[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 33 (Monday, February 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10554-10561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03474]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; National Professional Development
Program
AGENCY: Office of English Language Acquisition, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2021 for the National
Professional Development (NPD) program, Assistance Listing Number
84.365Z. This notice relates to the approved information collection
under OMB control number 1894-0006.
DATES:
Applications Available: February 22, 2021.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: March 15, 2021.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 23, 2021
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 22, 2021.
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: Francisco J. L[oacute]pez, Jr., U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, room 4w245,
Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 401-1433. 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 NPD program, authorized by sections
3111(c)(1)(C) and 3131 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended (ESEA), awards grants on a competitive basis, for a
period of not more than five years, to institutions of higher education
(IHEs) or public or private entities with relevant experience and
capacity, in consortia with State educational agencies (SEAs) or local
educational agencies (LEAs). The purpose of these grants is to provide
professional development activities that will improve classroom
instruction for English learners (ELs) and assist educational personnel
working with such children to meet high professional standards,
including standards for certification and licensure as teachers who
work in language instruction educational programs or serve ELs.
Grants awarded under this program may be used--
(1) For effective pre-service or in-service professional
development programs that will improve the qualifications and skills of
educational personnel involved in the education of ELs, including
personnel who are not certified or licensed and educational
paraprofessionals, and for other activities to increase teacher and
school leader effectiveness in meeting the needs of ELs;
(2) For the development of program curricula appropriate to the
needs of the consortia participants involved;
(3) To support strategies that strengthen and increase parent,
family, and community member engagement in the education of ELs;
(4) To develop, share, and disseminate effective practices in the
instruction of ELs and in increasing the academic achievement of ELs,
including the use of technology-based programs;
(5) In conjunction with other Federal need-based student financial
assistance programs, for financial assistance, including costs related
to tuition, fees, and books for enrolling in courses required to
complete the degree involved, to meet certification or
[[Page 10555]]
licensing requirements for teachers who work in language instruction
educational programs or serve ELs; and
(6) As appropriate, to support strategies that promote school
readiness of ELs and their transition from early childhood education
programs, such as Head Start or State-run preschool programs, to
elementary school programs.
Background: Educator effectiveness is the most important in-school
factor affecting student achievement and success.\1\ The NPD program is
a Federal grant program that offers professional development
specifically for educators of ELs. To improve the academic achievement
of ELs, the NPD program supports pre-service and in-service instruction
for teachers and other staff, including school leaders, working with
ELs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Calder[oacute]n, M., Slavin, R., and S[aacute]nchez, M.
(2011). Effective instruction for English learners. Future of
Children, 21(1), 103-127.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NPD program has funded a range of grantees that are currently
implementing 92 projects across the country. As the EL population
continues to grow, it has become increasingly important to identify and
expand the use of evidence-based instructional practices that improve
EL learning outcomes.
The body of evidence on effective language, literacy, and content
instruction for ELs, including specific instructional practices for
English language acquisition, is growing steadily, as documented by the
2014 What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Practice Guide for teaching ELs,
available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide.aspx?sid=19. To
encourage the use of evidence to increase the effectiveness of projects
funded by NPD, the Department has included Competitive Preference
Priority 1 for projects designed to improve academic outcomes for ELs
using strategies supported by moderate evidence (as defined in this
notice).
While we are encouraged by the growing body of evidence supporting
effective EL instruction, this competition is designed to promote
further study of pre- and in-service professional development models
for EL educators. We encourage NPD applicants to design rigorous
evaluations of their proposed activities that, if well-implemented,
would meet the WWC Evidence Standards With Reservations. We believe
that such evaluations will help ensure that projects funded under the
NPD program help expand the knowledge base on effective EL
instructional practice.
The Department is also interested in supporting dual language
acquisition approaches that are effective in developing biliteracy
skills. Evidence suggests that students who are biliterate have certain
cognitive and social benefits compared to their monolingual peers.
Further, research suggests that despite initial lags, students in well-
implemented dual language programs eventually perform equal to or
better than their counterparts in English-only programs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Valentino, R.A., and Reardon, S.F. (2015). Effectiveness of
four instructional programs designed to serve English language
learners: Variation by ethnicity and initial English proficiency.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, doi: 10.3102/
0162373715573310.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, we recognize that linguistic and cultural diversity is
an asset and that dual language approaches may also enhance the
preservation of heritage languages and cultures. These approaches may
be particularly impactful for diverse populations of ELs, such as
immigrant children and youth and Native American students. Accordingly,
we have included one invitational priority in this competition for
applicants proposing to provide EL educators with professional
development on effective dual language instruction.
Priorities: This notice includes one absolute priority, two
competitive preference priorities, and one invitational priority. The
absolute priority is from section 3131 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6861).
Competitive Preference Priority 1 is from 34 CFR 75.226(d)(2).
Competitive Preference Priority 2 is from the Department's notice of
final supplemental priorities and definitions (Supplemental
Priorities), published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR
9096).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2021 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Providing Professional Development To Improve Instruction for
English Learners.
Under this priority we provide funding to projects that provide
professional development activities that will improve classroom
instruction for ELs and assist educational personnel working with ELs
to meet high professional standards, including standards for
certification and licensure as teachers who work in language
instruction educational programs or serve ELs.
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2021 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), we award an additional five
points to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 1,
and we award up to an additional five points to an application,
depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference
Priority 2. An application may be awarded up to a maximum of 10
additional points under these competitive preference priorities.
Applicants may address none, one, or both of the competitive preference
priorities. An applicant must clearly identify in the project abstract
and the project narrative section of its application the competitive
preference priority or priorities it wishes the Department to consider
for purposes of earning competitive preference priority points.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Moderate Evidence (0 or 5
points).
Applications proposing projects supported by evidence that meets
the conditions in the definition of ``moderate evidence'' (as defined
in this notice).
Competitive Preference Priority 2--Promoting Literacy (up to 5
points).
Projects that are designed to address one or both of the following
priority areas:
(a) Providing families with evidence-based (as defined in this
notice) strategies for promoting literacy. This may include providing
families with access to books or other physical or digital materials or
content about how to support their child's reading development, or
providing family literacy activities (as defined in section 203(9) of
the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act).
(b) Facilitating the accurate and timely use of data by educators
to improve reading instruction and make informed decisions about how to
help children or students build literacy skills while protecting their
student and family privacy.
Invitational Priority: For FY 2021 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, this priority is an invitational priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets this invitational
priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications.
This priority is:
Dual Language Approaches.
[[Page 10556]]
We encourage applicants to propose projects to improve educator
preparation and professional learning for dual language implementation
models to support effective instruction for ELs. In particular, we
encourage such approaches to take into account the unique needs of
recently arrived EL students, immigrant children and youth, and Native
American students who are members of Federally recognized Indian
Tribes.
Definitions: The following definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1, the
Supplemental Priorities, and sections 3201 and 8101 of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 7011 and 7801), and they apply to the priorities and selection
criteria in this notice. The source of each definition is noted in
parentheses following the text of the definition.
Ambitious means promoting continued, meaningful improvement for
program participants or for other individuals or entities affected by
the grant or representing a significant advancement in the field of
education research, practices, or methodologies. When used to describe
a performance target, whether a performance target is ambitious depends
upon the context of the relevant performance measure and the baseline
for that measure. (34 CFR 77.1)
Baseline means the starting point from which performance is
measured and targets are set. (34 CFR 77.1)
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. (34 CFR 77.1)
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. (Section
8101 of the ESEA)
Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by
moderate evidence. (34 CFR 77.1)
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 Handbooks:
(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. (34 CFR 77.1)
Immigrant children and youth means individuals who--
(A) Are aged 3 through 21;
(B) Were not born in any State; and
(C) Have not been attending one or more schools in any one or more
States for more than 3 full academic years. (Section 3201 of the ESEA)
Institution of higher education has the meaning given that term in
section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965. (Section 8101(29)
of the ESEA)
Language instruction educational program means an instruction
course--
(A) In which an English learner is placed for the purpose of
developing and attaining English proficiency while meeting challenging
State academic standards; and
(B) That may make instructional use of both English and a child's
native language to enable the child to develop and attain English
proficiency, and may include the participation of English proficient
children if such course is designed to enable all participating
children to become proficient in English and a second language.
(Section 3201 of the ESEA)
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. (34 CFR 77.1.)
Note: Applicants may use resources such as the Pacific Education
Laboratory's Education Logic Model Application (http://relpacific.mcrel.org/resources/elm-app) to help design their logic
models.
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, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks 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,
3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks 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, 3.0, 4.0, or
4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using
version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, 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;
[[Page 10557]]
(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, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; 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 the
requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D). (34 CFR 77.1.)
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). (34
CFR 77.1)
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 Handbooks.
(34 CFR 77.1)
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. (34 CFR 77.1)
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, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``strong evidence base''
for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1,
3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``positive effect''
on a relevant outcome based on a ``medium to large'' extent of
evidence, with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC
using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise
assessed by the Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, 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, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; 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 the
requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D). (34 CFR 77.1)
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbooks (WWC Handbooks) means the
standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Standards Handbook,
Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1,
or in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version
2.1 (all incorporated by reference, see Sec. 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 WWC
Handbooks documentation. (34 CFR 77.1)
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6861.
Note: Projects will be awarded and operated in a manner consistent
with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil
rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The Supplemental Priorities.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $25,500,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2022 or a subsequent
fiscal year from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $350,000-600,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $464,000.
Maximum Award: $600,000 per year.
Estimated Number of Awards: 42.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for NPD grants
are IHEs, or public or private entities with relevant experience and
capacity, in consortia with LEAs or SEAs.
To maximize student population needs and geographic diversity, the
number of awards per single entity will be limited to one per DUNS
number.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses a training
indirect cost rate. This limits indirect cost reimbursement to an
entity's actual indirect costs, as determined in its negotiated
indirect cost rate agreement, or eight percent of a modified total
direct cost base, whichever amount is less. For more information
regarding training indirect cost rates, see 34 CFR 75.562. For more
information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated
indirect cost rate, please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform
Guidance.
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for
[[Page 10558]]
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 NPD competition,
your application may include business information that you consider
proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define ``business information'' and
describe the process we use in determining whether any of that
information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under
Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as
amended).
Consistent with the process followed in the prior NPD competitions,
we may post the project narrative section of funded NPD applications on
the Department's website so you may wish to request confidentiality of
business information. Identifying proprietary information in the
submitted application will help facilitate this public disclosure
process.
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.
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this
competition.
4. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative 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 no
more than 35 pages and (2) use the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5' x 11', on one side only, with 1'
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit for the application does not apply to
the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; the assurances and certifications; or the one-page
abstract, the bibliography, or the letters of support of the
application. However, the recommended page limit does apply to the
entire narrative section of the application. An application will not be
disqualified if it exceeds the recommended page limit.
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 us of their intent to submit an
application. To do so, please email the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT with the subject line ``Intent to
Apply,'' and include the applicant's name and a contact person's name
and email address. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to
apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice
of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information
provided.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from section 34 CFR 75.210. The maximum score for all of these
criteria is 100 points (not including competitive preference priority
points). The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in
parentheses.
(a) Quality of the project design. (up to 40 points)
The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(2) The extent to which the design for implementing and evaluating
the proposed project will result in information to guide possible
replication of project activities or strategies, including information
about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the
project.
(3) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a
rationale (as defined in this notice).
(b) Quality of project personnel. (up to 10 points)
The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry
out the proposed project. In determining the quality of project
personnel, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator.
(3) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of key project personnel.
(c) Quality of the management plan. (up to 25 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 the following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(2) The 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.
(d) Adequacy of resources. (up to 5 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 following factors:
(1) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(2) 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.
(e) Quality of the project evaluation. (up to 20 points)
The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
[[Page 10559]]
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project.
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well
implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness that
would meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards with or without
reservations as described in the What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (as
defined in this notice).
(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
(4) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes.
Note: The following are technical assistance resources on
evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1;
and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods.
In addition, we invite applicants to view two webinar recordings
that were hosted by the Institute of Education Sciences. The first
webinar addresses strategies for designing and executing well-designed
quasi-experimental design studies. This webinar is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=23. The second webinar focuses
on more rigorous evaluation designees, including strategies for
designing and executing randomized controlled trials. This webinar is
available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=18.
2. Review and Selection Process: The Department will screen
applications that are submitted for NPD grants in accordance with the
requirements in this notice and determine which applications meet the
eligibility and other requirements. Peer reviewers will review all
eligible applications for NPD grants that are submitted by the
established deadline.
Applicants should note, however, that we may screen for eligibility
at multiple points during the competition process, including before and
after peer review; applicants that are determined to be ineligible will
not receive a grant award regardless of peer reviewer scores or
comments. If we determine that an application does not meet an NPD
requirement, the application will not be considered for funding.
For NPD grant applications, the Department intends to conduct a
two-part review process to review and score all eligible applications.
Content reviewers will review and score all eligible applications on
the following selection criteria: (a) Quality of the project design;
(b) Quality of project personnel; (c) Quality of the management plan;
and (d) Adequacy of resources. These reviewers will also review and
score Competitive Preference Priority 2. Peer reviewers with evaluation
expertise will review and score selection criterion (e) Quality of the
project evaluation. The Department will review and score the
Competitive Preference Priority 1 relying on expertise from the
Institute of Education Sciences.
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 200.206(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.
5. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115--232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
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
[[Page 10560]]
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 http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms.html.
(c) 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 (GPRA), Federal departments and agencies must clearly
describe the goals and objectives of programs, identify resources and
actions needed to accomplish goals and objectives, develop a means of
measuring progress made, and regularly report on achievement.
(a) Measures. The Department has developed the following GPRA
performance measures for evaluating the overall effectiveness of the
NPD program:
Measure 1: The percentage of project-specific annual goals the
program met.
Measure 2: The number of pre-service program participants enrolled
annually.
Measure 3: The unduplicated number of in-service program
participants served annually.
Measure 4: Under measures 2 and 3, the number of participants who
are making progress toward becoming State certified, licensed, or
endorsed in EL instruction and the number of participants who have
become State certified, licensed, or endorsed by the end of the five-
year project period.
(b) Baseline data. Applicants must provide baseline (as defined in
this notice) data for each of the project performance measures listed
in (a) and explain how each proposed baseline data is related to
program outcomes; or, if the applicant has determined that there are no
established baseline data for a particular performance measure, explain
why there is no established baseline and explain how and when, during
the project period, the applicant will establish a baseline for the
performance measure.
(c) Performance measure targets. In addition, the applicant must
propose in its application annual targets for the measures listed in
paragraph (a). Applications must also include the following information
as directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b):
(1) Why each proposed performance target is ambitious (as defined
in this notice) yet achievable compared to the baseline for the
performance measure.
(2) The data collection and reporting methods the applicant would
use and why those methods are likely to yield reliable, valid, and
meaningful performance data; and
(3) The applicant's capacity to collect and report reliable, valid,
and meaningful performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data
collection, analysis, and reporting in other projects or research.
Note: If the applicant does not have experience with collection and
reporting of performance data through other projects or research, the
applicant should provide other evidence of capacity to successfully
carry out data collection and reporting for its proposed project.
(d) Performance Reports. All grantees must submit an annual
performance report and final performance report with information that
is responsive to these performance measures. The Department will
consider this data in making annual continuation awards.
(e) Department Evaluations. Consistent with 34 CFR 75.591, grantees
funded under this program must 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: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an
accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text
format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.
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
[[Page 10561]]
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.
Supreet Anand,
Acting Director, Office of English Language Acquisition.
[FR Doc. 2021-03474 Filed 2-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P