[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26426-26429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-12118]



[[Page 26425]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III





Department of Education





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Office of Innovation and Improvement-- Advanced Placement Incentive 
(API) Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Grant Awards for 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2003; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2003 / 
Notices  

[[Page 26426]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1855-ZA00

[CFDA No.: 84.330C]


Office of Innovation and Improvement--Advanced Placement 
Incentive (API) Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards 
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003

    Purpose of Program: The API program, funded under section 1705 of 
Title I, Part G of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
(ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), 
awards competitive grants designed to increase the successful 
participation of low-income students in pre-advanced placement and 
advanced placement courses and tests. By supporting increased access to 
and participation in pre-advanced placement and advanced placement 
courses and tests, the program provides greater opportunities for low-
income students to achieve to high standards in English, mathematics, 
science, and other core subjects. Additional long-term goals of the 
program are to demonstrate that larger and more diverse groups of 
students can participate and succeed in advanced placement programs, 
and to increase the numbers of low-income and other disadvantaged 
students who receive baccalaureate and advanced degrees.
    The API program provides resources that local educational agencies 
(LEAs) and other eligible applicants can use in pursuit of the 
objectives of the NCLB which aims for all elementary and secondary 
students to achieve to high standards. In particular, this program 
provides an opportunity for eligible entities to create new programs in 
schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring 
under Title I, Part A of the ESEA.
    Eligible Applicants: (a) State educational agencies (SEAs); (b) 
LEAs, including charter schools that are considered LEAs under State 
law; and (c) national nonprofit educational entities with expertise in 
advanced placement services. In the case of an eligible entity that is 
an SEA, the SEA may use API grant funds to award subgrants to LEAs to 
enable those LEAs to carry out activities authorized under this 
program.
    Applications Available: 5-16-03.
    Notification of Intent to Apply for Funding: The Department will be 
able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant 
applications if it has a better understanding of the number of entities 
that intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the 
Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant for the API 
program to notify the Department by e-mail that it intends to submit an 
application for funding. The notification of intent to apply for 
funding should be sent no later than June 16, 2003 to the following 
Internet address: [email protected].
    Applicants who fail to provide this e-mail notification may still 
apply for funding.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: 7-3-03.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: 9-1-03.
    Estimated Available Funds: Approximately $10.7 million.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $200,000 to $700,000 per year.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $200,000--$450,000 per year.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 22-42.

    Note: These estimates are projections for the guidance of 
potential applicants. The Department is not bound by any estimates 
in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 36 months.
    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part VII of the application 
package) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria 
that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You are encouraged to 
limit Part VII to the equivalent of no more than 50 pages, using the 
following standards:
    [sbull] A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'' on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides;
    [sbull] Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs; and
    [sbull] Use a font that is either 12-point or larger or no smaller 
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
    Applicable Regulations and Statute: (a) Regulations. Education 
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR Parts 
74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) Statute. Title 
I, Part G of Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as 
amended the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), 20 U.S.C. 6535-
6537.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The API program promotes greater access to, 
and participation in, advanced placement courses and tests for low-
income and other disadvantaged students. Covered programs include pre-
advanced placement and advanced placement courses as well as the 
advanced placement tests administered by the College Board. The 
International Baccalaureate Organization courses and exams are also 
approved under the program. Other educational entities that provide 
comparable programs of rigorous academic courses and testing through 
which low-income students may earn college credit may request approval 
from the Secretary.
    The Secretary encourages schools to offer more rigorous middle and 
high school curricula in English, mathematics, science, and other core 
subjects. The API program supports that effort and, thus, is an 
important component of the Department's commitment to ensuring that 
``no child is left behind''. In addition to improving academic 
achievement for all students, the program strives to raise expectations 
for low-income children. The development, enhancement, and expansion of 
advanced placement courses in all core disciplines is a key strategy 
for increasing the participation of students, especially low-income and 
other disadvantaged students, in advanced placement and other 
challenging courses.
    Since the original authorization of the Department's Advanced 
Placement program in 1998, funding for the program has increased from 
$3 million to the current appropriation of $23 million. In May 2002, 
low-income students took 140,571 advanced placement tests administered 
by the College Board, a 25 percent increase compared to 2001. While the 
Department is encouraged by this dramatic increase, it is important to 
note that, in 2002, the College Board changed the way it collects the 
data, and part of the increase may reflect this change. In addition, 
even with significant gains, there is still a significant gap between 
the level of participation of low-income students in advanced placement 
courses and tests and the level of participation of students from more 
affluent backgrounds.
    The API program supports activities that enable greater numbers of 
low-income and other disadvantaged students to benefit from advanced 
placement courses and exams (ultimately increasing the likelihood that 
these students will receive college degrees) through increased access 
to, and participation in, pre-advanced placement and advanced placement 
courses. Pre-advanced placement and advanced placement teachers in the 
schools served by the program may participate in sustained, high-
quality professional development activities designed to:
    (1) Improve teacher content area knowledge;

[[Page 26427]]

    (2) Increase utilization of research-based classroom practices that 
foster student achievement for low-income students; and
    (3) Strengthen the alignment of pre-advanced placement and advanced 
placement curricula through ``vertical team training'' and other 
strategies.
    In accordance with section 1705(f) of the authorizing statute, 
applicants approved for funding under this program will, for each 
advanced placement subject supported by the grant, be required to 
submit to the Secretary annual reports on, among other things, the 
number of students served by the grantee who are taking an advanced 
placement course in that subject; the number of advanced placement 
tests in that subject taken by students served by the grantee; and the 
number of students served by the grantee scoring at different levels on 
advanced placement tests in that subject. In addition, grantees must 
submit disaggregated data (by race, ethnicity, sex, English proficiency 
status, and socio-economic status) on individuals taking advanced 
placement courses and tests.
    Absolute Priority: We have chosen the elements of the absolute 
priority from the authorized activities and priorities specified in 
sections 1705(c) and (d) of the ESEA. To implement the absolute 
priority, the Secretary will fund under this competition only 
applications from eligible applicants that meet both elements of the 
absolute priority.
    Under section 75.105(c)(3) of EDGAR, the Secretary is establishing 
an absolute priority for applications that--
    (1) Demonstrate an intent to carry out activities that target 
schools, or LEAs operating schools, with a high concentration of low-
income students (if the applicant is an LEA, propose to serve schools 
with a high concentration of low-income students); and
    (2) Propose to develop, enhance, or expand pre-advanced placement 
courses, in conjunction with advanced placement courses, in English, 
mathematics, science, and other core academic areas at the middle or 
high school level. Effective pre-advanced placement programs should 
enable low-income students to enroll and succeed in advanced placement 
courses and tests in core academic areas. Proposals may include 
vertical teams training, high-quality professional development for pre-
advanced placement and advanced placement teachers, and coordination of 
curriculum design and development between middle and high school 
teachers.

Notes

    (1) Pre-advanced placement courses are intended to provide middle 
and high school students with the higher order thinking skills, content 
knowledge, and study habits necessary for successful participation in 
advanced placement courses. Applicants should explain why the courses 
supported by the proposed project qualify as pre-advanced placement or 
advanced placement.
    (2) Applicants may submit free or reduced-price lunch data in order 
to verify that participating schools meet this priority. For the 
definitions of low-income individual (including a list of other types 
of data that may be used to verify low-income status) and high 
concentration of low-income students, see the Definitions section of 
this notice.

Allowable Activities

    Within this absolute priority, eligible entities implement programs 
designed to expand access for low-income individuals to pre-advanced 
placement and advanced placement programs through activities such as:
    (1) Teacher training;
    (2) Pre-advanced placement course development;
    (3) Coordination and articulation between grade levels to prepare 
students to enter and succeed in advanced placement courses;
    (4) Purchase of books and supplies;
    (5) Activities to increase the availability of, and participation 
in, on-line advanced placement courses; and
    (6) Any other activity directly related to expanding access to and 
participation in pre-advanced placement and advanced placement 
programs, particularly for low-income individuals.

    Note: Applicants approved for funding under this competition may 
be required to attend a two-day Project Directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC during the first year of the grant. The cost of 
attending this meeting may be paid from API program grant funds or 
State or local resources.

    Selection Criteria: The Secretary will use the following selection 
criteria to evaluate applications under this competition. These 
selection criteria apply to the absolute priority and allowable 
activities only. The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 
100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in 
parenthesis with the criterion. The criteria are as follows:
    (a) Significance (20 points). The Secretary considers the 
significance of the proposed project. In determining the significance 
of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The likelihood that the proposed project will result in system 
changes or improvements that provide greater access to pre-advanced 
placement and advanced placement courses and highly-trained teachers 
for low-income and other disadvantaged students.
    (2) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely 
to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in 
teaching and student achievement.
    (b) Quality of the Project Design (20 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the project design of the proposed project. In 
determining the quality of the project design, the Secretary considers 
the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed project represents an 
exceptional approach for meeting the objectives of the program and the 
priorities established for the competition.
    (2) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is 
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target 
population.
    (c) Quality of Project Services (20 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of project services to be provided by the 
proposed project. In determining the quality of the services to be 
provided, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of 
strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project 
participants based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or 
disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed 
project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and of effective 
practices.
    (2) The extent to which the training or professional development 
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient 
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice 
among the recipients of those services.
    (d) Quality of Project Personnel (10 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (1) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of the project director and other key personnel;
    (2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of project consultants or subcontractors, if any.
    (e) Adequacy of Resources (5 points). The Secretary considers the 
adequacy of resources. In determining the adequacy

[[Page 26428]]

of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the 
following factors:
    (1) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization.
    (2) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
number of persons to be served and to the anticipated results and 
benefits.
    (f) Quality of the Management Plan (10 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the management plan. In determining the 
quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (1) The likelihood of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, time lines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks.
    (2) The extent to which the time commitments of the project 
director and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate 
to meet the objectives of the proposed project.
    (g) Quality of the Project Evaluation (15 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the project evaluation. In determining the 
quality of the project evaluation, the Secretary considers the 
following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the 
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and 
qualitative data to the extent possible; and
    (2) The extent to which the evaluation meets the reporting 
requirements of section 1705(f) of the authorizing statute.
    Competitive Priorities: These priority points are in addition to 
any points the applicant earns under the selection criteria. The 
selection criteria will not be used to evaluate these priorities. The 
Secretary may select an application that meets a priority over an 
application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority. The 
maximum number of points an application may earn based on the priority 
points and the selection criteria is 145 points.

Statutory Priorities

    In accordance with the requirements of section 1705(c) of the 
authorizing statute and section 75.105(c)(2)(i) of EDGAR, the Secretary 
will award applications a total of up to twenty-five (25) additional 
points for addressing the following statutory priorities:
    (1) Up to twenty (20) points for demonstrating a pervasive need for 
the development of pre-advanced placement or advanced placement courses 
for middle or high schools where there are few or no advanced placement 
courses currently available; and
    (2) Up to five (5) points for demonstrating one or more of the 
following:
    [sbull] Involvement of business and community organizations in the 
activities assisted;
    [sbull] Availability of matching funds from State, local, or other 
sources to pay for a portion of the cost of activities to be assisted; 
or
    [sbull] Intent to carry out activities to increase the availability 
of, and participation in, on-line advanced placement courses.

Evaluation Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), the Secretary will award a total of 
up to twenty (20) additional priority points to applicants that propose 
to conduct evaluation activities designed to assess the effectiveness 
of this program in one or more areas. The project is designed to 
determine whether the program implemented produces meaningful effects 
on student achievement or teacher performance through a rigorous 
evaluation. The evaluation preferably uses an experimental design. For 
the API program, an evaluation using an experimental design is one 
where subjects at the school or district level are randomly assigned to 
receive the program being evaluated or to be in a control group that 
does not receive the program. Evaluations using an experimental design 
will receive up to twenty (20) points.
    If random assignment is not feasible, the project may employ a 
quasi-experimental design with carefully matched comparison conditions. 
This alternative design attempts to approximate a randomly assigned 
control group by matching subjects (students, teachers, classrooms or 
schools) with non-participants possessing similar pre-program 
characteristics. Evaluations using a quasi-experimental design will 
receive up to fifteen (15) points.
    Proposed evaluations that use neither experimental designs with 
random assignment nor quasi-experimental designs using matched 
comparison groups will receive no points under this competitive 
priority.
    Data from reliable and valid measures of the intervention that the 
program intends to implement and of the outcomes that the program 
intends to effect should be collected before and after participation in 
the program or the comparison condition.
    Points awarded under this priority will be determined by the 
quality of the proposed evaluation. In determining the quality of the 
evaluation, we will consider the extent to which the applicant presents 
a feasible, credible plan that includes:
    (1) The type of design to be used (random assignment or matched 
comparison);
    (2) Outcomes to be measured;
    (3) A discussion of how schools or districts will be assigned to 
the program or matched for comparison with other schools or districts; 
and
    (4) A proposed evaluator, preferably independent, with the 
necessary background and technical expertise to carry out the proposed 
evaluation.

Definitions

    The following definitions and other provisions are taken from the 
API program authorizing statute, in Title I, Part G of the ESEA. They 
are repeated in this application notice for the convenience of the 
applicant.
    As used in this section:
    (a) The term advanced placement test means an advanced placement 
test administered by the College Board or approved by the Secretary.

    Note: In addition to advanced placement tests administered by 
the College Board, the Department has approved advanced placement 
tests administered by the International Baccalaureate Organization. 
As part of the grant application process, applicants may request 
approval of tests from other educational entities that provide 
comparable programs of rigorous academic courses and testing through 
which students may earn college credit.

    (b) The term high concentration of low-income students, used with 
respect to a school, means a school that serves a student population at 
least 40 percent or more of whom are low-income individuals.
    (c) The term low-income individual means an individual who is 
determined by a State educational agency or local educational agency to 
be a child from a low-income family on the basis of data used by the 
Secretary to determine allocations under section 1124 of the ESEA, data 
on children eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the 
National School Lunch Act, data on children in families receiving 
assistance under Part A of Title IV of the Social Security Act, or data 
on children eligible to receive medical assistance under the Medicaid 
program under title XIX of the Social Security Act, or through an 
alternate method that

[[Page 26429]]

combines or extrapolates from those data.

Supplement, Not Supplant, Rule

    Funds provided under this program must be used only to supplement 
and not supplant other non-Federal funds that are available to assist 
low-income individuals in paying advanced placement test fees.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking

    In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), 
it is the practice of the Secretary to offer interested parties the 
opportunity to comment on proposed rules that are not taken directly 
from the statute. Ordinarily, this practice would have applied to the 
rules in this notice. Section 437(d)(2) of the General Education 
Provisions Act (GEPA), however, exempts from this rulemaking 
requirement those rules where the Secretary determines that it will 
cause extreme hardship to the intended beneficiaries of the program 
affected by the regulations. The Secretary, in accordance with section 
437(d)(2) of GEPA, has decided to forgo public comment with respect to 
the rules in this grant competition in order to ensure timely and high-
quality awards. These rules will apply only to the FY 2003 grant 
competition.
    For Applications Contact: Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), 
P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-
7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244. If you use a telecommunications device for 
the deaf (TDD) you may call (toll free): 1-877-576-7734.
    You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pbs/edpubs.html.
    Or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: 
[email protected].
    If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify 
this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.330C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline E. Baggett, U.S. Department 
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E228, Washington, DC 
20202-6140. Telephone: (202) 260-2502 or via Internet: 
[email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application 
package in an alternative format by contacting that person. However, 
the Department is not able to reproduce in an alternative format the 
standard forms included in the application package.

Electronic Access to this Document

    You may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe 
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site: 
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister.
    To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. 
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in 
the Washington, DC area at (202) 512-1530.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request using the contact information provided under For 
Applications Contact.

    Note: The official version of this document is the document 
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the 
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal 
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html.


    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6535-6537.

    Dated: May 9, 2003.
Nina Rees,
Deputy Under Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 03-12118 Filed 5-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P