[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40898-40903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17491]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1855-ZA08
[CFDA Number 84.282M]


Final Priorities, Requirements, and Selection Criteria; Charter 
Schools Program (CSP) Grants for Replication and Expansion of High-
Quality Charter Schools

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
announces priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria 
under the CSP-Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools 
grant program. The Assistant Deputy Secretary may use these priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for competitions in 
fiscal year (FY) 2011 and later years. We intend to use these 
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria to award 
grants to eligible applicants to enable them to replicate or 
substantially expand high-quality charter schools with demonstrated 
records of success, including success in increasing student academic 
achievement.

DATES: Effective Date: These priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria are effective August 11, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Pfeltz, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W255, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 205-3525 or by e-mail: [email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the 
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the CSP is to increase national 
understanding of the charter school model and to expand the number of 
high-quality charter schools available to students across the Nation by 
providing financial assistance for the planning, program design, 
initial implementation, and expansion of charter schools; and to 
evaluate the effects of charter schools, including their effects on 
students, student academic achievement, staff, and parents.
    The purpose of the CSP-Replication and Expansion of High-Quality 
Charter Schools grant program (CFDA 84.282M) is to award grants to 
eligible applicants to enable them to replicate or expand high-quality 
charter schools with demonstrated records of success, including success 
in increasing student academic achievement.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7221-7221j; Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2010, Division D, Title III, Public Law 111-117; 
Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 
2011, Division B, Title VIII, Public Law 112-10.
    We published a notice of proposed priorities, requirements, 
definitions, and selection criteria (NPP) for the CSP-Replication and 
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grant program in the Federal 
Register on March 25, 2011 (76 FR 16754). That notice contained 
background information and our reasons for proposing the particular 
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria.
    There are differences between the priorities, requirements, 
definitions, and selection criteria proposed in the NPP and these final 
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, as 
discussed in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section elsewhere in 
this notice.
    Public Comment: In response to the NPP, three parties submitted 
comments on the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria.
    Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes. In 
addition, we do not address general comments that raised concerns not 
directly related to the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, 
or selection criteria.
    Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and 
any changes in the priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria since publication of the NPP follows.

Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic

    Comment: One commenter suggested that we modify this priority to 
require an applicant to demonstrate that at least 50 percent (rather 
than 60 percent, as proposed in the NPP) of all students in the charter 
schools it currently operates or manages are individuals from low-
income families.
    Discussion: We decline to make the requested change because we 
intend for this program to focus on serving educationally disadvantaged 
students, which include individuals from low-income families (as 
defined in this notice). The definition of individual from a low-income 
family includes an individual determined by a State educational agency 
(SEA) or local educational agency (LEA) to be a child between the ages 
of 5 and 17 from a low-income family on the basis of data on children 
eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the Richard B. Russell 
National School Lunch Act. The 60 percent threshold in this priority is 
consistent with the average percentage of students in large urban 
school districts receiving free- or reduced-price lunches (as reported 
by the Council of Great City Schools, http://www.cgcs.org/about/fact_sheet.aspx). Our definition of individual from a low-income family 
includes free or reduced-price lunch as one indicator. We believe that 
it is appropriate to align the threshold for the percentage of students 
from low-income families served by the applicant's current charter 
schools in Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic with the average 
percentage of students in large urban school districts receiving free- 
or reduced-price lunches so that schools funded under this competition 
will be able to serve students residing in such districts as well as 
students in districts that have a higher poverty percentage.
    Changes: None.

Priority 4--Promoting Diversity

    Comment: One commenter suggested that we revise the language in 
Priority 4--Promoting Diversity. Specifically, the commenter expressed 
concern that the language, which focuses on promoting racial and ethnic 
diversity and avoiding racial isolation, would, in effect, encourage 
applicants to use classifications based on race and ethnicity to 
achieve some predetermined racial and ethnic mix in their programs.
    Discussion: This priority is based on the ``Promoting Diversity'' 
priority established in the Department's

[[Page 40899]]

Supplemental Priorities, which were published in the Federal Register 
on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and is designed to serve the same 
purpose (e.g., to focus on the racial and ethnic diversity of students 
in order to promote cross-racial understanding, break down racial 
stereotypes, and prepare students for an increasingly diverse workforce 
and society). Nevertheless, we have added a note to the priority to 
clarify the purpose of the priority and ensure that proposals to meet 
the priority comply with current law.
    In addition, on further review of this priority, we believe that 
certain wording changes in the priority are appropriate. First, we 
believe that we can make the language more consistent with the 
``Promoting Diversity'' priority from the Supplemental Priorities by 
referring to ``student diversity'' rather than ``diversity in their 
student bodies.'' In addition, to eliminate any possibility that the 
language might encourage applicants to create charter schools with 
disproportionate enrollments, we believe it is appropriate to require 
that an applicant take active measures to serve students with 
disabilities and English learners at a rate at least comparable to the 
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the 
surrounding area--rather than at a rate equal to or higher than the 
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the 
surrounding area.
    Changes: We have added a Note following Priority 4--Promoting 
Diversity to provide further information for applicants on responding 
to Priority 4. This note invites an applicant to discuss how the 
project will encourage approaches by charter schools that help bring 
together students of different backgrounds to attain the benefits that 
flow from a diverse student body and how it will ensure that those 
approaches to promoting diversity among its schools are permissible 
under current law.
    In addition we have revised paragraph (a) of the priority to refer 
to promoting ``student diversity'' rather than ``diversity in their 
student bodies.'' Finally, we have revised the standard in paragraphs 
(b) and (c) to require applicants to demonstrate, in order to meet the 
priority, a record of, and intent to continue, taking active measures 
to serve students with disabilities (paragraph (b)) and English 
learners (paragraph (c)) at a rate that is at least comparable to the 
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the 
surrounding area.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that we revise Proposed Priority 
4--Promoting Diversity so that an applicant can meet the priority if 
the applicant meets any one of the three listed factors in the 
priority.
    Discussion: We decline to revise this priority as requested because 
we want to maintain flexibility to use the priority differently, 
depending on the objectives in a specific competition. For example, if 
we designate this priority as an absolute priority or an ``all or 
nothing'' competitive preference priority, an applicant would need to 
meet all of the factors under the priority in order to meet the 
priority. In contrast, if we elect to use this priority as a 
competitive preference priority under which applicants can receive up 
to a certain number of points, then an applicant might very well be 
able to receive competitive preference points under the priority if it 
satisfies one or some, but not all of, the factors listed in the 
priority.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that we designate certain 
proposed priorities as absolute, competitive, or invitational.
    Discussion: This notice is designed only to establish the 
priorities that we may choose to use in CSP Replication and Expansion 
of High-Quality Charter School grant competitions in fiscal year 2011 
and future years. As noted elsewhere in this notice, we do not 
designate whether a priority will be absolute, competitive, or 
invitational in this notice. When inviting applications for a 
competition using one or more priorities, we will designate the type of 
each priority through a notice in the Federal Register.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter encouraged the Department to make State and 
school subgroup data more readily accessible so that applicants will be 
better able to address Priority 4--Promoting Diversity and the Proposed 
Requirements.
    Discussion: At present, the Department is looking into ways we can 
make more data at the State, district and school levels, with 
information on subgroups, available to the public in a manner that 
protects the privacy of individuals.
    Changes: None.
    Requirements
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department establish a 
maximum limit of approximately $600,000 for the start-up of new schools 
under the CSP Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools 
grants program.
    Discussion: In the Reasonable and Necessary Costs section 
(paragraph (c)) of the Proposed Program Requirements, the Secretary 
reserves the right to impose a maximum limit on the amount of funds 
that may be awarded per charter school replicated, per charter school 
substantially expanded, or per new school seat created. We decline to 
make the change requested by the commenter regarding the establishment 
of a fixed maximum limit for the start-up of new schools because the 
requirements in this notice may be used in future competitions. In 
order to be able to respond to future needs or new information on the 
start-up costs of new or expanding charter schools, we believe it is 
prudent to preserve the Secretary's flexibility in making the 
determination of a maximum amount, or whether one is needed, on a 
competition-by-competition basis.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: None.
    Discussion: Upon further review of paragraph (j) in the Application 
Requirements, we have determined that the paragraph does not clearly 
state that the applicant should describe how all students in the 
community will be informed, and given an equal opportunity to attend, 
the proposed new or substantially expanded schools.
    Changes: We have inserted ``all'' into paragraph (j) of the 
Application Requirements section, before ``students in the community''.
    Comment: None.
    Discussion: Upon further review of the Application Requirements, we 
have determined that applicants should be aware that small data groups 
can lead to the disclosure of personally identifiable information 
(PII).
    Changes: In paragraphs (m), (n)(2), and (n)(3) of the Application 
Requirements section, we have inserted ``maintaining standards to 
protect personally identifiable information'' as a parenthetical.
    Comment: None.
    Discussion: Upon further review of paragraph (n)(3) in the 
Application Requirements, we have determined that the National Center 
for Education Statistics report to which we referred as an example of 
the scale of State proficiency standards is of limited value to 
applicants because the data in the report are based on State standards 
in 2007. Given that there is not a more recent version of this report, 
and because we do not want to provide a static example while State 
standards continue to change, we believe it is appropriate to remove 
this example.
    Changes: We have removed the parenthetical referencing the ``report 
available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/

[[Page 40900]]

2010456.pdf'' from paragraph (n)(3) of the Application Requirements 
section.
    Final Priorities:
    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
establishes the following four priorities for the CSP Replication and 
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may apply 
one or more of these priorities in any year in which this program is in 
effect.
    Priority 1--Experience Operating or Managing High-Quality Charter 
Schools.
    This priority is for projects that will provide for the replication 
or expansion of high-quality charter schools by applicants that 
currently operate or manage more than one high-quality charter school 
(as defined in this notice).
    Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that at least 
60 percent of all students in the charter schools it currently operates 
or manages are individuals from low-income families (as defined in this 
notice).
    Priority 3--School Improvement.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that its 
proposed replication or expansion of one or more high-quality charter 
schools will occur in partnership with, and will be designed to assist, 
one or more LEAs in implementing academic or structural interventions 
to serve students attending schools that have been identified for 
improvement, corrective action, closure, or restructuring under section 
1116 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended 
(ESEA), and as described in the notice of final requirements for School 
Improvement Grants, published in the Federal Register on October 28, 
2010 (75 FR 66363).
    Priority 4--Promoting Diversity.
    This priority is for applicants that demonstrate a record of (in 
the schools they currently operate or manage), as well as an intent to 
continue (in schools that they will be creating or substantially 
expanding under this grant), taking active measures to--
    (a) Promote student diversity, including racial and ethnic 
diversity, or avoid racial isolation;
    (b) Serve students with disabilities at a rate that is at least 
comparable to the rate at which these students are served in public 
schools in the surrounding area; and
    (c) Serve English learners at a rate that is at least comparable to 
the rate at which these students are served in public schools in the 
surrounding area.
    In support of this priority, applicants must provide enrollment 
data as well as descriptions of existing policies and activities 
undertaken or planned to be undertaken.

    Note: An applicant addressing this priority is invited to 
discuss how the proposed design of its project will encourage 
approaches by charter schools that help bring together students of 
different backgrounds, including students from different racial and 
ethnic backgrounds, to attain the benefits that flow from a diverse 
student body. The applicant should discuss in its application how it 
would ensure that those approaches are permissible under current 
law.

    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)).
    FINAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS:
    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
establishes the following program requirements for the CSP Replication 
and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may 
apply one or more of these requirements in any year in which this 
program is in effect.
    (a) Eligibility: To be eligible for an award, an applicant must 
meet the statutory requirements. The requirement listed below is 
statutory; we are including it here for clarity:
    Eligible applicants for this program are non-profit charter 
management organizations (CMOs) and other not-for-profit entities. 
Eligible applicants may also apply as a group or consortium.
    (b) Funding Restrictions: Grantees under this program must use the 
grant funds to replicate or substantially expand the charter school 
model or models for which the applicant has presented evidence of 
success. Grant funds must be used to carry out allowable activities, as 
described in section 5204(f)(3) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)(3)).

    Note: A grantee may use up to 20 percent of grant funds for 
initial operational costs associated with the expansion or 
improvement of the grantee's oversight or management of its charter 
schools, provided that: (i) The specific charter schools being 
created or substantially expanded under the grant are the intended 
beneficiaries of such expansion or improvement, and (ii) such 
expansion or improvement is intended to improve the grantee's 
ability to manage or oversee the charter schools created or 
substantially expanded under the grant.

    (c) Reasonable and Necessary Costs: The Secretary may elect to 
impose a maximum limit on the amount of grant funds that may be awarded 
per charter school replicated, per charter school substantially 
expanded, or per new charter school seat created.

    Note: Applicants must ensure that all costs included in the 
proposed budget are reasonable and necessary in light of the goals 
and objectives of the proposed project. Any costs determined by the 
Secretary to be unreasonable or unnecessary will be removed from the 
final approved budget.

    (d) Other CSP Grants: A charter school that receives funds under 
this competition is ineligible to receive funds for the same purpose 
under section 5202(c)(2) of the ESEA, including for planning and 
program design or the initial implementation of a charter school (i.e., 
CFDA 84.282A or 84.282B).
    A charter school that has received CSP funds for replication 
previously, or that has received funds for planning or initial 
implementation of a charter school (i.e., CFDA 84.282A or 84.282B), may 
not use funds under this grant for the same purpose. However, such 
charter schools may be eligible to receive funds under this competition 
to substantially expand the charter school beyond the existing grade 
levels or student count.
    Final Application Requirements:
    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
establishes the following application requirements for the CSP 
Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants. We 
may apply one or more of these application requirements in any year in 
which this program is in effect. An applicant may choose to respond to 
these application requirements in the context of its responses to the 
selection criteria.
    (a) Describe the objectives of the project for replicating or 
substantially expanding high-quality charter schools and the methods by 
which the applicant

[[Page 40901]]

will determine its progress toward achieving those objectives.
    (b) Describe how the applicant currently operates or manages the 
charter schools for which it has presented evidence of success, and how 
the proposed new or substantially expanded charter schools will be 
operated or managed. Include a description of central office functions, 
governance, daily operations, financial management, human resources 
management, and instructional management. If applying as a group or 
consortium, describe the roles and responsibilities of each member of 
the group or consortium and how each member will contribute to the 
proposed project.
    (c) Describe how the applicant will ensure that each proposed new 
or substantially expanded charter school receives its commensurate 
share of Federal education funds that are allocated by formula each 
year, including during the first year of operation of the school and 
any year in which the school's enrollment substantially expands.
    (d) Describe the educational program to be implemented in the 
proposed new or substantially expanded charter schools, including how 
the program will enable all students (including educationally 
disadvantaged students) to meet State student academic achievement 
standards, the grade levels or ages of students to be served, and the 
curriculum and instructional practices to be used.
    (e) Describe the administrative relationship between the charter 
school or schools to be replicated or substantially expanded by the 
applicant and the authorized public chartering agency.
    (f) Describe how the applicant will provide for continued operation 
of the proposed new or substantially expanded charter school or schools 
once the Federal grant has expired.
    (g) Describe how parents and other members of the community will be 
involved in the planning, program design, and implementation of the 
proposed new or substantially expanded charter school or schools.
    (h) Include a request and justification for waivers of any Federal 
statutory or regulatory provisions that the applicant believes are 
necessary for the successful operation of the proposed new or 
substantially expanded charter schools.
    (i) Describe how the grant funds will be used, including how these 
funds will be used in conjunction with other Federal programs 
administered by the Secretary, and with any matching funds.
    (j) Describe how all students in the community, including students 
with disabilities, English learners, and other educationally 
disadvantaged students, will be informed about the proposed new or 
substantially expanded charter schools and given an equal opportunity 
to attend such schools.
    (k) Describe how the proposed new or substantially expanded charter 
schools that are considered to be LEAs under State law, or the LEAs in 
which the new or substantially expanded charter schools are located, 
will comply with sections 613(a)(5) and 613(e)(1)(B) of the Individuals 
with Disabilities Education Act.
    (l) Provide information on any significant compliance issues 
identified within the past three years for each school managed by the 
applicant, including compliance issues in the areas of student safety, 
financial management, and statutory or regulatory compliance.
    (m) For each charter school currently operated or managed by the 
applicant, provide the following information: The year founded, the 
grades currently served, the number of students, the address, the 
percentage of students in each subgroup of students described in 
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA, results on the State 
assessment for the past three years (if available) by subgroup, 
attendance rates, student attrition rates for the past three years, and 
(if the school operates a 12th grade) high school graduation rates and 
college attendance rates (maintaining standards to protect personally 
identifiable information).
    (n) Provide objective data showing applicant quality. In 
particular, the Secretary requires the applicant to provide the 
following data:
    (1) Performance (school-wide and by subgroup) for the past three 
years (if available) on statewide tests of all charter schools operated 
or managed by the applicant as compared to all students in other 
schools in the State or States at the same grade level, and as compared 
with other schools serving similar demographics of students;
    (2) Annual student attendance and retention rates (school-wide and 
by subgroup) for the past three years (or over the life of the school, 
if the school has been open for fewer than three years), and 
comparisons with other similar schools (maintaining standards to 
protect personally identifiable information); and
    (3) Where applicable and available, high school graduation rates, 
college attendance rates, and college persistence rates (school-wide 
and by subgroup) for the past three years (if available) of students 
attending schools operated or managed by the applicant, and the 
methodology used to calculate these rates (maintaining standards to 
protect personally identifiable information). When reporting data for 
schools in States that may have particularly demanding or low standards 
of proficiency, applicants are invited to discuss how their academic 
success might be considered against applicants from across the country.
    (o) Provide such other information and assurances as the Secretary 
may require.
    Definitions:
    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
establishes the following definitions for the CSP Replication and 
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants. We may apply one or 
more of these definitions in any year in which this program is in 
effect.
    Charter management organization (CMO) is a nonprofit organization 
that operates or manages multiple charter schools by centralizing or 
sharing certain functions and resources among schools.
    Educationally disadvantaged students includes, but is not 
necessarily limited to, individuals from low-income families (as 
defined elsewhere in this notice), English learners, migratory 
children, children with disabilities, and neglected or delinquent 
children.
    High-quality charter school is a school that shows evidence of 
strong academic results for the past three years (or over the life of 
the school, if the school has been open for fewer than three years), 
based on the following factors:
    (1) Increasing student academic achievement and attainment for all 
students, including, as applicable, educationally disadvantaged 
students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the 
applicant.
    (2) Either (i) Demonstrated success in closing historic achievement 
gaps for the subgroups of students, described in section 
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools operated or 
managed by the applicant, or
    (ii) No significant achievement gaps between any of the subgroups 
of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at 
the charter schools operated or managed by the applicant and 
significant gains in student academic achievement with all populations 
of students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the 
applicant.
    (3) Achieved results (including performance on statewide tests, 
annual student attendance and retention rates, high school graduation 
rates, college attendance rates, and college persistence

[[Page 40902]]

rates where applicable and available) for low-income and other 
educationally disadvantaged students served by the charter schools 
operated or managed by the applicant that are above the average 
academic achievement results for such students in the State.
    (4) No significant compliance issues (as defined in this notice), 
particularly in the areas of student safety and financial management.
    Individual from a low-income family means an individual who is 
determined by an SEA or LEA to be a child, age 5 through 17, from a 
low-income family, on the basis of (a) data used by the Secretary to 
determine allocations under section 1124 of the ESEA, (b) data on 
children eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the Richard 
B. Russell National School Lunch Act, (c) data on children in families 
receiving assistance under part A of title IV of the Social Security 
Act, (d) data on children eligible to receive medical assistance under 
the Medicaid program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, or (e) 
an alternate method that combines or extrapolates from the data in 
items (a) through (d) of this definition (see 20 U.S.C. 6537(3)).
    Replicate means to open one or more new charter schools that are 
based on the charter school model or models for which the applicant has 
presented evidence of success.
    Significant compliance issue means a violation that did, will, or 
could lead to the revocation of a school's charter.
    Substantially expand means to increase the student count of an 
existing charter school by more than 50 percent or to add at least two 
grades to an existing charter school over the course of the grant.
    Final Selection Criteria:
    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement 
establishes the following selection criteria for the CSP Replication 
and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may 
apply one or more of these criteria, alone or in combination with one 
or more selection criteria from 34 CFR 75.210 and section 5204 of the 
ESEA, in any year in which we award grants for the replication and 
expansion of high-quality charter schools. In the notice inviting 
applications or the application package, or both, we will announce the 
maximum possible points assigned to each criterion.
    (a) Quality of the eligible applicant. In determining the quality 
of the applicant, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The degree, including the consistency over the past three 
years, to which the applicant has demonstrated success in significantly 
increasing student academic achievement and attainment for all 
students, including, as applicable, educationally disadvantaged 
students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the 
applicant.
    (2) Either (i) The degree, including the consistency over the past 
three years, to which the applicant has demonstrated success in closing 
historic achievement gaps for the subgroups of students, described in 
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools 
operated or managed by the applicant, or
    (ii) The degree, including the consistency over the past three 
years, to which there have not been significant achievement gaps 
between any of the subgroups of students described in section 
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools operated or 
managed by the applicant and to which significant gains in student 
academic achievement made with all populations of students served by 
the charter schools operated or managed by the applicant.
    (3) The degree, including the consistency over the past three 
years, to which the applicant has achieved results (including 
performance on statewide tests, annual student attendance and retention 
rates, high school graduation rates, college attendance rates, and 
college persistence rates where applicable and available) for low-
income and other educationally disadvantaged students served by the 
charter schools operated or managed by the applicant that are 
significantly above the average academic achievement results for such 
students in the State.
    (b) Contribution in assisting educationally disadvantaged students.
    The contribution the proposed project will make in assisting 
educationally disadvantaged students served by the applicant to meet or 
exceed State academic content standards and State student academic 
achievement standards, and to graduate college- and career-ready. When 
responding to this selection criterion, applicants must discuss the 
proposed locations of schools to be created or substantially expanded 
and the student populations to be served.
    (c) Quality of the project design.
    The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the goals, 
objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are 
clearly specified, measurable, and attainable. Applicants proposing to 
open schools serving substantially different populations than those 
currently served by the model for which they have demonstrated evidence 
of success must address the attainability of outcomes given this 
difference.
    (d) Quality of the management plan and personnel.
    The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan and 
personnel to replicate and substantially expand high-quality charter 
schools. In determining the quality of the management plan and 
personnel for the proposed project, the Secretary considers:
    (1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks.
    (2) The business plan for improving, sustaining, and ensuring the 
quality and performance of charter schools created or substantially 
expanded under these grants beyond the initial period of Federal 
funding in areas including, but not limited to, facilities, financial 
management, central office, student academic achievement, governance, 
oversight, and human resources of the charter schools.
    (3) A multi-year financial and operating model for the 
organization, a demonstrated commitment of current and future partners, 
and evidence of broad support from stakeholders critical to the 
project's long-term success.
    (4) The plan for closing charter schools supported, overseen, or 
managed by the applicant that do not meet high standards of quality.
    (5) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of the project director, chief executive officer or organization 
leader, and key project personnel, especially in managing projects of 
the size and scope of the proposed project.
    This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional 
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject 
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

    Note:  This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, we invite 
applications through a notice in the Federal Register.

    Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance 
with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have 
assessed the potential costs and benefits of this final regulatory 
action.
    The potential costs associated with this final regulatory action 
are those

[[Page 40903]]

resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering this program effectively and efficiently.
    In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative 
and qualitative--of this final regulatory action, we have determined 
that the benefits of the final priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria justify the costs.
    We have determined, also, that this final regulatory action does 
not unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    Summary of potential costs and benefits:
    The impact of the Charter Schools Program in opening new charter 
schools around the country has been well-established. CSP Grants for 
the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools program 
gives the best CMOs in the country a chance to replicate their high-
performing charter schools and serve more students. The priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria announced in this 
notice will ensure that the highest-quality applicants receive funds 
and are able to serve the students most in need.
    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.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free 
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the 
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System 
at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, 
as well as all other documents of this Department published in the 
Federal Register, in text or Adobe 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: http://www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

    Dated: July 7, 2011.
James H. Shelton, III,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2011-17491 Filed 7-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P