[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 85 (Friday, May 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25422-25428]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09336]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Competitive Grants for State
Assessments 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 for fiscal year (FY) 2020 for the Competitive
Grants for State Assessments program, Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) number 84.368A. This notice relates to the approved
information collection under OMB control number 1894-0006.
DATES:
Applications Available: May 1, 2020.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 1, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: June 30, 2020.
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: Donald Peasley, Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, Room 3W106, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Telephone: (202) 453-
7982. 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:
[[Page 25423]]
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Competitive Grants for State
Assessments (CGSA) program is to enhance the quality of assessment
instruments and assessment systems used by States for measuring the
academic achievement of elementary and secondary school students.
Background: The purpose of the CGSA program is to support States'
efforts to improve the technical quality of their assessment systems--
both the quality of individual State assessments and the overall field
of State assessments. In this competition, the Department is using
three absolute priorities to encourage State educational agencies
(SEAs) to consider new approaches to their State assessment systems.
Two of these priorities, Absolute Priorities 1 and 2, build on the
flexibility in section 1204 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA), which
establishes the Innovative Assessment Demonstration Authority (IADA).
Given the national emergency related to the coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19), flexible approaches to education, including
innovative, formative, and competency-based assessments such as those
that these priorities will support, are essential for students,
parents, and educators.
IADA provides an opportunity for an SEA to pilot a new and
innovative approach to assessments by first implementing it in a subset
of schools or LEAs. Students in those schools would take the innovative
assessment in place of the statewide assessment and their results would
be included in the State's accountability system. Over a period of five
years, the SEA would scale up the innovative assessment to eventually
replace the statewide assessment. Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 encourage
States to use CGSA funds to improve alignment with and support related
work through the IADA.
In 2018 and 2019, the Department published notices inviting
applications (NIAs) for IADA and approved four SEAs through this
authority. During the initial demonstration period (as defined in ESEA
section 1204(b)(3) and 34 CFR 200.104(d)), up to seven SEAs may be
approved for IADA. After the initial demonstration period, and upon
meeting the requirements in ESEA section 1204(d), the Secretary may
grant IADA flexibility to additional SEAs. Absolute Priority 2 in this
CGSA competition aims to support SEAs that are planning to apply for
the IADA authority and Absolute Priority 1 is for SEAs that are
currently implementing an approved IADA plan. Approval for a CGSA grant
for those SEAs planning to apply for IADA does not imply or infer that
the Department will ultimately approve that SEA to implement its
subsequent IADA proposal. However, the Department believes that the
work to plan for IADA will strengthen the State's assessment system,
even if the SEA is not ultimately granted IADA flexibility.
The Department is including a third priority in this competition
for States that are neither planning to apply for nor implementing the
IADA. Absolute Priority 3 is from the notice of final priorities
published on August 8, 2016 in the Federal Register (81 FR 52341) (2016
NFP) and focuses on States that are developing innovative assessment
item types and design approaches for their assessment systems. The
Department believes that innovative item types and innovative
assessment approaches can allow students to gain valuable experience by
demonstrating complex work and critical thinking skills. Assessments
can improve student learning by providing data that can support and
inform instruction, particularly if the data are timely and targeted.
As such, the Department believes it is important for applicants under
this priority to focus their proposals on the complex tasks of
developing, evaluating, and implementing new, innovative item types or
developing approaches to transforming traditional summative assessment
forms into more innovative forms.
The Department intends to fund one or more projects under each of
the absolute priorities and is also establishing different project
periods and budget ranges for each absolute priority. In particular,
the Department will make IADA planning grants under Absolute Priority 2
available for a project period not to exceed 18 months, with a maximum
budget request of $500,000 or the minimum amount specified in section
1203(b)(1)(C) of the ESEA (whichever is greater for an individual
State) for the total project period. Since a planning grant is intended
to provide support only during the preparation of an IADA proposal,
this will give an SEA or consortium of SEAs sufficient time to prepare
an application for submission. Similarly, the Department anticipates
that the budget request for a planning grant will be substantially
lower than for an IADA implementation grant under Absolute Priority 1,
both because the project period would be shorter and because the work
would be more targeted, preliminary, and smaller in scope. Grants for
IADA implementation under Absolute Priority 1 or for developing
innovative assessment item types and design approaches under Absolute
Priority 3 are available for up to 48 months with a maximum budget
request of $3,000,000 for the total project period.
Section 1203(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA identifies the six allowable uses
of funds under CGSA. In brief, these uses include developing or
improving assessments for English learners; developing or improving
models to measure and assess student progress or student growth on
assessments; developing or improving assessments for children with
disabilities; allowing for collaboration with institutions of higher
education or other organizations to improve the quality, validity, and
reliability of State academic assessments; measuring student academic
achievement using multiple measures of student academic achievement
from multiple sources; and evaluating student academic achievement
using comprehensive academic assessment instruments (such as
performance and technology-based academic assessments, computer
adaptive assessments, projects, or extended performance task
assessments) that emphasize the mastery of standards and aligned
competencies in a competency-based education model. An SEA, or
consortium of SEAs, applying for funds under any of the absolute
priorities in this CGSA competition must describe in its application
how it is meeting one or more of these six allowable uses of funds.
Priorities: This competition includes three absolute priorities.
Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 are from the Department's notice of final
priorities published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Absolute Priority 3 is from the 2016 NFP.
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2020 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 one of these
priorities. The Secretary intends to create three separate funding
slates, one for each absolute priority. The Secretary intends to award
at least one grant under each absolute priority for which applications
of sufficient quality are submitted. As a result, the Secretary may
fund applications out of the overall rank order. Eligible applicants
must specify which absolute priority they are applying under in the
project abstract.
[[Page 25424]]
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the Innovative Assessment
Demonstration Authority (IADA).
Under this priority, SEAs must--
(a) Be approved for IADA as of the date of their CGSA application.
If applying as part of a consortium (or in partnership with other
SEAs), each SEA must be approved for IADA as of the date of its CGSA
application; and
(b) Be implementing IADA, consistent with all requirements of
section 1204 of the ESEA and applicable regulations as of the date of
their CGSA application. If applying for CGSA as part of a consortium
(or in partnership with other SEAs), each SEA must individually meet
this requirement; and
(c) Describe how the SEA will use CGSA funds to implement its
approved IADA plan.
Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the Innovative
Assessment Demonstration Authority (IADA).
Under this priority, SEAs must--
(a) Provide an assurance by an authorized representative that the
SEA intends to apply for flexibility under the IADA, when made
available by the Department. If applying for CGSA as part of a
consortium (or in partnership with other SEAs), each SEA must provide
an assurance that it intends to apply for flexibility under the IADA;
(b) If applying as a consortium of SEAs during the initial
demonstration authority for IADA, not include more than four SEAs; and
(c) Describe their approach to innovative assessments in terms of
the subjects and grades the SEA anticipates addressing, the proposed
assessment design, proposed item types (e.g., item prototypes), and
other relevant features.
Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Assessment Item Types
and Design Approaches.
Under this priority, SEAs must:
(a) Develop, evaluate, and implement new, innovative item types for
use in summative assessments in reading/language arts, mathematics, or
science;
(1) Development of innovative item types under paragraph (a) may
include, for example, performance tasks; simulations; or interactive,
multi-step, technology-rich items that can support competency-based
assessments or portfolio projects;
(2) Projects under this priority must be designed to develop new
methods for collecting evidence about a student's knowledge and
abilities and ensure the quality, validity, reliability, and fairness
(such as by incorporating principles of universal design for learning)
of the assessment and comparability of student data; or
(b) Develop new approaches to transform traditional, end-of-year
summative assessment forms with many items into a series of modular
assessment forms, each with fewer items than the end-of-year summative
assessment.
(1) To respond to paragraph (b), applicants must develop modular
assessment approaches which can be used to provide timely feedback to
educators and parents as well as be combined to provide a valid,
reliable, and fair summative assessment of individual students.
(c) Applicants proposing projects under either paragraph (a) or (b)
must provide a dissemination plan to share lessons learned and best
practices such that their projects can serve as models and resources
that can be shared with other States.
Application Requirement: For FY 2020, and any subsequent year in
which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, applicants must meet the following application requirement
from section 1203(b)(1)(B) of the ESEA, which refers to section
1201(a)(2)(C) and (H)-(K) of the ESEA.
Uses of Funds: Applicants must demonstrate that their proposed uses
of funds for CGSA would be to carry out one or more of the following
activities:
(a) Developing or improving assessments for English learners,
including assessments of English language proficiency as required under
section 1111(b)(2)(G) of the ESEA and academic assessments in languages
other than English to meet the State's obligations under section
1111(b)(2)(F) of the ESEA.
(b) Developing or improving models to measure and assess student
progress or student growth on State assessments under section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA and other assessments not required under section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
(c) Developing or improving assessments for children with
disabilities, including alternate assessments aligned to alternate
academic achievement standards for students with the most significant
cognitive disabilities described in section 1111(b)(2)(D) of the ESEA,
and using the principles of universal design for learning.
(d) Allowing for collaboration with institutions of higher
education, other research institutions, or other organizations to
improve the quality, validity, and reliability of State academic
assessments beyond the requirements for such assessments described in
section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
(e) Measuring student academic achievement using multiple measures
of student academic achievement from multiple sources.
(f) Evaluating student academic achievement through the development
of comprehensive academic assessment instruments (such as performance
and technology-based academic assessments, computer adaptive
assessments, projects, or extended performance task assessments) that
emphasize the mastery of standards and aligned competencies in a
competency-based education model.
Definitions: For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition,
the following definitions apply. The definitions of ``Child with a
disability,'' ``English learner,'' and ``Universal design for
learning'' are from section 8101 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7801). The
definitions of ``Demonstrates a rationale,'' ``Logic model,'' ``Project
component,'' and ``Relevant outcome'' are from 34 CFR 77.1.
Child with a disability, as defined in section 602 of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, means--
(A) A child--
(i) With intellectual disabilities, hearing impairments (including
deafness), speech or language impairments, visual impairments
(including blindness), serious emotional disturbance (referred to in
the IDEA as ``emotional disturbance''), orthopedic impairments, autism,
traumatic brain injury, other health impairments, or specific learning
disabilities; and
(ii) Who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.
(B) The term ``child with a disability'' for a child aged 3 through
9 (or any subset of that age range, including ages three through five),
may, at the discretion of the State and the local educational agency,
include a child--
(i) Experiencing developmental delays, as defined by the State and
as measured by appropriate diagnostic instruments and procedures, in 1
or more of the following areas: physical development; cognitive
development; communication development; social or emotional
development; or adaptive development; and
(ii) Who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.
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.
[[Page 25425]]
English learner, when used with respect to an individual, means an
individual--
(A) Who is aged 3 through 21;
(B) Who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school
or secondary school;
(C)(i) Who was not born in the United States or whose native
language is a language other than English;
(ii)(I) Who is a Native American or Alaska Native, or a native
resident of the outlying areas; and
(II) Who comes from an environment where a language other than
English has had a significant impact on the individual's level of
English language proficiency; or
(iii) Who is migratory, whose native language is a language other
than English, and who comes from an environment where a language other
than English is dominant; and
(D) Whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or
understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the
individual--
(i) The ability to meet the challenging State academic standards;
(ii) The ability to successfully achieve in classrooms where the
language of instruction is English; or
(iii) The opportunity to participate fully in society.
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).
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.
Universal design for learning, as defined under section 103 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, means a scientifically valid
framework for guiding educational practice that--
(a) Provides flexibility in the ways information is presented, in
the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in
the ways students are engaged; and
(b) Reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate
accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains high
achievement expectations for all students, including students with
disabilities and students who are limited English proficient.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For purposes of this notice, English learner and limited
English proficient have the same meaning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The 2016 NFP. (e) The notice of final priorities
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. (f) The IADA
regulations in 34 CFR 200.104-200.108.
Program Authority: Section 1203(b)(1) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.
6363(b)(1)).
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $12,327,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2021 (or later) from
the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards for the Project Period:
(a) Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the IADA: $1,000,000 to
$3,000,000.
(b) Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the IADA: $100,000
to $500,000.
(c) Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Item Types and
Design Approaches: $1,000,000 to $3,000,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards for the Project Period:
(a) Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the IADA: $2,500,000.
(b) Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the IADA: $300,000.
(c) Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Item Types and
Design Approaches: $2,500,000.
Maximum Size of Awards for the Project Period: We will not make an
award exceeding these amounts:
(a) Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the IADA: $3,000,000.
(b) Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the IADA: $500,000
or the State statutory minimum award amount as specified in section
1203(b)(1)(C) of the ESEA if greater than $500,000.
(c) Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Item Types and
Design Approaches: $3,000,000.
Note: The Department will not make an award under any of the
absolute priorities for less than the amount specified in section
1203(b)(1)(C) of the ESEA.
Estimated Number of Awards:
(a) Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the IADA: 1-3.
(b) Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the IADA: 1-3.
(c) Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Item Types and
Design Approaches: 1-3.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period:
(a) Absolute Priority 1: Implementing the IADA: up to 48 months.
(b) Absolute Priority 2: Planning to Apply for the IADA: up to 18
months.
(c) Absolute Priority 3: Developing Innovative Item Types and
Design Approaches: up to 48 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs, as defined in section 8101(49) of the
ESEA, of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, and consortia of such SEAs.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition 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.
4. Other: An application from a consortium of SEAs must designate
one SEA as the fiscal agent.
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.
Grants.gov has relaxed the requirement for applicants to have an
active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) in order
to apply for funding during the COVID-19 pandemic. An applicant that
does not have an active SAM registration can still register with
Grants.gov, but must contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll-free, at
1-800-518-4726, in order to take advantage of this flexibility.
[[Page 25426]]
2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the CGSA, 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 all application materials public, you
may wish to request confidentiality of business information.
Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure
under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your
application, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' please list the page
number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional
information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
3. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However,
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to
make awards by the end of FY 2020.
4. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The project 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 the equivalent of no more than 65 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 applies to the project narrative,
including the table of contents, which must include a discussion of how
the application meets one of the absolute priorities; and how well the
application addresses each of the selection criteria. The recommended
page limit also applies to any attachments to the project narrative
other than the items mentioned in Part 6 of the application package,
including the references/bibliography. In other words, we recommend
that the entirety of the project narrative, including the
aforementioned discussion and any attachments to the project narrative,
be limited to the equivalent of no more than 65 pages. The only
allowable attachments other than those included in the project
narrative are outlined in Part 6, ``Other Attachments Forms,'' in the
application package.
The recommended 65-page limit, or its equivalent, does not apply to
the following sections of an application: Part 1 (including the
response regarding research activities involving human subjects); Part
2 (budget information); Part 3 (two-page project abstract); Part 5 (the
budget narrative); Part 6 (memoranda of understanding or other binding
agreement, if applicable; copy of applicant's indirect cost rate
agreement; letters of commitment and support from collaborating SEAs
and organizations; other attachments forms, including, if applicable,
references/bibliography for the project narrative and individual
r[eacute]sum[eacute]s for project director(s) and key personnel); and
Part 7 (standard assurances and certifications). Applicants are
encouraged to limit each r[eacute]sum[eacute] to no more than five
pages.
Please note, hyperlinks should not be used in an application.
Reviewers will be instructed not to follow hyperlinks if included.
Applicants are encouraged to submit applications that meet the page
limit following the standards outlined in this section rather than
submitting applications that are the equivalent of the page limit
applying other standards.
6. Notice of Intent to Apply:
We are better able to develop a more efficient process for
reviewing grant applications if we have a better understanding of the
number of applicants that intend to apply for funding under this
competition. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant
to notify us of the applicant's intent to submit an application for
funding and which absolute priority the applicant intends to address.
This notification should be brief and identify the SEA applicant and,
in the case of consortia applicants, the SEA that it will designate as
the fiscal agent for an award. Submit this notification by email to
[email protected] with ``Intent to Apply'' in the email subject
line or mail to Donald Peasley, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW, room 3W106, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Applicants
that do not provide this notification may still apply for funding.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210. We will award up to 100 points to an
application under the selection criteria; the total possible points for
each selection criterion are noted in parentheses.
(a) Need for project (up to 10 points).
The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. 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 (up to 10 points).
The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.
In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the 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 (up to 20 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(5 points)
(2) The extent to which the proposed project will establish
linkages with other appropriate agencies and organizations providing
services to the target population. (5 points)
(3) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a
comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support
rigorous academic standards for students. (5 points)
(4) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a
rationale (as defined in this notice). (5 points)
(d) Quality of project services (up to 25 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided
by the proposed project. In determining the quality of the services to
be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers:
(1) The quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal
access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members
of groups
[[Page 25427]]
that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or disability. (10 points)
(2) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or
beneficiaries of those services. (10 points)
(3) 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. (5 points)
(e) Adequacy of resources (up to 10 points).
The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the costs are
reasonable in relation to the number of persons to be served and to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(f) Quality of the management plan (up to 20 points).
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:
(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. (10 points)
(2) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project. (10 points)
(g) Quality of the project evaluation (up to 5 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the extent to which the methods of
evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals,
objectives, and outcomes 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
$150,000), 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 SAM. 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/
[[Page 25428]]
fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993, the Department has developed three measures to
evaluate the overall effectiveness of the CGSA program:
(1) The percentage of grantees, for each grant cycle, that
demonstrate significant progress towards improving, developing, or
implementing a new model for measuring the achievement of students.
(2) The percentage of grantees, for each grant cycle, that
demonstrate collaboration with institutions of higher education, other
research institutions, or other organizations to develop or improve
State assessments.
(3) The percentage of grantees that, at least three times during
the period of their grants, make available to SEA staff in non-
participating States and to assessment researchers information on
findings resulting from the CGSA program through presentations at
national conferences, publications in refereed journals, or other
products disseminated to the assessment community.
Grantees will be expected to include in their interim and final
performance reports information about the accomplishments of their
projects.
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 Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-09336 Filed 4-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P