Current through Reg. 49, No. 38; September 20, 2024
(a) General Information. The program, as it
applies to this section:
(1) Name--Nursing,
Allied Health and Other Health-related Education Grant Program.
(2) Purpose--To provide funding to eligible
institutions of higher education to establish or support academic instruction
and training programs on public health issues specific to nursing, allied
health and other health-related education.
(3) Authority--Texas Education Code,
§§
63.201
-
63.203.
(4) Eligible institutions--Public
institutions of higher education that offer upper-level academic instruction
and training in the fields of nursing, allied health, or other health-related
education. Institutions or components identified under Texas Education Code,
§
63.002(c),
and §§63.101 - 63.102 are not eligible to receive funding through the
grant program.
(5) Eligible
programs--Nursing, allied health or other health-related educational
initiatives, including those that expand existing academic programs, and
develop other new or existing activities and projects, that are not funded by
state appropriation during the funding period.
(6) Application requirements--Applications
shall be submitted to the Board in the format and at the time specified by the
Board.
(7) General Selection
Criteria--Competitive. The Program is designed to award grants that provide the
best overall value to the state. Selection criteria shall be based on:
(A) Program quality as determined by
reviewers;
(B) Impact the grant
award shall have on academic instruction and training in public health-related
education in the state;
(C) Cost of
the proposed program; and
(D) Other
factors to be considered by the Board, including financial ability to perform
program, state and regional needs and priorities, ability to continue program
after grant period, and past performance.
(8) Minimum award--$15,000 per award in any
fiscal year.
(9) Maximum award--30
percent of the estimated available funding per award in any fiscal
year.
(10) Maximum award length--A
program is eligible to receive funding for up to three years within a grant
period. Previously funded programs may reapply to receive funding for one
additional grant period.
(b) Review Criteria.
(1) The Board shall use peer and Board staff
reviewers to evaluate the quality of applications.
(2) The Commissioner shall select qualified
individuals to serve as reviewers. Reviewers shall demonstrate appropriate
credentials to evaluate grant applications in health education. Reviewers shall
not evaluate any applications for which they have a conflict of
interest.
(3) The Board staff shall
provide written instructions and training for reviewers.
(4) The reviewers shall score each
application according to these award criteria and weights:
(A) Significance of instruction or training
program. The reviewers shall consider issues such as: How relevant and timely
is this topic to public health issues for the particular discipline? Is the
program unique and important or unique and important for a geographic area?
Will the program be useful to or later replicated at other institutions in the
state? Will the program provide an advancement of knowledge that may result in
positive changes in patient care, education or health care policy? How many
people will benefit directly from the program? Maximum points: 30
(B) Resources to perform program. The
reviewers shall consider issues such as: What new personnel, equipment and
facility resources are needed for the program? What existing resources can be
used? What are the professional credentials and experience of the program's key
personnel? Maximum points: 15
(C)
Program design. The reviewers shall consider issues such as: Is the program
well defined? Is it a discrete program which can be completed in the grant
period? Are the goals and objectives realistic? How well has the proposal
described the program development process and the nature of analysis to be
carried out? Maximum points: 25
(D)
Cost sharing. The reviewers shall consider issues such as: What level of local
funding, if any, is available to share in the cost of the program? Maximum
points: 5
(E) Cost effectiveness.
The reviewers shall consider issues such as: How appropriate are the chosen
equipment, staffing and service providers for the program given the cost of the
program? Is the budget realistic? Does the proposal make effective use of the
grant funds? Maximum points: 25.
(F) Evaluation and expected outcomes. The
reviewers shall consider issues such as: How well has the proposal described
the methodology to evaluate and estimate the outcomes from the program? Is the
evaluation methodology appropriate and effective? Are the outcomes realistic?
Maximum points: 30
(5)
Award criteria and weights may be adjusted to best fulfill the purpose of an
individual grant competition, if those adjusted award criteria and weights are
first included in the Request for Proposal for the grant competition.
(c) Application and Review
Process.
(1) The Commissioner may solicit
recommendations from an advisory committee or other group of qualified
individuals on funding priorities for each grant period, and the administration
of the application and review process.
(2) The Board staff shall review applications
to determine if they adhere to the grant program requirements and the funding
priorities contained in the Request for Proposal. An application must meet the
requirements of the Request for Proposal and be submitted with proper
authorization before or on the day specified by the Board to qualify for
further consideration. Qualified applications shall be forwarded to the
reviewers for evaluation. Board staff shall notify applicants eliminated
through the screening process within 30 days of the submission
deadline.
(3) Reviewers shall
evaluate applications and assign scores based on award criteria. All
evaluations and scores of the review committee are final.
(4) Board staff shall rank each application
based on points assigned by reviewers, and then may request that individuals
representing the most highly-ranked applications make oral presentations on
their applications to the reviewers and other Board staff. The Board staff may
consider reviewer comments from the oral presentations in recommending a
priority ranked list of applications to the Board for approval.
(d) Funding Decisions.
(1) Applications for grant funding shall be
evaluated only upon the information provided in the written
application.
(2) The Board shall
approve grants upon the recommendation of the panel of reviewers and Board
staff. The Commissioner shall report approved grants to the Board for each
biennial grant period.
(3) Funding
recommendations to the Board shall consist of the most highly ranked and
recommended applications up to the limit of available funds. If available funds
are insufficient to fund a proposal after the higher-ranking and recommended
applications have been funded, staff shall negotiate with the applicant to
determine if a lesser amount would be acceptable. If the applicant does not
agree to the lesser amount, the staff shall negotiate with the next applicant
on the ranked list. The process shall be continued until all grant funds are
awarded to the most highly ranked and recommended applications.
(e) Contract. Following approval
of grant awards by the Board, the successful applicants must sign a contract
issued by Board staff and based on the information contained in the
application.
(f) Cancellation or
Suspension of Grants. The Board has the right to reject all applications and
cancel a grant solicitation at any point before a contract is signed.
(g) Request for Proposal. The full text of
the administrative regulations and budget guidelines for this program are
contained in the official Request for Proposal (RFP) available upon request
from the Board.
(h) This subsection
pertains to the 2020-2021 and 2022-2023 biennia only (rules are effective only
through August 31, 2023).
(1) Funds available
to the program will be distributed as grants in proportions determined by the
Board through one or more programs that are based on:
(A) a competitive, peer- or staff-reviewed
process for eligible institutions proposing to address the shortage of
registered nurses and nursing faculty, as described in subsections (a) - (g) of
this section unless amended in paragraph (2) of this subsection;
(B) a staff-reviewed process for eligible
institutions, as amended in paragraph (2) of this subsection; or
(C) a criteria-based, funding formula for
eligible institutions, as amended in paragraph (2) of this
subsection.
(2) In
subsection (a)(4) of this section, eligible institutions, as they pertain to
paragraph (1) of this subsection, are public institutions of higher education,
private or independent institutions of higher education and hospitals that
offer nursing programs that prepare students for initial licensure as
registered nurses or that prepare qualified faculty for such nursing
programs.