[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 111 (Monday, June 10, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26829-26835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12101]
[[Page 26829]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; School Climate Transformation Grant
Program--Local Educational Agency 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 School Climate
Transformation Grant Program--Local Educational Agency Grants, Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.184G. This notice
relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number
1894-0006.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 10, 2019.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 22, 2019.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 18, 2019.
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 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlette KyserPegram. Telephone: (202)
453-6732. 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 School Climate Transformation Grant
Program--Local Educational Agency Grants (SCTG-LEA) provides
competitive grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) to develop,
enhance, or expand systems of support for, and technical assistance to,
schools implementing a multi-tiered system of support, for improving
school climate.
Background: School climate plays a critical role in the potential
success and school experiences of a student. Students who learn in
positive learning environments are more likely to improve academically,
participate more fully in the classroom, and develop skills that will
help them be successful in school and in life. Recent studies on school
climate have focused on the many different elements and indicators of
the overall quality of a school's climate, and its relationship to
academic and behavioral outcomes.\1\ Accordingly, in 2014, the
Department developed a school climate survey resource, called the ED
School Climate Survey tool (EDSCLS), to assist States, local districts,
and schools to collect and access data related to their school climate.
This tool focuses on three content domains: (1) Engagement (which
encompasses cultural and linguistic competence, relationships, and
school participation), (2) safety (which encompasses emotional safety,
physical safety, bullying/cyberbullying, substance abuse, and emergency
readiness/management), and (3) environment, including physical
environment, instructional environment, physical health, mental health,
and discipline.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wang, M.T. & Degol, J.L. (2016). School Climate: A Review of
the Construct, Measurement, and Impact on Student Outcomes.
Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 315-352.
\2\ National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments. ED
School Climate Surveys. Retrieved from: https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/edscls/measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In April 2019, the Department released a Parent and Educator Guide
to School Climate Resources (Guide) document. The purpose of the Guide
is to provide general information about the concept of school climate
improvement, suggestions for leading an effective school climate
improvement effort, and additional resources for those interested in
more information.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Access the Parent and Educator Guide to School Climate
Resources (Guide) at: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/essaguidetoschoolclimate041019.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementing a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) framework is
one strategy schools can use to address their school climate concerns.
MTSS frameworks are designed to assist schools in providing the
appropriate level of instruction and intervention for their students.
The successful implementation of an MTSS can support many areas of
students' needs including academic growth and achievement, behavior,
and social and emotional needs. In schools with healthy learning
environments, students tend to score higher on standardized tests.\4\
Conversely, researchers find that students who perceive personal
victimization and unfairness in school are generally less engaged, and
schools where students report more hostility have lower student
engagement and lower academic achievement.\5\ Furthermore, data from
the 2015 School Crime Supplement shows that students experiencing
bullying or criminal victimization rate their schools' overall climate
lower.\6\ We also note that multi-tiered behavioral frameworks, such as
positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), that were the
focus of the previous School Climate Transformation Grants LEA
competition in fiscal year 2014, are an example of an MTSS that
research shows can help improve overall school climate and safety.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ MacNeil, A.J., Prater, D.L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects
of school culture and climate on student achievement. International
Journal of Leadership in Education, 12(1), 73-84.
\5\ Ripski, M.B., & Gregory, A. (2009). Unfair, unsafe, and
unwelcome: Do high school students' perceptions of unfairness,
hostility, and victimization in school predict engagement and
achievement? Journal of School Violence, 8(4), 355-375.
\6\ National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Measuring
School Climate Using the 2015 School Crime Supplement: Technical
Report. Institute of Education Sciences, Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018098.pdf.
\7\ Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J.
(2009). Altering School Climate through School-Wide Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a Group-
Randomized Effectiveness Trial. Prevention Science.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In March 2018, the President emphasized a national need to examine
the safety and security of our schools. He also appointed a Federal
Commission on School Safety.\8\ In December 2018, the Federal
Commission on School Safety released a final report on its work. The
report offers recommendations for States, local communities, and the
Federal government on strategies for improving school safety.\9\ Under
the SCTG-LEA program, grantees may use funds to support activities
directly linked with some of those recommendations as they develop
local approaches to address a wide range of school climate issues
through implementation of evidence-based practices for improving school
engagement, safety, and environment for all students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-taking-immediate-actions-secure-schools/.
\9\ Report available at: https://www2.ed.gov/documents/school-safety/school-safety-report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, LEAs that implement these school climate improvement
efforts as part of a coordinated strategy will enhance their ability to
achieve the goals and objectives of both this program and others that
are included in the coordinated effort. A coordination of all programs
that use evidence-based practices for improving school engagement,
safety, and environment for all students will facilitate interagency
partnerships and strategies to address
[[Page 26830]]
school climate issues in a comprehensive manner.
Through this program, the Department will prioritize supporting
certain communities that may uniquely benefit from implementing a
multi-tiered system of support. In particular, the Department is
establishing an absolute priority for an LEA that is a rural LEA (as
defined in this notice) or serves a Tribal community. The Department is
also establishing a separate absolute priority for an LEA that is in a
Qualified Opportunity Zone (as defined in this notice).
Priorities: This competition includes four absolute priorities and
three competitive preference priorities. We are establishing the
absolute priorities and Competitive Preference Priority 3 for the FY
2019 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards
from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, in
accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions
Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1). In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and 2 are from
the Department's Notice of Final Supplemental Priorities and
Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs (Supplemental Priorities),
published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096).
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 and one of Absolute Priorities 2, 3, or 4.
Note: The Secretary intends to create three funding slates for SCTG
applications--one for applications that meet Absolute Priorities 1 and
2, a separate slate for applications that meet Absolute Priorities 1
and 3, and a third slate for applications that meet Absolute Priorities
1 and 4. As a result, the Secretary may fund applications out of the
overall rank order. The Secretary anticipates awarding at least 15
grants from among applicants that meet Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 and
at least 15 grants from applicants that meet Absolute Priorities 1 and
3, provided applications of sufficient quality are submitted, but the
Secretary is not bound by these estimates. Applicants must clearly
identify the specific absolute priorities that the proposed project
addresses.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Improving School Climate.
Projects designed to develop, enhance, or expand systems of support
for, and technical assistance to, schools implementing a multi-tiered
system of support for improving school climate, which may include a
multi-tiered behavioral framework, by using evidence-based efforts that
are designed to foster safety; promote supportive academic,
disciplinary, and physical environments; and/or encourage and maintain
respectful, trusting, and caring relationships throughout the school
community.
Absolute Priority 2--LEAs that are rural LEAs or serve a federally
recognized Tribe.
An LEA, including a BIE-funded school, meets this absolute priority
if it provides evidence that it meets one of the following criteria:
(1) It is a rural LEA, as defined in this notice; or (2) it
predominantly serves members of one federally recognized Tribe. In
determining whether a charter school LEA meets criteria (1) of this
absolute priority, we consider where the school is located, regardless
of where the students it serves live.
Absolute Priority 3--LEAs that include a Qualified Opportunity
Zone.
An LEA meets this priority if it includes, as a portion of the area
served by the LEA, a Qualified Opportunity Zone under section 1400Z-1
of the Internal Revenue Service Code, as amended by the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act, as defined in this notice. In determining whether a charter
school LEA meets this absolute priority, we consider where the school
is located, regardless of where the students it serves live.
Absolute Priority 4--LEAs that are not rural LEAs, do not include
Qualified Opportunity Zones, and do not serve a Tribe.
An LEA meets this absolute priority if it indicates in its
application that it is not a rural LEA, as defined in this notice, does
not serve a Qualified Opportunity Zone, and does not predominantly
serve members of one federally recognized Tribe.
Competitive Preference 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 competitive preference
priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(1) we award up to an additional
two points for Competitive Preference Priority 1, up to an additional
three points for Competitive Preference Priority 2, and up to an
additional five points for Competitive Preference Priority 3, depending
on how well the application meets each of Competitive Preference
Priorities 1, 2, and 3. Applications may address any one or more of the
competitive preference priorities, for a maximum of 10 competitive
preference priority points. An applicant must clearly indicate in the
abstract section of its application each competitive preference
priority under which it is applying.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Protecting Freedom of Speech and
Encouraging Respectful Interactions in a Safe Educational Environment.
(0 to 2 points)
Projects that are designed to develop positive learning
environments that promote strong relationships among students and
school personnel to help prevent bullying, violence, and disruptive
actions that diminish the opportunity for each student to receive a
high-quality education.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--Fostering Knowledge and
Promoting the Development of Skills That Prepare Students To Be
Informed, Thoughtful, and Productive Individuals and Citizens. (0 to 3
points)
Projects that are likely to improve student academic performance
and better prepare students for employment, responsible citizenship,
and fulfilling lives, including by preparing children or students to do
one or more of the following:
(i) Develop positive personal relationships with others.
(ii) Develop determination, perseverance, and the ability to
overcome obstacles.
(iii) Develop self-esteem through perseverance and earned success.
(iv) Develop problem-solving skills.
(v) Develop self-regulation in order to work toward long-term
goals.
Competitive Preference Priority 3--Opioid Abuse and Prevention. (0
to 5 points)
Applications that propose a high-quality plan to implement opioid
abuse prevention and mitigation strategies. The plan must describe how
the LEA will use funds to implement evidence-based strategies for
preventing opioid abuse by students, and/or address the mental health
needs of students who are negatively impacted by family or community
members who are (or have been) abusers. The plan may also include
providing technical assistance to, or support for, schools that
implement or plan to implement high-quality approaches to opioid abuse
prevention such as the Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to
Treatment (SBIRT) approach supported by the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration.
[[Page 26831]]
Applicants that receive competitive preference points under this
priority and are ultimately awarded an SCTG-LEA grant will finalize and
implement the high-quality plan described in response to this priority
post-award.
Requirements: We are establishing these program requirements and
application requirements for the FY 2019 grant competition and any
subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition, in accordance with section
437(d)(1) of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).
Program Requirements: Each grantee must implement a project that
builds LEA capacity for supporting schools implementing evidence-based
efforts to improve school climate by--
(a) Developing, enhancing, or expanding systems of support for, and
technical assistance to, schools implementing a multi-tiered system of
support for improving school climate by using evidence-based efforts
that are designed to foster safety; promote supportive academic,
disciplinary, and physical environments; and/or encourage and maintain
respectful, trusting, and caring relationships throughout the school
community;
(b) Improving the skills of LEA personnel to assist schools'
efforts to improve school climate through, for example, policies,
funding, professional development, coaching, and coordination of
providing services and implementing programs;
(c) Improving the quality, accessibility, and usefulness of any
relevant districtwide data collection and analysis related to data-
based decision making in areas related to improved school climate;
(d) Defining what it means to implement the multi-tiered system of
support with fidelity and determining annually the extent to which the
impacted schools are implementing such model with fidelity, for
example, by using a tool or rubric to review implementation;
(e) Encouraging the use of evidence-based practices and reliable
and valid tools and processes for evaluating the fidelity of efforts
related to improved school climate; and
(f) Coordinating LEA efforts with appropriate Federal, State, and
local resources.
Application Requirements: The applicant must--
(a) Describe the current efforts by the LEA to support schools
implementing evidence-based efforts that are designed to foster safety;
promote a supportive academic, disciplinary, and physical environment;
and/or encourage and maintain respectful, trusting, and caring
relationships throughout the school community;
(b) Describe how the LEA used the EDSCLS or similar assessment tool
to help determine program needs and will use the EDSCLS or similar
assessment tool for program decision making and improvements;
(c) Describe its plan to build, improve, or enhance LEA capacity to
provide effective training, technical assistance, and support to
schools related to implementing evidence-based efforts that are
designed to foster safety; promote a supportive academic, disciplinary,
and physical environment; and/or encourage and maintain respectful,
trusting, and caring relationships throughout the school community,
including--
(1) When and how often the applicant plans to conduct technical
assistance activities;
(2) How the applicant plans to garner buy-in from participants and
other stakeholders; and
(3) The estimated number of schools that will be assisted; and
(d) Describe how the proposed project will address the needs of
schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement under
section 1111(d)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended (ESEA), and schools identified for targeted support
and improvement under section 1111(d)(2) of the ESEA.
Definitions: We are establishing the definitions of ``Qualified
Opportunity Zone'' and ``rural local educational agency'' in this
notice for the FY 2019 grant competition and any subsequent year in
which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, 20 U.S.C.
1232(d)(1). The definition of ``local educational agency'' is from 20
U.S.C. 7801(30). The definition of ``multi-tiered system of support''
is from section 8101(33) of the ESEA. The definitions of ``demonstrates
a rationale,'' ``evidence-based,'' ``experimental study,'' ``logic
model,'' ``moderate evidence,'' ``project component,'' ``promising
evidence,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' ``relevant outcome,''
``strong evidence,'' and ``What Works Clearinghouse Handbook'' are from
34 CFR 77.1.
These definitions are:
Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in
the project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation
findings that suggest the project component is likely to improve
relevant outcomes.
Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by
one or more of strong evidence, moderate evidence, promising evidence,
or evidence that demonstrates a rationale.
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--
(i) 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;
(ii) Any other public institution or agency having administrative
control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary
school;
(iii) An elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau
of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school
makes
[[Page 26832]]
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
this Act with the smallest student population, except that the school
shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational
agency other than the Bureau of Indian Education;
(iv) Educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies;
or
(v) 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 key project
components and relevant outcomes.
Moderate evidence means that there is evidence of effectiveness of
a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample
that overlaps with the populations or 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'' or ``moderate
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'' or
``potentially 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 or quasi-experimental design
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 with or 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.
Multi-tiered system of support means a comprehensive continuum of
evidence-based, systemic practices to support a rapid response to
students' needs, with regular observation to facilitate data-based
instructional decision making.
Note: For purposes of this notice a multi-tiered behavioral
framework such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports falls
under this definition.
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).
Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the
effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant
outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a ``strong evidence
base'' or ``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding practice
guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a
``positive effect'' or ``potentially positive effect'' on a relevant
outcome with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate,
that--
(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or
a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression
methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a
comparison group); and
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome.
Qualified Opportunity Zone means a Qualified Opportunity Zone, as
designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under section 1400Z-1 of
the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
(Pub. L. 115-97). To demonstrate that it meets Absolute Priority 3 by
being located in a Qualified Opportunity Zone, an applicant must
provide the census tract number of the Qualified Opportunity Zone(s) in
which it proposes to provide services. A list of Qualified Opportunity
Zones is available at: www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/Opportunity-Zones.aspx.
Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation
(e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being
compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet
WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbook.
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.
Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency
that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA)
program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized
under Title V, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine
whether a particular district is eligible for these programs by
referring to information on the Department's website at https://www2.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/eligibility.html.
Note: For the purposes of this competition, in order to qualify as
a rural LEA under this definition, an LEA must have been eligible for
fiscal year 2018 or 2019 SRSA or RLIS funds.
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
[[Page 26833]]
(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.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested parties
the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and requirements.
Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, however, allows the Secretary to exempt from
rulemaking requirements regulations governing the first grant
competition under a new or substantially revised program authority.
This is the first grant competition for this program under Title IV,
part F, subpart 3 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7281) and therefore qualifies
for this exemption. In order to ensure timely grant awards, the
Secretary has decided to forgo public comment on the priorities and
requirements under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. These priorities and
requirements will apply to the FY 2019 grant competition and any
subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition.
Program Authority: Subpart 3 of Title IV, Part F of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 7281).
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 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.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $40,000,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2020 and subsequent
years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $100,000 to $750,000 per year for up to
5 years.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $500,000.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $750,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 80.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: (a) LEAs, or consortia of LEAs, as defined
by section 8101(30) of the ESEA. (b) The Secretary limits eligibility
under this discretionary grant competition to LEAs that have never
received a grant under SCTG-LEA.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application.
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which
contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this program are
from 34 CFR 75.210. The maximum score for all selection criteria is 100
points. The points or weights assigned to each criterion are indicated
in parentheses. Non-Federal peer reviewers will evaluate and score each
application program narrative against the following selection criteria:
(a) Need for project. (15 points)
(1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
(2) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses.
(b) Significance. (15 points)
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project is likely
to build local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that
address the needs of the target population.
(c) Quality of the project design. (20 points)
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the
proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the design of the proposed project includes
a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a high-
quality plan for project implementation, and the use of appropriate
methodological tools to ensure successful achievement of project
objectives. (15 points)
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project represents an
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities
[[Page 26834]]
established for the competition. (5 points)
(d) Quality of the project services. (30 points)
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the extent to which the
training or professional development services to be provided by the
proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to
lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those
services.
(e) Quality of the project evaluation. (20 points)
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project. (10 points)
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes. (10 points)
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).
3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this program 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.
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.
5. Performance Measures: The Department has established the
following Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 performance
measures for SCTG-LEA:
(a) The number of training and/or technical assistance events to
support implementation with fidelity provided annually by LEAs to
schools implementing a multi-tiered system of support.
(b) Number and percentage of schools annually that report an
improved school
[[Page 26835]]
climate based on the results of the EDSCLS or similar tool.
(c) Number and percentage of schools annually that are implementing
a multi-tiered system of support framework with fidelity.
(d) Number and percentage of schools annually that are implementing
opioid abuse prevention and mitigation strategies.
(e) Number and percentage of schools that report an annual decrease
in suspensions and expulsions related to possession or use of alcohol.
(f) Number and percentage of schools that report an annual decrease
in suspensions and expulsions related to possession or use of other
drugs.
These measures constitute the Department's indicators of success
for this program. Consequently, we advise an applicant for a grant
under this program to give careful consideration to these measures in
conceptualizing the approach and evaluation for its proposed project.
Each grantee will be required to provide, in its annual performance and
final reports, data about its progress in meeting these measures. This
data will be considered by the Department in making continuation
awards.
Consistent with 34 CFR 75.591, grantees funded under this program
shall comply with the requirements of any evaluation of the program
conducted by the Department or an evaluator selected by the Department.
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.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2019-12101 Filed 6-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P