institutions that meet the applicable eligibility
requirements. The Secretary believes that the costs imposed on
applicants by the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions
would be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an
application and that the benefits would outweigh any costs incurred by
applicants.
Participation in this program is voluntary. For this reason, the
proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions would impose no
burden on small entities unless they applied for funding under the
program. We expect that in determining whether to apply for PSSG
program funds, an eligible applicant would evaluate the requirements of
preparing an application and any associated costs and weigh them
against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving PSSG funds.
Eligible applicants most likely would apply only if they determine that
the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an application. The
likely benefits include the potential receipt of a grant as well as
other benefits that may accrue to an entity through its development of
an application.
This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant
economic impact on any small entity once it receives a grant because it
would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided
under this program. We invite comments from eligible small entities as
to whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a
significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to
support that belief.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions do not
contain any information collection requirements.
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file,
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible
format.
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.
Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2024-12502 Filed 6-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P