[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13878-13885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04885]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2020 for the Magnet
Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) number 84.165A. This notice relates to the approved
information collection under OMB control number 1855-0011.
DATES:
Application Available: March 10, 2020.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: April 9, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 26, 2020.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 23, 2020.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than March 16, 2020,
MSAP will hold a webinar to provide technical assistance to interested
applicants. Detailed information regarding this webinar will be
provided on the MSAP web page at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. A recording of this
webinar will be available on the MSAP web page following the session.
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: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1259. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
[[Page 13879]]
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: MSAP, authorized under title IV, part D of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended by the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESEA), provides grants to local educational agencies
(LEAs) and consortia of LEAs to support magnet schools under an
approved, required, or voluntary desegregation plan.
Under the ESEA, MSAP prioritizes the creation and replication of
evidence-based (as defined in this notice) magnet programs and magnet
schools that seek to reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group
isolation by taking into account socioeconomic diversity.
Grantees may use grant funds for activities intended to improve
students' academic achievement, including acquiring books, materials,
technology, and equipment to support a rigorous, theme-based academic
program; conducting planning and promotional activities; providing
professional development opportunities for teachers to implement the
academic program; and paying the salaries of effective teachers and
other instructional personnel. MSAP also enables LEAs to support
student transportation, provided the transportation costs are
sustainable and the costs do not constitute a significant portion of
grant funds.
Background: MSAP seeks to reduce, eliminate or prevent minority
group isolation by funding projects carried out by LEAs or consortia of
LEAs that propose to implement magnet schools with academically
challenging, innovative instructional approaches, or specialized
curricula that are, consistent with constitutional and statutory
limitations, ``designed to bring students from different social,
economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds together.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through the implementation of high-demand programming, using
sophisticated technology and curricula, magnet schools have often
served as a conduit for innovative, theme-based instruction. For
example, 61 percent of the 145 schools currently supported by MSAP
grants include science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
themes in their programming, which aligns with the Secretary's
Supplemental Priority 6, Promoting STEM Education.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ STEM is also a national priority. For more details, see
``Charting A Course For Success: America's Strategy For STEM
Education,'' www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf (December 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While some grantees have effectively implemented innovative, theme-
based programming and successfully diversified their schools, other
grantees have struggled to meet their desegregation goals. Significant
variations in grantees' ability to increase academic achievement also
persist. Therefore, we continue to use selection criteria to focus on
projects that seek to promote academic achievement and reduce,
eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation. The Department
encourages applicants to propose projects of high interest to students
and families that offer rigorous curriculum with authentic theme-based
experiences and to form integrated partnerships that will attract and
retain students from different racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. In
this year's competition we have added criteria specific to
partnerships. Specifically, we encourage applicants to propose robust
partnerships that offer relevant opportunities for students and
teachers, such as mentoring, apprenticeships, certifications, and
theme-related, industry-specific experiences.
In addition, as part of MSAP's focus on improving academic
achievement and reducing, eliminating, or preventing minority group
isolation, consistent with constitutional and statutory limitations, we
encourage applicants, through competitive preference points, to propose
projects that would increase racial integration by taking into account
socioeconomic diversity. Beyond proposing quality projects that have
the potential to attract students from various backgrounds, we
encourage applicants to propose a range of activities that incorporate
a focus on socioeconomic and racial diversity, such as: Establishing
and participating in a voluntary, inter-district transfer program for
students from varied neighborhoods; making strategic decisions
regarding magnet school sites to maximize the potential diversity of
the school given the school's neighboring communities; revising school
boundaries, attendance zones, or feeder patterns to take into account
residential segregation or other related issues; and formal merging or
coordinating among multiple educational jurisdictions in order to pool
resources, provide transportation, and expand high-quality public
school options for lower-income students. Applicants that choose to
address this priority should identify the criteria they intend to use
to determine students' socioeconomic status (e.g., family income level,
education level of the students' parent or guardian, other factors
identified by the LEA, or a combination thereof) and clearly describe
how their approach to incorporating socioeconomic diversity is part of
their overall effort to eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group
isolation.
To encourage systemic and timely change, the Department is
interested in proposals that establish new school assignment or
admissions policies for schools that seek to increase the number of
low-income students schools serve through new student assignment
policies that consider the socioeconomic status of students'
households, students residing in neighborhoods experiencing
concentrated poverty, and students from low-performing schools (among
other factors). As applicable, each applicant should coordinate with
other relevant government entities--such as housing and transportation
authorities, among others--given the impact that other public policies
have on the composition of a school's student body. Such proposals may
be addressed in response to Competitive Preference Priority 4.
This NIA also includes a competitive preference priority for MSAP
projects that would be carried out in areas that overlap with a
Qualified Opportunity Zone (QOZ). Public Law (Pub. L.) 115-97
authorized the designation of QOZs to promote economic development and
job creation in distressed communities through preferential tax
treatment for investors. A list of QOZs is available at
www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/Opportunity-Zones.aspx; applicants may also
determine whether a particular area overlaps with a QOZ using the
National Center of Education Statistics' map located at: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/LocaleLookup/. To receive competitive
preference points under this priority, applicants must provide the
Department with the census tract number of the QOZ they plan to serve
and describe the services they will provide. For the purpose of this
competition, applicants should consider the area where their LEA is
located to be the area that must overlap with a QOZ; an LEA may be
considered to overlap with a QOZ even if only one magnet school
included in the current MSAP grant application is located in a QOZ.
Lastly, with this year's competition, the Department also aims to
improve MSAP's short- and longer-term outcomes, as well as generate
evidence to inform future efforts, by encouraging
[[Page 13880]]
applicants to propose (1) projects that are supported by prior
evidence, and (2) robust evaluations of their proposed MSAP projects
that would yield promising evidence (as defined in this notice) from
which future MSAP applicants could learn. Along these lines, we include
selection factors that encourage applicants to provide a conceptual
framework (logic model) as part of their applications and propose
evaluations designed to produce promising evidence. Each proposed
project should be supported by a logic model with clearly defined
outcomes that will inform the project's performance measures and
evaluation. In addition, through Competitive Preference Priority 2, we
encourage applicants to implement activities that are evidence-based in
their proposed MSAP project schools and we encourage applicants to
submit supporting evidence that corresponds to the highest levels of
evidence available.
Priorities: This competition includes five competitive preference
priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive
Preference Priorities 1 and 3 are from the MSAP regulations at 34 CFR
280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive
Preference Priorities 2 and 4 are from section 4406 of the ESEA, 20
U.S.C. 7231e. Competitive Preference Priority 5 is from the notice of
final priority published in the Federal Register on November 27, 2019
(84 FR 65300) (Opportunity Zones NFP).
Competitive Preference Priorities: These priorities are competitive
preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award one
additional point to an application that meets Competitive Preference
Priority 1; up to two additional points to an application, depending on
how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 2; up to
three additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 3; up to two
additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4; and three
additional points to an application that meets Competitive Preference
Priority 5. Depending on how well the application meets these
priorities, an application may be awarded up to a total of 11
additional points. Applicants may apply under any, all, or none of the
competitive preference priorities. The maximum possible points for each
competitive preference priority are indicated in parentheses following
the name of the priority. These points are in addition to any points
the application earns under the selection criteria in this notice.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Need for Assistance (0 or 1
additional points).
The Secretary evaluates the applicant's need for assistance by
considering--
(1) The costs of fully implementing the magnet schools project as
proposed;
(2) The resources available to the applicant to carry out the
project if funds under the program were not provided;
(3) The extent to which the costs of the project exceed the
applicant's resources; and
(4) The difficulty of effectively carrying out the approved plan
and the project for which assistance is sought, including consideration
of how the design of the magnet school project--e.g., the type of
program proposed, the location of the magnet school within the LEA--
impacts on the applicant's ability to successfully carry out the
approved plan.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--New or Revised Magnet Schools
Projects and Strength of Evidence to Support Proposed Projects (0 to 2
additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to carry out a new, evidence-based magnet school program or
significantly revise an existing magnet school program, using evidence-
based methods and practices, as available, or replicate an existing
magnet school program that has a demonstrated record of success in
increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of
minority groups.
Competitive Preference Priority 3--Selection of Students (0 to 3
additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to select students to attend magnet schools by methods such as lottery,
rather than through academic examination.
Competitive Preference Priority 4--Increasing Racial Integration
and Socioeconomic Diversity (0 to 2 additional points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic
diversity in designing and implementing magnet school programs.
Competitive Preference Priority 5--Spurring Investment in Qualified
Opportunity Zones (0 or 3 additional points).
Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that the area in
which the applicant proposes to provide services overlaps with a QOZ,
as designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under section 1400Z-1 of
the Internal Revenue Code. An applicant must--
(1) Provide the census tract number of the QOZ(s) in which it
proposes to provide services; and
(2) Describe how the applicant will provide services in the QOZ(s).
Definitions: The definition of ``evidence-based'' is from 20 U.S.C.
7801. The remaining definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1(c).
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 an activity, strategy, or intervention that--
(i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving
student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on--
(A) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented experimental study;
(B) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented quasi-experimental study; or
(C) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection
bias; or
(ii)(A) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research
findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or
intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant
outcomes; and
(B) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such
activity, strategy, or intervention.
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
[[Page 13881]]
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards
Handbook (Version 3.0), as well as the more recent What Works
Clearinghouse Handbooks released in October 2017 (Version 4.0) and
January 2020 (Version 4.1), are available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j.
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 regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 280. (e)
The Opportunity Zones NFP.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $23,500,887.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2021 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $700,000-$4,000,000 per budget year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award to an LEA or a consortium
of LEAS exceeding $15,000,000 for the project period. Grantees may not
expend more than 50 percent of the year one grant funds and not more
than 15 percent of year two and three grant funds on planning
activities. Professional development is not considered to be a planning
activity.
Note: Yearly award amounts may vary.
Estimated Number of Awards: 7-9.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or consortia of LEAs implementing a
desegregation plan as specified in section III. 3 of this notice.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Application Requirement: Under section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the
ESEA, applicants must describe how a grant awarded under this
competition will be used to promote desegregation and include any
available evidence on how the proposed magnet school programs will
increase interaction among students of different social, economic,
ethnic, and racial backgrounds. If such evidence is not available,
applicants must include a rationale, based on current research, for how
the proposed magnet school programs will increase interaction among
students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds.
Applicants should address this application requirement in the project
narrative and, as appropriate, the logic model.
4. Other: Applicants must submit with their applications one of the
following types of desegregation plans to establish eligibility to
receive MSAP assistance: (a) A desegregation plan required by a court
order; (b) a desegregation plan required by a State agency or an
official of competent jurisdiction; (c) a desegregation plan required
by the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI); or (d) a voluntary desegregation
plan adopted by the applicant and submitted to the Department for
approval as part of the application. Under the MSAP regulations,
applicants are required to
[[Page 13882]]
provide all of the information required in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g)
in order to satisfy the civil rights eligibility requirements found in
34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) and (b).
In addition to the particular data and other items for required and
voluntary desegregation plans described in the application package, an
application must include--
Projected enrollment by race and ethnicity for magnet and
feeder schools;
Signed civil rights assurances (included in the
application package); and
An assurance that the desegregation plan is being
implemented or will be implemented if the application is funded.
Required Desegregation Plans
1. Desegregation plans required by a court order. An applicant that
submits a desegregation plan required by a court order must submit
complete and signed copies of all court documents demonstrating that
the magnet schools are a part of the approved desegregation plan.
Examples of the types of documents that would meet this requirement
include a Federal or State court order that establishes specific magnet
schools, amends a previous order or orders by establishing additional
or different specific magnet schools, requires or approves the
establishment of one or more unspecified magnet schools, or that
authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the
applicant.
2. Desegregation plans required by a State agency or official of
competent jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a desegregation plan
ordered by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction must
provide documentation that shows that the desegregation plan was
ordered based upon a determination that State law was violated. In the
absence of this documentation, the applicant should consider its
desegregation plan to be a voluntary plan and submit the data and
information necessary for voluntary plans.
3. Desegregation plans required by Title VI. An applicant that
submits a desegregation plan required by OCR under Title VI must submit
a complete copy of the desegregation plan demonstrating that magnet
schools are part of the approved plan or that the plan authorizes the
inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.
4. Modifications to required desegregation plans. A previously
approved desegregation plan that does not include the magnet school or
program for which the applicant is now seeking assistance must be
modified to include the magnet school component. The modification to
the desegregation plan must be approved by the court, agency, or
official that originally approved the plan. An applicant that wishes to
modify a previously approved OCR Title VI desegregation plan to include
different or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed
modification for review and approval to the OCR regional office that
approved its original plan.
An applicant should indicate in its application if it is seeking to
modify its previously approved desegregation plan. However, all
applicants must submit proof of approval of all modifications to their
plans to the Department by June 11, 2020. Proof of plan modifications
should be mailed to: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202-5970.
Telephone: (202) 401-1259. Email: [email protected].
Voluntary Desegregation Plans
A voluntary desegregation plan must be approved by the Department
each time an application is submitted for funding. Even if the
Department has approved a voluntary desegregation plan in an LEA in the
past, to be reviewed, the desegregation plan must be resubmitted with
the application, by the application deadline.
An applicant's voluntary desegregation plan must describe how the
LEA defines or identifies minority group isolation, demonstrate how the
LEA will reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation for
each magnet school in the proposed magnet school application, and, if
relevant, at identified feeder schools, demonstrate that the proposed
voluntary desegregation plan is adequate under Title VI.
Complete and accurate enrollment forms and other information as
required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f) and (g) for applicants
with voluntary desegregation plans are critical to the Department's
determination of an applicant's eligibility under a voluntary
desegregation plan (specific requirements are detailed in the
application package).
Voluntary desegregation plan applicants must submit documentation
of school board approval or documentation of other official adoption of
the plan as required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f)(2) when
submitting their application. LEAs that were previously under a
required desegregation plan, but that have achieved unitary status and
so are voluntary desegregation plan applicants, typically would not
need to include court orders. Rather, such applications should provide
the documentation discussed in this section.
5. Single-Sex Programs: An applicant proposing to operate a single-
sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school that offers single-
sex classes or extracurricular activities, will undergo a review of its
proposed single-sex educational program to determine compliance with
applicable nondiscrimination laws, including the Equal Protection
Clause of the U.S. Constitution (as interpreted in United States v.
Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), and other cases) and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its
regulations--including 34 CFR 106.34. This review may require the
applicant to provide additional fact-specific information about the
single-sex program. Please see the application package for additional
information about an application proposing a single-sex magnet school
or a coeducational magnet school offering single-sex classes or
extracurricular activities.
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. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the MSAP, 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
[[Page 13883]]
Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application,
under ``Other Attachments Form,'' 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 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.
4. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR
280.41. We reference additional regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative 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 to 150 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, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
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, certifications, the
desegregation plan and related information, and the tables used to
respond to Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 3; or the one-page
abstract, the resumes, or letters of support. However, the recommended
page limit does apply to all of the application narrative in Part III.
6. Notice of Intent To Apply: The Department will be able to review
grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number
of applicants that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage
each potential applicant to notify the Department of their intent to
submit an application. To do so, please submit your intent to apply for
funding by completing a web-based form at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. Applicants
that do not notify the Department of their intent to apply may still
apply for funding.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria are from 34 CFR
75.210, 280.30, and 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405 of the ESEA.
The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points.
The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses
following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion
also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining
the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.
Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to
any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference
priorities in this notice. The maximum score that an application may
receive under the competitive preference priorities and the selection
criteria is 111 points.
(a) Desegregation (30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the desegregation-related activities and determines the extent to which
the applicant demonstrates--
(1) The effectiveness of its plan to recruit students from
different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds into the
magnet schools. (34 CFR 280.31)
(2) How it will foster interaction among students of different
social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in classroom
activities, extracurricular activities, or other activities in the
magnet schools (or, if appropriate, in the schools in which the magnet
school programs operate). (34 CFR 280.31)
(3) How it will ensure equal access and treatment for eligible
project participants who have been traditionally underrepresented in
courses or activities offered as part of the magnet school, e.g., women
and girls in mathematics, science, or technology courses, and disabled
students. (34 CFR 280.31)
(4) The effectiveness of all other desegregation strategies
proposed by the applicant for the elimination, reduction, or prevention
of minority group isolation in elementary schools and secondary schools
with substantial proportions of minority students. (Section 4401(b)(1)
of the ESEA)
(b) Quality of Project Design (30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the project design. In determining the quality of the design of the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The manner and extent to which the magnet school program will
increase student academic achievement in the instructional area or
areas offered by the school, including any evidence, or if such
evidence is not available, a rationale based on current research
findings, to support such description. (Sections 4405(b)(1)(E)(i) and
4405(b)(1)(B) of the ESEA)
(2) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services. (34 CFR 75.210)
(3) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for
maximizing the effectiveness of project services. (34 CFR 75.210)
(4) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework. (34 CFR 75.210)
(c) Quality of Management Plan (15 points) (34 CFR 75.210).
The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project. In determining the 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) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate.
(3) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates that it has the
resources to operate the project beyond the length of the grant,
including a multi-year financial and operating model and accompanying
plan; the demonstrated commitment of any partners; evidence of broad
support from stakeholders (e.g., State educational agencies, teachers'
unions) critical to the project's long-term success; or more than one
of these types of evidence.
[[Page 13884]]
(d) Quality of Personnel (5 points) (34 CFR 280.31).
(1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the
qualifications of the personnel the applicant plans to use on the
project. The Secretary determines the extent to which--
(a) The project director (if one is used) is qualified to manage
the project;
(b) Other key personnel are qualified to manage the project; and
(c) Teachers who will provide instruction in participating magnet
schools are qualified to implement the special curriculum of the magnet
schools.
(2) To determine personnel qualifications, the Secretary considers
experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the
project, including the key personnel's knowledge of and experience in
curriculum development and desegregation strategies.
(e) Quality of Project Evaluation (20 points) (34 CFR 75.210).
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 promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))
about the project's effectiveness.
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
(3) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
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 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
as well.
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).
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) If awarded a grant, applicants that responded to the selection
criterion (e)(1), Quality of the Project Evaluation, must also submit a
final evaluation report addressing the study to produce promising
evidence.
[[Page 13885]]
5. Performance Measures: We have established the following five
performance measures for the MSAP:
(a) The number and percentage of magnet schools receiving
assistance whose student enrollment reduces, eliminates, or prevents
minority group isolation.
(b) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in reading/language arts as
compared to previous year's data.
(c) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in mathematics as compared to
previous year's data.
(d) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that
are still operating magnet school programs three years after Federal
funding ends.
(e) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that
meet the State's annual measurable objectives and, for high schools,
graduation rate targets at least three years after Federal funding
ends.
Note: Recognizing that States are no longer required to report
annual measurable objectives to the Department under the ESEA, we
include this performance measure in order to ensure MSAP grantees
monitor and report high school graduation rates. States must establish
and measure against ambitious, long-term goals; we encourage MSAP
grantees to consider these State goals and incorporate them into their
annual performance reporting as appropriate.
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: March 5, 2020.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-04885 Filed 3-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P