[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 76 (Thursday, April 22, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21190-21195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08379]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Part 677

RIN 1840-AD63


Calculation of the Endowment Factor for Allocations to 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities Under Section 314(a)(2)(A) 
of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2021

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Final regulations.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) issues this final 
rule so that it may determine final allocations to Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) awarded under section 314(a)(2) of 
the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2021 (CRRSAA).

DATES: These regulations are effective April 22, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Epps, Office of Postsecondary 
Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, Room 
2B133, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-6337. Email: 
[email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay

[[Page 21191]]

Service (FRS), toll-free, at (800) 877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The CRRSAA was enacted on December 27, 2020, to help Americans cope 
with the ongoing economic and health crises created by the novel 
coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Section 314 of the CRRSAA 
authorizes supplemental awards to institutions of higher education 
(IHEs) through the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) 
initially established by section 18004 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, 
and Economic Security (CARES) Act (March 27, 2020). Section 314 of the 
CRRSAA also authorizes, in paragraph (a)(2)(A), additional awards to 
HBCUs eligible to receive assistance under two programs authorized by 
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA): The Strengthening 
HBCUs program authorized by part B of title III of the HEA, and the 
HBCU Masters program authorized by subpart 4 of part A of title VII of 
the HEA. Section 314 further specifies, in paragraph (a)(2), the 
amounts available for these additional awards and, in paragraph 
(a)(2)(A), the three-part formula for determining the allocations to 
each eligible HBCU.
    This formula calls for the allocation of--
    (1) 70 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the 
number of Pell Grant recipients in attendance at the institution at the 
end of the school year preceding the beginning of the most recent 
fiscal year and the total number of Pell Grant recipients at all such 
institutions;
    (2) 20 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the 
total number of students enrolled at the institution at the end of the 
school year preceding the beginning of that fiscal year and the number 
of students enrolled at all such institutions; and
    (3) 10 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the 
total endowment size at all eligible institutions at the end of the 
school year preceding the beginning of that fiscal year and the total 
endowment size at the institution.
    The first two elements for determining allocations to HBCUs under 
section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA reflect a familiar and 
straightforward methodology: Institutions receive a share of funds 
commensurate with their respective shares of Pell Grant recipients and 
total overall enrollment at all eligible institutions. However, the 
third element, also known as the endowment factor, calls for allocating 
10 percent of funds based on an inverse proportion of an institution's 
share of the total endowment funding at all eligible institutions. In 
other words, institutions with the smallest endowments receive the 
largest share of funds. This inverse proportion formula reflects the 
intent of Congress to direct additional funding to institutions unable 
to tap endowment resources to meet needs arising from the COVID-19 
pandemic. Such institutions often have smaller enrollments or serve 
highly disadvantaged populations; consequently, they have not been able 
to build up significant endowment funds over time that might have been 
used to respond to the COVID-19-related disruptions to teaching and 
learning on campus.
    In fact, some institutions reported an endowment value of zero, 
which contributed to the circumstances requiring this final rule. 
Specifically, endowment data collected by the Department for the 
purpose of determining the allocation of funds through the endowment 
factor showed that, of 97 eligible institutions, nine reported an 
endowment value of zero. While it seems clear that Congress intended 
for such institutions to receive the largest share of endowment factor 
funding because of their complete lack of endowment resources to call 
upon in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is not possible to 
generate the endowment ratios described in section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of 
the CRRSAA for these schools due to the mathematic principle that 
division by zero yields an undefined result and thus has no meaning. 
Therefore, it would be impossible to implement this formula in a manner 
consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible entities.
    Excluding these schools entirely from the endowment factor 
calculation would seem contrary to the plain language of the statute, 
as the Act does not expressly exclude these entities and is meant to 
include all eligible institutions under part B of title III and subpart 
4 of part A of title VII of the HEA. Moreover, even if the nine HBCUs 
with zero endowments could be excluded from the formula, there is a 
large enough gap between the institution with the lowest non-zero 
endowment and other institutions with non-zero endowments that the 
institution with the lowest non-zero endowment would garner nearly all 
of the program funding ($72.8 million) allocable through the endowment 
factor. The Department does not believe such an inequitable outcome 
would be consistent with the design of the endowment factor formula; 
rather, it indicates a technical oversight in developing the endowment 
factor.
    In response to the inability to implement this formula in a manner 
consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible entities, the 
Department consulted with Congress to determine options for calculating 
awards to HBCUs under section 314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA. These 
discussions were focused on two goals: (1) Ensuring that all eligible 
institutions with relatively low endowment values benefited from the 
endowment factor, and (2) ensuring that the endowment factor operated 
as intended, delivering significantly greater amounts of funding to 
those institutions with the smallest endowments rather than to those 
institutions with the largest endowments. This consultation took on 
additional urgency because of the possibility that additional HEERF 
appropriations for HBCUs would be provided on the basis of the formula 
in section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA as part of the American Rescue 
Plan Act of 2021 (ARP).
    Ultimately, Congress provided such additional appropriations in the 
ARP and directed IHEs to make allocations in accordance with the same 
terms and conditions as those provided in section 314 of the CRRSAA, 
with several exceptions. Of relevance here, Congress established a 
``floor'' on the endowment value used when allocating the ARP-provided 
HEERF funds based on the endowment factor. Section 2003(3) of the ARP 
specifies that an institution ``that has a total endowment size of less 
than $1,000,000 (including an institution that does not have an 
endowment) shall be treated by the Secretary as having a total 
endowment size of $1,000,000'' for the purposes of section 
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, which is used to determine allocations 
under the ARP. However, this provision does not apply to the HEERF 
funds appropriated in the CRRSAA. Consequently, the Department 
determined that the best course of action would be to issue regulations 
on the endowment factor under section 314(a)(2). In the interim, on 
February 26, 2021, the Department awarded 90 percent of the funds 
provided to HBCUs under section 314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA--the funds 
allocated on the basis of factors 1 and 2 of the formula in section 
314(a)(2)(A).
    In considering alternatives for refining the methodology for 
implementing the endowment factor, the Department relied on analyses of 
options developed both prior to and during consultation with Congress 
regarding the challenges

[[Page 21192]]

presented by the endowment factor under the CRRSAA.
    We considered exclusion of the nine entities that reported an 
endowment position of zero. As stated above, we determined this was 
inconsistent with the plain language of the statute. Further, it would 
exclude the institutions with the greatest need--i.e., those 
institutions reporting endowment amounts of zero--while allocating 
virtually all funds apportioned to the endowment factor to just two of 
the 88 eligible institutions with non-zero endowments. Such an outcome 
would be contrary to the purpose of any funding formula based on 
proportionality, which is to provide benefits to all eligible entities 
in proportion to one or more characteristics of those entities, and not 
to merely direct all or nearly all applicable funding to a few such 
entities.
    Given that we cannot implement the formula in a manner consistent 
with the statutory text for certain eligible entities, we considered a 
variety of approaches. A rule that imputed a small dollar amount to the 
nine eligible institutions reporting zero endowment funding, such as 
$1, would result in the allocation of nearly all funding to those 
institutions, effectively preventing the accrual of any benefits from 
the endowment factor to any other eligible institutions (approximately 
$8.1 million would be awarded to each of the nine institutions with 
zero endowments and a balance of less than $1,500 would be distributed 
among the remaining eligible institutions). Again, such an outcome 
would not, in the Department's view, be consistent with the basic 
equity principles that generally underlie the funding formulas enacted 
by Congress for the many formula grant programs administered by the 
Department.
    The Department also explored an option that considered the 
relationship between the amount institutions receive through the 
endowment factor and the sum of that value in combination with the 
institution's reported (or imputed, in the case of the institutions 
reporting $0 endowments) endowment. The underlying principle of this 
approach was that while the endowment factor was to direct additional 
funding to institutions with the smallest endowments, such institutions 
should not benefit disproportionately when compared to other 
institutions with small endowments. For example, it would be both 
inequitable and inconsistent with the design of the endowment factor if 
an institution with a reported endowment of $100,000 received 
$3,000,000 from the endowment factor--effectively increasing its 
endowment-based resources to $3,100,000--while another institution with 
a reported endowment of $1,000,000 received $500,000 from the endowment 
factor, effectively ending up with just half ($1,500,000) of the 
endowment-based resources as the first institution. In other words, no 
institution's allocation from the endowment factor should exceed the 
resources available to any other institution based on the sum of its 
allocation from the endowment factor and its reported endowment. The 
Department's preliminary modeling of an option based on this principle 
produced an appropriately graduated distribution of endowment factor 
allocations to all 97 institutions, while directing 72 percent of funds 
to the bottom quartile of institutions ranked by endowment size, a 
result that the Department deemed both equitable and consistent with 
the core purpose of the endowment factor.
    Importantly, for the purposes of this final rule, the $1,000,000 
floor endowment amount set by Congress for use in calculating endowment 
factor allocations under the ARP yields an equitable distribution of 
funds nearly identical to that of the Department's ``imputed endowment 
size'' model. Specifically, applying the ARP's $1,000,000 endowment 
floor to the endowment factor in the CRRSAA would allocate $54.3 
million, or 75 percent of funds, to the bottom quartile of institutions 
ranked by endowment size.
    Consequently, the Department has concluded that the equitable 
impact of the $1,000,000 floor endowment threshold adopted by Congress 
for the purpose of calculating endowment factor allocations under the 
ARP, combined with its simplicity and the benefits of a uniform 
approach to determining endowment factor allocations across the ARP and 
the CRRSAA, make that same $1,000,000 endowment floor the most 
appropriate manner to implement the endowment factor formula in section 
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, which cannot otherwise be implemented 
in a manner consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible 
entities.

Significant Regulations

    Statute: Section 314 of the CRRSAA (division M of Public Law 116-
260, December 27, 2020) provides for funding for eligible HBCUs. 
Specifically, section 314(a)(2)(A) specifies a three-part formula for 
determining the allocations to each eligible HBCU, including an 
endowment factor that allocates 10 percent of the available funding 
according to a ratio equivalent to the total endowment size at all 
eligible institutions at the end of the school year preceding the 
beginning of that fiscal year and the total endowment size at the 
institution.
    Current Regulation: None.
    New Regulation: In new Sec.  677.1, we provide that, for the 
purpose of calculating allocations under section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of 
the CRRSAA, an institution that has a total endowment of less than 
$1,000,000, including an institution that does not have an endowment, 
will be treated by the Secretary as having an endowment of $1,000,000.
    Reasons: The Department is making this regulatory change to remedy 
a technical defect in the statute; allocate funds consistent with its 
best interpretation of the statutory purpose of the endowment factor; 
make the allocation methodology related to endowment size under the 
CRRSAA consistent with the refined methodology under the ARP; and 
ensure that the endowment factor operates to equitably deliver funding 
to eligible institutions based on the relative size of their 
endowments. See the Background section for a more detailed discussion 
of our reasons for this regulatory change.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delayed Effective Date Under the 
Administrative Procedure Act

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the 
Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to 
comment on proposed rules. However, the APA provides that an agency is 
not required to conduct notice and comment rulemaking when the agency, 
for good cause, finds that notice and public comment thereon are 
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest (5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(B)).
    Congress enacted the CRRSAA to help Americans cope with the urgent 
economic and health crises created by the COVID-19 outbreak and created 
the HEERF to provide emergency financial aid grants to students and 
institutions. Section 314(b)(2)(B) of the CRRSAA requires the 
Secretary, to the extent practicable, to make awards to HBCUs under 
section 314(a)(2) by February 25, 2021. In the absence of this final 
rule, the Department would be unable to timely award the final 10 
percent of funds appropriated by Congress to HBCUs under section 
314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA in a manner that equitably benefits those HBCUs 
with limited endowments serving large numbers or percentages of 
students from low-

[[Page 21193]]

income families. In light of the urgent economic challenges facing IHEs 
as a result of the current national emergency and the importance of 
awarding all available emergency funds appropriated by Congress as 
quickly as possible, particularly to those institutions without access 
to much-needed resources that can help address the disruption to 
teaching and learning caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, it would be 
impracticable and contrary to the public interest to conduct notice-
and-comment rulemaking. Accordingly, there is good cause to waive the 
notice and comment requirements of the APA.
    Moreover, the APA generally requires that regulations be published 
at least 30 days before their effective date, unless the agency has 
good cause to implement its regulations sooner (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). As 
described above, good cause exists for this rule to be effective upon 
publication in light of the current national emergency and the 
importance of awarding HEERF allocations to eligible institutions in a 
timely manner consistent with statutory intent.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and 
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines 
a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to result in a 
rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive order.
    This final regulatory action is a significant regulatory action 
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. 
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule as 
not a ``major rule'', as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order 
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in 
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 
13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing this final rule only on a reasoned determination 
that its benefits would justify its costs. In choosing among 
alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that 
would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the 
Department believes that these regulations are consistent with the 
principles in Executive Order 13563.
    We have also determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.

Need for Regulatory Action

    The Department is issuing this final rule to clarify the 
methodology for calculating allocations to HBCUs in accordance with the 
endowment factor described in section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA. 
The endowment factor is intended to provide additional funding to 
institutions with limited endowment resources available to address 
institutional and student needs arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. 
This final rule addresses a defect in the statutory allocation formula 
and permits the allocation of all available funds to eligible 
institutions as quickly as possible.
    As detailed in the preamble of this final rule, in light of the 
current national emergency and the importance of delivering HEERF 
awards to institutions as soon as possible, notice-and-comment 
rulemaking would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. 
Absent immediate implementation of this final rule, the Department 
would be unable to timely award the remaining HBCU funding in a manner 
consistent with the intent to provide funding to eligible HBCUs based 
on relative endowment size, with a potentially serious negative impact 
on both institutions and the students they serve.

Costs, Benefits, and Transfers

    As noted elsewhere in this final rule, this regulatory change 
affects only the allocation of funding under the HEERF program. It does 
not impose or relieve any regulatory or compliance burden on regulated 
entities. In general, we do not anticipate this final rule to impose 
any net costs on affected entities. However, to the extent that the 
receipt of funding under this program affects the marginal cost of 
administering funds, there may be some effects on participating 
institutions, but given the overall amount of funding administered 
under this program and the relatively small amount implicated by this 
rule, we expect those effects to be de minimis.
    As noted above, this final rule will allow the Department to 
operationalize the statutory requirements of the CRRSAA relative to the 
endowment factor and limit unintended consequences. Since this rule is 
only intended to implement existing statutory requirements, we assess 
the impacts of this final rule relative to a pre-statutory baseline. In 
the absence of passage of the CRRSAA, none of the affected entities 
would have received additional funding under the HEERF program. Passage 
of CRRSAA resulted in additional funds being made

[[Page 21194]]

available to these entities. Specific to this final rule, approximately 
$72.8 million in additional funds will be made available to affected 
entities through the endowment factor implicated by this final rule. As 
noted above, we do not anticipate this rule resulting in any increased 
regulatory burden for affected entities and, even if the additional 
funding provided under the endowment factor did result in such 
increased costs, those costs would be far outweighed by the additional 
funding received. We do not anticipate this rule to result in any 
transfers between regulated entities given that, as described above, 
the Department would not be able to implement the statutory 
requirements in a manner consistent with the statutory text for certain 
eligible entities without this final rule. As a result, in the absence 
of this rule, no entity would have received funds under the endowment 
factor.

Regulatory Alternatives Considered

    The Department considered a wide range of options to address the 
issues posed by the statutory requirements. Initially, we considered 
whether it was possible to resolve the issue without regulating. As 
described elsewhere, we determined that it would not be possible to 
allocate funds for certain eligible entities under the endowment factor 
in a manner consistent with the statutory requirements because doing so 
would require the agency to divide by zero.
    Alternatively, the Department could have pursued a rule where it 
sought to divide the entire amount of funds equally among the nine 
entities with zero-dollar endowments. Such an approach would have 
focused resources on entities with smaller endowments but would have 
created sizable disparities among entities. For example, an entity 
without an endowment would have received approximately $8.1 million, 
while the entity with the smallest non-zero endowment (with an 
endowment of only $6,400) would have received no funding.
    The Department also could have pursued a rule that imputed a $1 
endowment for all of the entities without endowments, the minimum 
required adjustment to allow for formula allocations in accordance with 
the statutory requirements. Using this approach, approximately 55 
institutions would receive funds under the endowment factor. Of those, 
45 would receive allocations of less than $100. While this approach 
would be more equitable than the prior alternatives, we still do not 
believe such an approach would meet the spirit of the statutory 
requirement.
    Under this final rule, all 97 eligible entities would receive 
funding, with the smallest allocation being approximately $7,300. We 
believe that this final rule, which ensures that all entities receive 
at least some funding under the endowment factor while also heavily 
preferencing those entities with small or no endowments, best meets the 
statutory intent.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    This analysis, required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, presents 
an estimate of the effect of the final regulations on small entities. 
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards define 
proprietary IHEs as small businesses if they are independently owned 
and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have 
total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are 
defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated 
and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions and 
local educational agencies are defined as small organizations if they 
are operated by a government overseeing a population below 50,000.
    For purposes of this analysis, the Department proposes to define a 
small institution as a two-year IHE with an enrollment of less than 500 
FTE or a four-year IHE with an enrollment of less than 1,000 FTE. Under 
this proposed definition, we would identify 27 of the 97 affected 
entities as small. As noted above, we estimate that this final rule 
will result in benefits for all affected entities with no regulatory 
burden. Small institutions would, on average, see an increase of 
approximately $952,400 and non-small institutions receiving an increase 
would see an increase of approximately $407,900.
    As such, the Department certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    There are no information collection requirements associated with 
this regulatory action.
    Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive 
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the 
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental 
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies 
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination 
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
actions for this program.

Assessment of Educational Impact

    Based on our own review, we have determined that these final 
regulations do not require transmission of information that any other 
agency or authority of the United States gathers or makes available.

Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 requires us to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local elected officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have federalism implications. ``Federalism 
implications'' means substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. This final regulation may have federalism implications.
    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, and 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 for 
free on 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.

[[Page 21195]]

List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 677

    Colleges and universities, Grant programs-education, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Miguel Cardona,
Secretary of Education.


0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary adds part 677 
to title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows:

PART 677--HIGHER EDUCATION EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND PROGRAMS

Subpart A--Provisions Related to Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities
Sec.
677.1 Calculations.
677.2 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Reserved

    Authority:  20 U.S.C. 1221e-3; section 314(a)(2), Pub. L. 116-
260, Division M, 134 Stat. 1182.

Subpart A--Provisions Related to Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities


Sec.  677.1  Calculations.

    For the purpose of calculating allocations under section 
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2021 (division M of Pub. L. 116-260, December 27, 
2020), an institution that has a total endowment of less than 
$1,000,000, including an institution that does not have an endowment, 
will be treated by the Secretary as having a total endowment of 
$1,000,000.


Sec.  677.2   [Reserved]

Subpart B--Reserved

[FR Doc. 2021-08379 Filed 4-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P