[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1085-1093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00711]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Education Innovation and Research
(EIR) Program--Expansion Grants
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2019 for the EIR program--
Expansion Grants, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number
84.411A (Expansion Grants).
DATES:
Applications Available: February 4, 2019.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: February 21, 2019.
[[Page 1086]]
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 2, 2019.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 3, 2019.
Pre-Application Information: The Department will post additional
competition information for prospective applicants on the EIR program
website: https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/education-innovation-and-research-eir/.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Montanti, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E323, Washington, DC 20202-
5900. Telephone: (202) 453-7122. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The EIR program, established under section 4611
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA),
provides funding to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to
scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to
improve student achievement and attainment for high-need students; and
rigorously evaluate such innovations. The EIR program is designed to
generate and validate solutions to persistent education challenges and
to support the expansion of those solutions to serve substantially
larger numbers of students.
The central design element of the EIR program is its multi-tier
structure that links the amount of funding an applicant may receive to
the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the proposed
project, with the expectation that projects that build this evidence
will advance through EIR's grant tiers: ``Early-phase,'' ``Mid-phase,''
and ``Expansion.'' Applicants proposing innovative practices that are
supported by limited evidence can receive relatively small grants to
support the development, implementation, and initial evaluation of the
practices; applicants proposing practices supported by evidence from
rigorous evaluations, such as an experimental study (as defined in this
notice), can receive larger grant awards to support expansion across
the country. This structure provides incentives for applicants to: (1)
Explore new ways of addressing persistent challenges that other
educators can build on and learn from; (2) build evidence of
effectiveness of their practices; and (3) replicate and scale
successful practices in new schools, districts, and States while
addressing the barriers to scale, such as cost structures and
implementation fidelity.
All EIR projects are expected to generate information regarding
their effectiveness in order to inform EIR grantees' efforts to learn
about and improve upon their efforts, and to help similar, non-EIR
efforts across the country benefit from EIR grantees' knowledge. By
requiring that all grantees conduct independent evaluations of their
EIR projects, EIR ensures that its funded projects make a significant
contribution to improving the quality and quantity of information
available to practitioners and policymakers about which practices
improve student achievement and attainment, for which types of
students, and in what contexts.
The Department awards three types of grants under this program:
``Early-phase'' grants, ``Mid-phase'' grants, and ``Expansion'' grants.
These grants differ in terms of the level of prior evidence of
effectiveness required for consideration for funding, the expectations
regarding the kind of evidence and information funded projects should
produce, the level of scale funded projects should reach, and,
consequently, the amount of funding available to support each type of
project.
The Department expects that Expansion grants will provide funding
for implementation and rigorous evaluation of a program that has been
found to produce sizable, significant impacts under a Mid-phase grant
or other effort meeting similar criteria, for the purposes of: (a)
Determining whether such impacts can be successfully reproduced and
sustained over time; and (b) identifying the conditions in which the
program is most effective.
Expansion grants are supported by evidence that demonstrates a
statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other
relevant outcomes based on strong evidence (as defined in this notice)
from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study
for at least one population and setting, and grantees are encouraged to
implement at the national level (as defined in this notice).
This notice invites applications for Expansion grants only. The
notices inviting applications for Early-phase and Mid-phase grants are
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Background: While this notice is for the Expansion tier only, the
premise of the EIR program is that new and innovative programs and
practices can help to solve the persistent problems in education that
prevent students, particularly high-need students, from succeeding.
These innovations need to be evaluated, and if sufficient evidence of
effectiveness can be demonstrated, the intent is for these innovations
to be replicated and tested in new populations and settings. EIR is not
intended to provide support for any practices which are already
commonly implemented by educators, unless significant adaptations of
such practices warrant testing to determine if they can accelerate
achievement, or greatly increase the efficiency and likelihood that
they can be widely implemented in a variety of new populations and
settings effectively.
As an EIR project is implemented, grantees are encouraged to learn
more about how the practices improve student achievement and
attainment; and to develop increasingly rigorous evidence of
effectiveness and new strategies to efficiently and cost-effectively
scale to new school districts, regions, and States. In connection with
selection criterion B.2., we encourage applicants to develop a logic
model (as defined in this notice), theory of action, or another
conceptual framework that includes the goals, objectives, outcomes and
key project components (as defined in this notice) of the project.
Disseminating evaluation findings is a critical element of every
project, even if a rigorous evaluation does not demonstrate positive
results. Such results can influence the next stage of education
practice and promote follow-up studies that build upon the results. The
EIR program considers all high-quality evaluations to be a valuable
contribution to the field of education research and encourages the
documentation and sharing of lessons learned.
For those innovations that have positive results and have the
potential for continued development and implementation, the Department
is interested in learning more about continued efforts regarding cost-
effectiveness and feasibility when scaled to additional populations
and/or
[[Page 1087]]
settings. EIR projects at the Mid-phase and Expansion levels are
encouraged to test new strategies for recruiting and supporting new
project adoption, seek efficiencies where project implementation has
been too costly or cumbersome to operate at scale, and test new ways of
overcoming any other barriers in practice or policy that might inhibit
project growth. Early-phase grantees that are not yet ready to scale
are still encouraged to think about how their innovations might
translate to other populations or settings in the long term, and to
select their partners and implementation sites accordingly.
Finally, all EIR applicants and grantees should consider how they
need to develop their organizational capacity, project financing, or
business plans to sustain their projects and continue implementation
and adaptation after Federal funding ends. EIR encourages all grantees
to engage in sustainability planning as part of a funded project. The
Department intends to provide grantees with technical assistance in
their dissemination, scaling, and sustainability efforts.
Expansion grants are expected to scale practices that have prior
evidence of effectiveness, in order to improve outcomes for high-need
students. They are also expected to generate important information
about an intervention's effectiveness (e.g., in what context(s) does
the intervention work best? Where does it not work as well? What
components of the practice are most critical to its success?).
Expansion grants are uniquely positioned to help answer critical
questions about the process of scaling a practice to the national
level. Expansion grantees are encouraged to consider how the cost
structure of a practice can change as the intervention scales.
Additionally, grantees may want to consider multiple ways to facilitate
implementation fidelity without making scaling too onerous or rigid a
process.
Evaluations of Expansion grants are expected to be conducted in a
variety of contexts and for a variety of students in order to determine
the context(s) and population(s) for which the EIR-supported practice
is most effective and how to effectively adapt the practice for these
contexts and populations. An Expansion grantee is encouraged to design
an EIR-supported evaluation that examines the cost-effectiveness of its
practices, identifies potential obstacles and success factors to
scaling that would be relevant to other organizations, and has the
potential to meet the strong evidence threshold. We expect that
Expansion grantees will work toward sustaining their projects and
continuing to scale successful practices after the EIR grant period
ends; EIR grantees can use their evaluations to assess how their EIR-
funded practices could be successfully reproduced and sustained. The
Department intends to provide grantees and their independent evaluators
with evaluation technical assistance. This evaluation technical
assistance could include grantees and their independent evaluators
providing to the Department or its contractor updated comprehensive
evaluation plans in a format as requested by the technical assistance
provider and using such tools as the Department may request. Grantees
will be encouraged to update this evaluation plan at least annually to
reflect any changes to the evaluation, with updates consistent with the
scope and objectives of the approved application.
The FY 2019 Expansion competition includes three absolute
priorities. All Expansion applicants must address Absolute Priority 1.
Expansion applicants are also required to address one of the other two
absolute priorities. The absolute priorities align with the purpose of
the program and the Administration's priorities.
Absolute Priority 1--Strong Evidence, establishes the evidence
requirement for this tier of grants. All Expansion applicants must
submit prior evidence of effectiveness that meets the strong evidence
standard.
Absolute Priority 2--Field-Initiated Innovations--General, allows
applicants to propose projects that align with the intent of the EIR
program statute: To create and take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-
based, field-initiated innovations to improve student achievement and
attainment.
Absolute Priority 3--Field-Initiated Innovations--Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), is intended to highlight the
Administration's efforts to ensure our Nation's economic
competitiveness by improving and expanding STEM learning and
engagement, including computer science.
In Absolute Priority 3, the Department recognizes the importance of
funding Pre-Kindergarten (Pre-K) through grade 12 STEM education that
addresses the enrollment and achievement gap for underrepresented
students in a manner consistent with nondiscrimination requirements
contained in the U.S. Constitution and Federal civil rights laws. The
Department also encourages expanding access to STEM education in rural
areas, especially through partnerships with rural school districts to
utilize virtual and remote access to makerspace technologies, such as
3-D printers, to expand opportunities for students in rural areas where
such tools are often cost prohibitive.
Through these priorities, the Department intends to advance
innovation, build evidence, and address the learning and achievement of
high-need students beginning in Pre-K through grade 12.
Priorities: This notice includes three absolute priorities. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Absolute Priority 1 is from 34
CFR 75.226(d)(1). In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Absolute
Priority 2 is from section 4611(a)(1)(A) of the ESEA. Absolute Priority
3 is from section 4611(a)(1)(A) of the ESEA and the Secretary's Final
Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant
Programs, published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR
9096) (Supplemental Priorities).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2019 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet Absolute Priority
1--Strong Evidence, and one additional absolute priority.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Strong Evidence.
Under this priority, we provide funding to projects supported by
evidence that meets the conditions in the definition of strong
evidence.
Note: An applicant must identify up to four study citations to
be reviewed against the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbook (as
defined in this notice) for the purposes of meeting strong evidence.
The studies may have been conducted by the applicant or by a third
party. An applicant should clearly identify these citations in the
Evidence form. The Department may not review a study citation that
an applicant fails to clearly identify for review. In addition to
including up to four study citations, applicants should describe in
the form information such as the following: (1) The positive student
outcomes they intend to replicate under their Expansion grant and
how the characteristics of students and the positive student
outcomes in the study citations correspond with the characteristics
of the high-need students to be served under the Expansion grant;
(2) the correspondence of practice(s) the applicant plans to
implement with the practice(s) cited in the studies; and (3) the
intended student outcomes that the proposed practice(s) attempts to
impact.
An applicant must ensure that all evidence is available to the
Department from publicly available sources and provide links or other
guidance indicating where it is available. If the
[[Page 1088]]
Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient
information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide
additional information at a later time. However, if the WWC determines
that a study does not provide enough information on key aspects of the
study design, such as sample attrition or equivalence of intervention
and comparison groups, the WWC may submit a query to the study
author(s) to gather information for use in determining a study rating.
Authors would be asked to respond to queries within 10 business days.
Should the author query remain incomplete within 14 days of the initial
contact to the study author(s), the study may be deemed ineligible
under the grant competition. After the grant competition closes, the
WWC will, for purposes of its own curation of studies, continue to
include responses to author queries and will make updates to study
reviews as necessary. However, no additional information will be taken
into account after the competition closes and the initial timeline
established for response to an author query passes.
Absolute Priority 2--Field-Initiated Innovations--General.
Under the priority, we provide funding to projects that are
designed to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale
entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve
student achievement and attainment for high-need students.
Absolute Priority 3--Field-Initiated Innovations--Promoting
Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math (STEM) Education, With a
Particular Focus on Computer Science.
Under the priority, we provide funding to projects that are
designed to:
(1) Create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale
entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve
student achievement and attainment for high-need students, and;
(2) Improve student achievement or other educational outcomes in
one or more of the following areas: Science, technology, engineering,
math, or computer science (as defined in this notice).
Definitions: The definitions of ``baseline,'' ``experimental
study,'' ``logic model,'' ``national level,'' ``nonprofit,''
``performance measure,'' ``performance target,'' ``project component,''
``regional level,'' ``relevant outcome,'' ``strong evidence,'' and
``What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook)'' are from 34 CFR
77.1. The definition of ``computer science'' is from the Supplemental
Priorities. The definitions of ``local educational agency'' and ``State
educational agency'' are from section 8101 of the ESEA.
Baseline means the starting point from which performance is
measured and targets are set.
Computer science means the study of computers and algorithmic
processes and includes the study of computing principles and theories,
computational thinking, computer hardware, software design, coding,
analytics, and computer applications.
Computer science often includes computer programming or coding as a
tool to create software, including applications, games, websites, and
tools to manage or manipulate data; or development and management of
computer hardware and the other electronics related to sharing,
securing, and using digital information.
In addition to coding, the expanding field of computer science
emphasizes computational thinking and interdisciplinary problem-solving
to equip students with the skills and abilities necessary to apply
computation in our digital world.
Computer science does not include using a computer for everyday
activities, such as browsing the internet; use of tools like word
processing, spreadsheets, or presentation software; or using computers
in the study and exploration of unrelated subjects.
Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare
outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are
otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment
group receiving a project component or a control group that does not.
Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies,
and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental
studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g.,
sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression
discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)
standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbook:
(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for
example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the
project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to
receive the project component (the control group).
(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project
component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning
students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental
education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of
outcomes.
(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case
(e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in
the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to
determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the
treatment.
Local educational agency (LEA) means:
(a) In General. A public board of education or other public
authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative
control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public
elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township,
school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or
for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in
a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools
or secondary schools.
(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any
other public institution or agency having administrative control and
direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.
(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an
elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian
Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the
school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not
provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does
not have a student population that is smaller than the student
population of the local educational agency receiving assistance under
the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school
shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational
agency (as defined in this notice) other than the Bureau of Indian
Education.
(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational
service agencies and consortia of those agencies.
(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the State
educational agency in a State in which the State educational agency is
the sole educational agency for all public schools.
Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to be
critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the
[[Page 1089]]
key project components and relevant outcomes.
National level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to be effective in
a wide variety of communities, including rural and urban areas, as well
as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and
ethnic groups, migrant populations, individuals with disabilities,
English learners, and individuals of each gender).
Nonprofit, as applied to an agency, organization, or institution,
means that it is owned and operated by one or more corporations or
associations whose net earnings do not benefit, and cannot lawfully
benefit, any private shareholder or entity.
Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or
metric used to gauge program or project performance.
Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant
would seek to meet during the course of a project or as a result of a
project.
Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention,
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).
Regional level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to serve a variety
of communities within a State or multiple States, including rural and
urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically
disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations,
individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of
each gender). For an LEA-based project, to be considered a regional-
level project, a process, product, strategy, or practice must serve
students in more than one LEA, unless the process, product, strategy,
or practice is implemented in a State in which the State educational
agency is the sole educational agency for all schools.
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s)
the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the
specific goals of the program.
State educational agency (SEA) means the agency primarily
responsible for the State supervision of public elementary schools and
secondary schools.
Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness
of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample
that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive
that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0
of the WWC Handbook reporting a ``strong evidence base'' for the
corresponding practice guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1
or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a ``positive effect'' on a
relevant outcome based on a ``medium to large'' extent of evidence,
with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially negative
effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC
using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, or otherwise assessed by
the Department using version 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, as appropriate,
and that--
(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;
(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative
effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a
corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1 or 3.0
of the WWC Handbook; and
(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State,
county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at
least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies
of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs
(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy this
requirement.
What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook) means the
standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards
Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (incorporated by reference, see 34
CFR 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can
meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with
reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and
intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of
evidence as described in the Handbook documentation.
Program Authority: Section 4611 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7261.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The Supplemental Priorities.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions
of higher education only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $125,000,000.
These estimated available funds are the total available for all
three types of grants under the EIR program (Early-phase, Mid-phase,
and Expansion grants). Contingent upon the availability of funds and
the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in
subsequent years from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: Up to $15,000,000.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $15,000,000 for
a project period of 60 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1-4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months. We anticipate that initial awards
under this competition will be made for a three-year (36 month) period.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and each grantee's
substantial progress towards accomplishing the goals and objectives of
the project as described in its approved application, we may make
continuation awards to grantees for the remainder of the project
period.
Applicants are to propose a budget that covers the entire project
period of up to 60 months.
Note: Under section 4611(c) of the ESEA, the Department must
use at least 25 percent of EIR funds for a fiscal year to make
awards to applicants serving rural areas, contingent on receipt of a
sufficient number of applications of sufficient quality. For
purposes of this competition, we will consider an applicant as rural
if the applicant meets the qualifications for rural applicants
[[Page 1090]]
as described in the eligible applicants section and the applicant
certifies that it meets those qualifications through the
application.
In implementing this statutory provision and program requirement,
the Department may fund high-quality applications from rural and STEM
education applicants out of rank order in one or more of the EIR
competitions.
In addition, for FY 2019 the EIR program intends to award at least
$60 million in funds for STEM education projects, contingent on receipt
of a sufficient number of applications of sufficient quality.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants:
(a) An LEA;
(b) An SEA;
(c) The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE);
(d) A consortium of SEAs or LEAs;
(e) A nonprofit organization; and
(f) An SEA, an LEA, a consortium described in (d), or the Bureau of
Indian Education, in partnership with--
(1) A nonprofit organization;
(2) A business;
(3) An educational service agency; or
(4) An IHE.
To qualify as a rural applicant under the EIR program, an applicant
must meet both of the following requirements:
(a) The applicant is--
(1) An LEA with an urban-centric district locale code of 32, 33,
41, 42, or 43, as determined by the Secretary;
(2) A consortium of such LEAs;
(3) An educational service agency or a nonprofit organization in
partnership with such an LEA; or
(4) A grantee described in clause (1) or (2) in partnership with an
SEA; and
(b) A majority of the schools to be served by the program are
designated with a locale code of 32, 33, 41, 42, or 43, or a
combination of such codes, as determined by the Secretary.
Applicants are encouraged to retrieve locale codes from the
National Center for Education Statistics School District search tool
(https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/), where districts can be
looked up individually to retrieve locale codes, and Public School
search tool (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/), where individual
schools can be looked up to retrieve locale codes. More information on
rural applicant eligibility is in the application package.
Note: LEA, SEA, BIE, and nonprofits are eligible to apply and
submit and receive an EIR grant. A private IHE that can document its
nonprofit status, as provided for under 34 CFR 75.51(b), which
includes recognition by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as having
501(c)(3) status, is eligible to apply for and receive an EIR grant
as a lead applicant, applying as a nonprofit organization. In
addition, any IHE is eligible to be a partner in an application
where an LEA, SEA, BIE, consortium of SEAs or LEAs, or a nonprofit
organization is the lead applicant that submits the application. A
nonprofit organization, such as a development foundation, which is
affiliated with a public IHE, can apply for a grant. A public IHE
that has 501(c)(3) status would also qualify as a nonprofit
organization and could be a lead applicant for an EIR grant. A
public IHE without 501(c)(3) status, or that could not provide any
other documentation described in 34 CFR 75.51(b), however, would not
qualify as a nonprofit organization, and therefore could not apply
for and receive an EIR grant.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Under section 4611(d) of the ESEA,
each grant recipient must provide, from Federal, State, local, or
private sources, an amount equal to 10 percent of funds provided under
the grant, which may be provided in cash or through in-kind
contributions, to carry out activities supported by the grant. Grantees
must include a budget showing their matching contributions to the
budget amount of EIR grant funds and must provide evidence of their
matching contributions for the first year of the grant in their grant
applications. Section 4611(d) of the ESEA also authorizes the Secretary
to waive this matching requirement on a case-by-case basis, upon a
showing of exceptional circumstances, such as:
(a) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program to serve
a rural area;
(b) The difficulty of raising matching funds in areas with a
concentration of LEAs or schools with a high percentage of students
aged 5 through 17--
(1) Who are in poverty, as counted in the most recent census data
approved by the Secretary;
(2) Who are eligible for a free or reduced price lunch under the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.);
(3) Whose families receive assistance under the State program
funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.); or
(4) Who are eligible to receive medical assistance under the
Medicaid program; and
(c) The difficulty of raising funds on Tribal land.
Applicants that wish to apply for a waiver must include a request
in their application that describes why the matching requirement would
cause serious hardship or an inability to carry out project activities.
Further information about applying for waivers can be found in the
application package. However, given the importance of matching funds to
the long-term success of the project, the Secretary expects eligible
entities to identify appropriate matching funds.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application.
4. Other: a. Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered
for an award only for the type of EIR grant (i.e., Early-phase, Mid-
phase, and Expansion grant) for which it applies. An applicant may not
submit an application for the same proposed project under more than one
type of grant.
Note: Each application will be reviewed under the competition
it was submitted under in the Grants.gov system, and only
applications that are successfully submitted by the established
deadline will be peer- reviewed. Applicants should be careful that
they download the intended EIR application package and that they
submit their applications under the intended EIR competition.
b. Evaluation: The grantee must conduct an independent evaluation
of the effectiveness of its project.
c. High-need students: The grantee must serve high-need students.
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: For information on how to
submit an application please refer to our Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs,
published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003),
and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.
2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the Expansion grant
competition, your application may include business information that you
consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define ``business information''
and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that
information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under
Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as
amended).
Because we plan to make successful applications available to the
public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business
information.
Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure
under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your
application, under ``Other Attachments Form,''
[[Page 1091]]
please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this
information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
3. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this
competition.
4. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of
the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend
that you (1) limit the application narrative for an Expansion grant
application to no more than 50 pages and (2) use the following
standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover
sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-
page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of
support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the
application narrative.
6. Notice of Intent to Apply: We will be able to develop a more
efficient process for reviewing grant applications if we know the
approximate number of applicants that intend to apply for funding under
this competition. Therefore, the Secretary strongly encourages each
potential applicant to notify us of the applicant's intent to submit an
application by completing a web-based form. When completing this form,
applicants will provide (1) the applicant organization's name and
address and (2) which absolute priorities the applicant intends to
address. Applicants may access this form online at
www.surveymonkey.com/r/GD3BGJ6. Applicants that do not complete this
form may still submit an application.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for the Expansion
grant competition are from 34 CFR 75.210. The points assigned to each
criterion are indicated in the parentheses next to the criterion. An
applicant may earn up to a total of 100 points based on the selection
criteria for the application.
A. Significance (up to 10 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 national significance of the proposed project.
(2) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates there is unmet
demand for the process, product, strategy, or practice that will enable
the applicant to reach the level of scale that is proposed in the
application.
B. Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).
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 following factors:
(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(2) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework.
C. Strategy to Scale (up to 20 points).
The Secretary considers the applicant's strategy to scale the
proposed project. In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the applicant identifies a specific
strategy or strategies that address a particular barrier or barriers
that prevented the applicant, in the past, from reaching the level of
scale that is proposed in the application.
(2) The extent to which the proposed project will increase
efficiency in the use of time, staff, money, or other resources in
order to improve results and increase productivity.
D. Adequacy of Resources and Quality of the Management Plan (up to
25 points).
The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources and the quality
of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the
adequacy of resources and quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(2) The applicant's capacity (e.g., in terms of qualified
personnel, financial resources, or management capacity) to bring the
proposed project to scale on a national or regional level (as defined
in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) working directly, or through partners, during the
grant period.
(3) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes,
activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or
organization at the end of Federal funding.
(4) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
E. Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 20 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well
implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness that
would meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards without reservations
as described in the What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (as defined in
this notice).
(2) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about
effective strategies suitable for replication or testing in other
settings.
(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes.
(4) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the
key project components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a
measurable threshold for acceptable implementation.
Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical
assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and Standards
Handbooks: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks; (2) ``Technical
Assistance Materials for Conducting Rigorous Impact Evaluations'':
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluationTA.asp; and (3) IES/NCEE
Technical Methods papers: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/. In
addition, applicants may view an optional webinar recording that was
hosted by the Institute of Education Sciences. The webinar focused
on more rigorous evaluation designs, discussing strategies for
designing and executing experimental studies that meet WWC
[[Page 1092]]
evidence standards without reservations. This webinar is available
at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=18.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
Before making awards, we will screen applications submitted in
accordance with the requirements in this notice to determine whether
applications have met eligibility and other requirements. This
screening process may occur at various stages of the process;
applicants that are determined to be ineligible will not receive a
grant, regardless of peer reviewer scores or comments.
Peer reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation of, and
score the assigned applications, using the selection criteria provided
in this notice.
3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
3474.10, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the
applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2), we must make a judgment about
your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under
Federal awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before
we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about
you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred
to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables.
This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20(c).
Note: The evaluation report is a specific deliverable under an
Expansion grant that grantees must openly license to the public.
Additionally, EIR grantees are encouraged to submit final studies
resulting from research supported in whole or in part by EIR to the
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC, http://eric.ed.gov).
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the EIR program is
to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative
practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on improving student
achievement and attainment for high-need students. We have established
several performance measures (as defined in this notice) for the
Expansion grants.
Annual performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees that
reach their annual target number of students as specified in the
application; (2) the percentage of grantees that reach their annual
target number of high-need students as specified in the application;
(3) the percentage of grantees with ongoing well-designed and
independent evaluations that will provide evidence of their
effectiveness at improving student outcomes in multiple contexts; (4)
the percentage of grantees that
[[Page 1093]]
implement a well-designed, well-implemented, and independent evaluation
that provides information about the key practices and the approach of
the project so as to facilitate replication; (5) the percentage of
grantees that implement an evaluation that provides information on the
cost-effectiveness of the key practices to identify potential obstacles
and success factors to scaling; and (6) the cost per student served by
the grant.
Cumulative performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees
that reach the targeted number of students specified in the
application; (2) the percentage of grantees that reached the targeted
number of high-need students specified in the application; (3) the
percentage of grantees that implement a completed well-designed, well-
implemented, and independent evaluation that provides evidence of their
effectiveness at improving student outcomes in multiple contexts; (4)
the percentage of grantees with a completed well-designed, well-
implemented, and independent evaluation that provides information about
the key elements and the approach of the project so as to facilitate
replication or testing in other settings; (5) the percentage of
grantees with an evaluation that provided information on the cost-
effectiveness of the key practices, and obstacles and success factors
to scaling; and (6) the cost per student served by the grant.
Project-Specific Performance Measures: Applicants must propose
project-specific performance measures and performance targets (as
defined in this notice) consistent with the objectives of the proposed
project. Applications must provide the following information as
directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b) and (c):
(1) Performance measures. How each proposed performance measure
would accurately measure the performance of the project and how the
proposed performance measure would be consistent with the performance
measures established for the program funding the competition.
(2) Baseline (as defined in this notice) data. (i) Why each
proposed baseline is valid; or (ii) if the applicant has determined
that there are no established baseline data for a particular
performance measure, an explanation of why there is no established
baseline and of how and when, during the project period, the applicant
would establish a valid baseline for the performance measure.
(3) Performance targets. Why each proposed performance target is
ambitious yet achievable compared to the baseline for the performance
measure and when, during the project period, the applicant would meet
the performance target(s).
(4) Data collection and reporting. (i) The data collection and
reporting methods the applicant would use and why those methods are
likely to yield reliable, valid, and meaningful performance data; and
(ii) the applicant's capacity to collect and report reliable, valid,
and meaningful performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data
collection, analysis, and reporting in other projects or research.
All grantees must submit an annual performance report with
information that is responsive to these performance measures.
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the
performance targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to
the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at: www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of this Department published
in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: January 29, 2019.
Frank Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2019-00711 Filed 1-31-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P