[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9587-9596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03643]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2022 for the Magnet
Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), Assistance Listing Number 84.165A.
This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB
control number 1855-0011.
DATES:
Application Available: February 22, 2022.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: March 24, 2022.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 25, 2022.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 7, 2022.
PreApplication--Webinar Information: No later than March 4, 2022,
MSAP will begin holding webinars to provide technical assistance to
interested applicants. Detailed information regarding these webinars
will be provided on the MSAP website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. Recordings
of all webinars will be available on the MSAP website following the
sessions.
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 December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979. Please note that these Common
Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and,
in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in
SAM.gov a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to the
implementation of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). More information
on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1259. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: MSAP, authorized under Title IV, part D of the
[[Page 9588]]
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA),
provides grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) and consortia of
LEAs to create or revise magnet schools under required or voluntary
desegregation plans.
As written in section 4401(b) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231, ``the
purpose of MSAP is to assist LEAs in the desegregation of schools by
providing financial assistance to eligible LEAs for: (1) The
elimination, reduction, or prevention of minority group isolation (MGI)
in elementary schools and secondary schools with substantial
proportions of minority students, which shall include assisting in the
efforts of the United States to achieve voluntary desegregation in
public schools; (2) the development, implementation, and expansion of
magnet school programs that will assist LEAs in achieving systemic
reforms and providing all students the opportunity to meet challenging
State academic standards; (3) the development, design, and expansion of
innovative educational methods and practices that promote diversity and
increase choices in public elementary schools and public secondary
schools and public educational programs; (4) courses of instruction
within magnet schools that will substantially strengthen the knowledge
of academic subjects and the attainment of tangible and marketable
career, technological, and professional skills of students attending
such schools; (5) improving the capacity of LEAs, including through
professional development, to continue operating magnet schools at a
high performance level after Federal funding for the magnet schools is
terminated; and (6) ensuring that all students enrolled in the magnet
school programs have equitable access to high quality education that
will enable the students to succeed academically and continue with
postsecondary education or employment.''
Background: Since its inception nearly 40 years ago, MSAP has
supported LEAs in establishing numerous successful magnet schools,
defined under section 4402 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231a, as public
elementary or secondary schools that offer ``a special curriculum
capable of attracting substantial numbers of students of different
racial backgrounds.'' In this competition, the Department seeks to
focus applicants on effectively addressing the legislative purpose of
the MSAP statute--assisting LEAs in the desegregation of schools
through the use of magnet schools--by requiring applicants to
demonstrate how they intend to align the elements of their proposed
MSAP projects with their required (e.g., court-ordered) or voluntary
desegregation plans, which must be submitted as a component of their
applications under sections 4403 and 4404 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231b
and 7231c. In accordance with 34 CFR 280.2 and 280.20, under Section
III, Part 4 of this notice, applicants must provide context and a
summary description for the goals of their desegregation plan and how
Federal funding for magnet schools will assist in achieving the LEAs'
specific goals related to the reduction, prevention, or elimination of
MGI. This information will assist the Department in confirming the
LEA's eligibility for an award and inform the Department's review of
the applicant's project narrative against the selection criteria
outlined in Section V, Part 1 of this notice.
Beyond proposing high-quality projects that provide unique
educational opportunities capable of attracting substantial numbers of
students of different backgrounds, we encourage applicants to employ a
range of strategies to maximize the potential of bringing students
together from different racial backgrounds. For example, under section
4407 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231f, MSAP permits LEAs to support student
transportation to and from magnet schools, provided the transportation
costs are sustainable beyond the grant period and the costs do not
constitute a significant portion of the LEA's grant funds. Under
Competitive Preference Priority 5, we provide competitive preference
for applicants that propose to establish, expand, or strengthen inter-
district and regional magnet programs consistent with section
4407(a)(8) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231f.\1\ Responses to Competitive
Preference Priority 5 could include, among a range of other activities,
establishing and participating in a voluntary, inter-district transfer
program for students from varied neighborhoods; making strategic
decisions regarding the selection of magnet school sites or revising
school boundaries, attendance zones, or feeder patterns to take into
account neighboring communities; and formal merging or coordinating
among multiple educational jurisdictions in order to pool resources,
provide transportation, and expand high-quality public school options
for students from low-income backgrounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We note the FY 2022 House Appropriations Report (H.R. Rep.
No. 117-96 at 276 (2021)) directs the Department to include such a
priority, citing a 2019 report by the Urban Institute, which
indicated that two-thirds of total school segregation in
metropolitan areas is due to segregation between, rather than
within, school districts. Monarrez, T[oacute]mas, Kisida, Brian, and
Chingos, Matthew. When is a school segregated? Making sense of
segregation 65 years after Brown v. Board of Education. Urban
Institute, September 27, 2019. Retrieved January 3, 2021 from
www.urban.org/research/publication/when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation-65-years-after-brown-v-board-education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to increase the overall diversity of the school settings
in which students learn, under Competitive Preference Priority 6, we
provide competitive preference to LEAs that propose to connect their
projects to broader school and district plans for increasing students'
access to high-quality instruction delivered by a diverse group of
educators.
In Invitational Priority 1, we encourage applicants to prioritize
the establishment of whole-school magnet programs in order to promote
learning for students in ways that ensure all students within a school
have the opportunity to successfully partake in the special curriculum
and meet challenging academic content standards and decrease the
likelihood of tracking within schools.
Additionally, the Department is interested in projects that propose
to coordinate with relevant government entities--such as housing and
transportation authorities, among others--given the impact that other
public policy choices may have on the composition of a school's student
body. For example, the Department seeks applications connecting MSAP
projects to nearby public housing redevelopment projects, such as those
funded through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Choice Neighborhoods Initiative and the HUD Rental Assistance
Demonstration program. Accordingly, under Invitational Priority 2, and
more generally through the selection criteria outlined in Section V of
this notice, we encourage projects that propose to coordinate efforts
with housing and transportation authorities, as well as other Federal,
State, or local agencies, or community-based organizations.
Finally, to assist grantees in grounding their programs in the
existing knowledge base as well as identifying practices that will
improve LEA capacity to continue operating magnet schools at high
performance levels beyond the funding period, this competition provides
for applicants to address evidence in two ways. Under Competitive
Preference Priority 2, applicants may demonstrate that they intend to
implement activities that are evidence-based in their proposed MSAP
project schools. Additionally, in response to the quality of the
project evaluation selection criterion,
[[Page 9589]]
applicants should discuss how they will monitor the implementation and
results of their MSAP project activities, as well as how they intend to
identify practices to be sustained beyond the project period through
the final evaluation reports described in Section VI, Part 4(c) of this
notice, which should be designed to yield results at the level of
promising evidence or higher.
Priorities: This competition includes six competitive preference
priories and two invitational priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and 3 are from
the MSAP regulations at 34 CFR 280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 4 are from
section 4406 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231e. In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(v), Competitive Preference Priority 5 is from allowable
activities specified in section 4407 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231f.
Competitive Preference Priority 6 is from the Final Priorities and
Definitions--Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for
Discretionary Grants Programs, published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612) (Supplemental Priorities).
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2022 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)(i), we award one additional point
to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 1; up to
three additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 2; up to two
additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 3; up to three
additional points to an application, depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4; up to four
additional points to an application depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 5; and up to two
additional points to an application depending on how well the
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 6.
Based on the quality of the applicant's response in addressing any
or all of these priorities, an application may be awarded up to a total
of 15 additional points. Applicants may apply under any, all, or none
of the competitive preference priorities. The maximum possible points
for each competitive preference priority are indicated in parentheses
following the name of the priority. These points are in addition to any
points the application earns under the selection criteria in this
notice.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1--Need for Assistance (0 or 1
point).
The Secretary evaluates the applicant's need for assistance by
considering--
(1) The costs of fully implementing the magnet schools project as
proposed;
(2) The resources available to the applicant to carry out the
project if funds under the program were not provided;
(3) The extent to which the costs of the project exceed the
applicant's resources; and
(4) The difficulty of effectively carrying out the approved plan
and the project for which assistance is sought, including consideration
of how the design of the magnet school project--e.g., the type of
program proposed, the location of the magnet school within the LEA--
impacts the applicant's ability to successfully carry out the approved
plan.
Competitive Preference Priority 2--New or Revised Magnet Schools
Projects and Strength of Evidence to Support Proposed Projects (up to 3
points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to (1) carry out a new, evidence-based magnet school program; (2)
significantly revise an existing magnet school program, using evidence-
based methods and practices, as available; or (3) replicate an existing
magnet school program that has a demonstrated record of success in
increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of
minority groups.
Competitive Preference Priority 3--Selection of Students (up to 2
points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to select students to attend magnet schools by methods such as lottery,
rather than through academic examination.
Competitive Preference Priority 4--Increasing Racial Integration
and Socioeconomic Diversity (up to 3 points).
The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes
to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic
diversity in designing and implementing magnet school programs.
Competitive Preference Priority 5--Inter-district and Regional
Approaches (up to 4 points).
Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that grant funds
will be used to enable the LEA, or consortium of such agencies, or
other organizations partnered with such agency or consortium, to
establish, expand, or strengthen inter-district and regional magnet
programs.
Competitive Preference Priority 6--Supporting a Diverse Educator
Workforce and Professional Growth to Strengthen Student Learning (up to
2 points).
Projects that are designed to increase the proportion of well-
prepared, diverse, and effective educators serving students, with a
focus on underserved students, through building or expanding high-
poverty school districts' capacity to hire, support, and retain an
effective and diverse educator workforce, through one or both of the
following:
(a) Adopting or expanding comprehensive, strategic career and
compensation systems that provide competitive compensation and include
opportunities for educators to serve as mentors and instructional
coaches, or to take on additional leadership roles and responsibilities
for which educators are compensated.
(b) Developing data systems, timelines, and action plans for
promoting inclusive and bias-free human resources practices that
promote and support development of educator diversity.
Invitational Priorities: For FY 2022 and any subsequent year in
which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these are invitational priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets these
invitational priorities a competitive or absolute preference over other
applications.
These priorities are:
Invitational Priority 1--Whole-School Magnet Programs.
Projects that propose to implement ``whole-school magnet'' schools
in which all students enrolled in the school participate in the magnet
school program, rather than schools that implement magnet programs
within schools which are offered to less than the entire school
population.
Invitational Priority 2--Coordination Across Agencies and
Organizations.
Projects that propose to coordinate efforts with relevant
governmental agencies, such as housing or transportation authorities,
or community organizations to promote student diversity and achievement
in magnet schools. This may include projects coordinated with public
housing redevelopment efforts, such as those funded through the HUD
Choice Neighborhoods Initiative or the HUD Rental Assistance
Demonstration program.
Definitions: The definition of ``evidence-based'' is from 20 U.S.C.
[[Page 9590]]
7801. The definitions of ``desegregation'' and ``feeder school'' are
from 34 CFR 280.4. The definitions of ``demonstrates a rationale,''
``experimental study,'' ``logic model,'' ``project component,''
``promising evidence,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' ``relevant
outcome,'' and ``What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks'' are from 34 CFR
77.1(c). The definitions of ``children or students with disabilities,''
``disconnected youth,'' ``educator,'' ``English learner,'' ``military-
or veteran-connected student,'' and ``underserved student'' are from
the Supplemental Priorities.
Children or students with disabilities means children with
disabilities as defined in section 602(3) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1401(3)) and 34 CFR 300.8,
or students with disabilities, as defined in the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 (29 U.S.C. 705(37), 705(202)(B)).
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.
Desegregation, in reference to a plan, means a plan for the
reassignment of children or faculty to remedy the illegal separation of
minority group children or faculty in the schools of an LEA or a plan
for the reduction, elimination, or prevention of minority group
isolation in one or more of the schools of an LEA.
Disconnected youth means an individual, between the ages 14 and 24,
who may be from a low-income background, experiences homelessness, is
in foster care, is involved in the justice system, or is not working or
not enrolled in (or at risk of dropping out of) an educational
institution.
Educator means an individual who is an early learning (as defined
in the Supplemental Priorities) educator, teacher, principal or other
school leader, specialized instructional support personnel (e.g.,
school psychologist, counselor, school social worker, early
intervention service personnel), paraprofessional, or faculty.
English learner means an individual who is an English learner as
defined in section 8101(20) of the ESEA, or an individual who is an
English language learner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act.
Evidence-based means an activity, strategy, or intervention that--
(i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving
student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on--
(A) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented experimental study;
(B) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented quasi-experimental study; or
(C) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection
bias; or
(ii) (A) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research
findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or
intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant
outcomes; and
(B) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such
activity, strategy, or intervention.
Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare
outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are
otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment
group receiving a project component or a control group that does not.
Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies,
and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental
studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g.,
sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression
discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)
standards without reservations as described in the WWC 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.
Feeder school means a school from which students are drawn to
attend a magnet school.
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.
Military- or veteran-connected student means a child participating
in an early learning (as defined in the Supplemental Priorities)
program, a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12, or a student
enrolled in career and technical education or postsecondary education
who has a parent or guardian who is a veteran of the uniformed services
(as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101), in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine
Corps, Coast Guard, Space Force, National Guard, Reserves, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or Public Health Service or is
a veteran of the uniformed services with an honorable discharge (as
defined by 38 U.S.C. 3311).
Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention,
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).
Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the
effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant
outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a ``strong
evidence base'' or ``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding
practice guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a
``positive effect'' or ``potentially positive effect'' on a relevant
outcome with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate,
that--
(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study,
or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using
regression methods to account for differences between a treatment
group and a comparison group); and
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome.
Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation
(e.g., establishment
[[Page 9591]]
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.
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.
Underserved student means a student (which includes students in K-
12 programs) in one or more of the following subgroups:
(a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools
with high concentrations of students living in poverty.
(b) A student of color.
(c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian
Tribe.
(d) An English learner.
(e) A child or student with a disability.
(f) A disconnected youth.
(g) A technologically unconnected youth.
(h) A migrant student.
(i) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.
(j) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning,
or intersex (LGBTQI+) student.
(k) A student who is in foster care.
(l) A student without documentation of immigration status.
(m) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.
(n) A student impacted by the justice system, including a
formerly incarcerated student.
(o) A student performing significantly below grade level.
(p) A military- or veteran-connected student.
What Works Clearinghouse (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.
Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards
Handbooks are available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j.
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with discrimination 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, 97,
98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 280. (e)
Supplemental Priorities.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
$149,000,000 for the MSAP program for FY 2022, of which we would use an
estimated $135,000,000 for awards under this competition. The actual
level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action.
However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete
the grant process before the end of the current fiscal year, if
Congress appropriates funds for this program.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2023 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $1,000,000-$3,500,000 per budget year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award to an LEA or a consortium
of LEAS exceeding $15,000,000 for the project period. Under section
4408(b) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231h, grantees may not expend more than
50 percent of the year one grant funds and not more than 15 percent of
year two and three grant funds on planning activities. Professional
development is not considered to be a planning activity.
Note: Yearly award amounts may vary.
Estimated Number of Awards: 30-40.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or consortia of LEAs implementing a
desegregation plan as specified in section III. 4 of this notice.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application.
4. Other--Desegregation Plans: Per section 4404 of the ESEA and 34
CFR 280.20(e) and (f) of the regulations, to establish eligibility to
receive MSAP assistance, applicants must also submit with their
applications one of the following types of desegregation plans: (i) A
desegregation plan required by a court order; (ii) a desegregation plan
required by a State agency or an official of competent jurisdiction;
(iii) a desegregation plan required by the Department's Office for
Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(Title VI); or (iv) a voluntary desegregation plan adopted by the
applicant and submitted to the Department for approval as part of the
application. Under the MSAP regulations, applicants are required to
provide all of the information required in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g)
in order to satisfy the civil rights eligibility requirements found in
34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) and (b).
Note: While voluntary desegregation plans must be approved by the
school board of the submitting LEA or consortium of LEAs, these
desegregation plans do not require Department approval prior to
application submission. Review of applicants' voluntary desegregation
plans is a component of the application review process under section
4404 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C.7231c, and 34 CFR 280.2(b) to ensure that
all grantees receiving funds have desegregation plans that are adequate
under Title VI and, for each magnet school for which funding is sought,
the magnet school will reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI within the
project period, either in the magnet school or in a feeder school, as
appropriate.
In addition to the particular data and other items for required and
voluntary desegregation plans described in the application package, per
34 CFR 280.20(e)(f) and(g), an application must include--
Projected enrollment by race and ethnicity for magnet and
feeder schools;
Signed civil rights assurances; and
An assurance that the desegregation plan is being
implemented or will be implemented if the application is funded.
Finally, under section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C.
7231d(b)(1)(A), applicants must describe ``how a grant awarded under
this part will be used to promote desegregation, including any
available evidence on, or if such evidence is not available, a
rationale,
[[Page 9592]]
based on current research, for how the proposed magnet school programs
will increase interaction among students of different social, economic,
ethnic, and racial backgrounds.'' To assist applicants in submitting
succinct and comprehensive information to this end, the Application
Package for this competition includes a Desegregation Plan Form OMB-
1855-0011. Through this form, applicants will summarize their
desegregation plan and describe: The plan's overarching goals; the
definition of MGI being used by the LEA and the specific schools
(either magnets or feeders) and racial/ethnic group(s) that have been
identified as in need of reduction, prevention, or elimination of MGI;
how these particular schools are currently part of the LEA's school
configuration and enrollment patterns; and how the MSAP project and its
proposed magnets are designed to effectively prevent, reduce, or
eliminate MGI in elementary or secondary schools with substantial
proportions of minority students.
Note: Section 4401(b)(1) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231, describes the
desegregation purpose of MSAP as the elimination, reduction, or
prevention of MGI in elementary and secondary schools with substantial
proportions of minority students. In accordance with section 4404 of
the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7231c) and 34 CFR 280.2, projects that are not
designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI and to bring students
from different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds
together in accordance with an approved desegregation plan, are not
eligible for MSAP funding. Additionally, for the purposes of the MSAP
program, ``feeder school'' is defined in 34 CFR 280.4(b) as ``a school
from which students are drawn to attend the magnet school,'' and refers
to the schools that students attending magnet schools would otherwise
have attended had the magnet school not been available.
Applicants are encouraged to elaborate on these summary
descriptions and the content of their desegregation plans in the
application's project narrative described in Section V of this notice
and with an accompanying logic model demonstrating the conceptual
framework for and graphically depicting how the applicant intends to
achieve the summarized desegregation plan goals outlined above.
Required Desegregation Plans
1. Desegregation plans required by a court order. An applicant that
submits a desegregation plan required by a court order must submit
complete and signed copies of all court documents demonstrating that
the magnet schools are a part of the approved desegregation plan.
Examples of the types of documents that would meet this requirement
include a Federal or State court order that establishes specific magnet
schools, amends a previous order or orders by establishing additional
or different specific magnet schools, requires or approves the
establishment of one or more unspecified magnet schools, or authorizes
the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.
2. Desegregation plans required by a State agency or official of
competent jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a desegregation plan
ordered by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction must
provide documentation that shows that the desegregation plan was
ordered based upon a determination that State law was violated. In the
absence of this documentation, the applicant should consider its
desegregation plan to be a voluntary plan and submit the data and
information necessary for voluntary plans.
3. Desegregation plans required by OCR under Title VI. An applicant
that submits a desegregation plan required by OCR under Title VI must
submit a complete copy of the desegregation plan demonstrating that
magnet schools are part of the approved plan or that the plan
authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the
applicant.
4. Modifications to required desegregation plans. A previously
approved desegregation plan that does not include the magnet school or
program for which the applicant is now seeking assistance must be
modified to include the magnet school component. The modification to
the desegregation plan must be approved by the court, agency, or
official that originally approved the plan. An applicant that wishes to
modify a previously approved OCR Title VI desegregation plan to include
different or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed
modification for review and approval to the OCR regional office that
approved its original plan.
An applicant should indicate in its application if it is seeking to
modify its previously approved desegregation plan. However, all
applicants must submit proof of approval of all modifications to their
plans to the Department by June 22, 2022. Proof of plan modifications
should be emailed to Gillian Cohen-Boyer at [email protected] or mailed
to her at: U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room
3C134, Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1259.
Voluntary Desegregation Plans
A voluntary desegregation plan must be approved by the Department
each time an application is considered for funding. Even if the
Department has approved a voluntary desegregation plan in an LEA in the
past, to be reviewed, the desegregation plan must be resubmitted with
the application by the application deadline.
The Department will determine on a case-by-case basis whether a
district's voluntary plan meets the statutory purpose of reducing,
eliminating, or preventing MGI in its magnet or feeder schools,
considering the unique circumstances in each district and school. As
part of this consideration, the Department will consider, consistent
with 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(1), whether the project is designed to
eliminate, reduce, or prevent MGI in elementary and/or secondary
schools with substantial proportions of students from any minority
group(s). We also note that Congress has recognized that ``segregation
exists between minority and nonminority students as well as among
students of different minority groups.'' Section 4401(a)(4)(C) of the
ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231(a)(4)(C). This case-by-case review will include an
examination of the factual basis for any proposed increases in
enrollment of students from minority groups at district schools; for
example, the Department will consider whether a plan to reduce,
eliminate, or prevent MGI at a magnet school or at a feeder school
would significantly increase MGI at any other magnet or feeder school
in the LEA at the grade levels served by the magnet school.
An applicant's voluntary desegregation plan must describe how the
LEA defines or identifies MGI; demonstrate how the LEA will reduce,
eliminate, or prevent MGI for each magnet school in the proposed
project, and, if relevant, at identified feeder schools; and
demonstrate that the proposed voluntary desegregation plan is adequate
under Title VI.
Under 34 CFR 280.20(f) and (g), applicants with voluntary
desegregation plans must submit complete and accurate enrollment forms
and other information to demonstrate their eligibility (specific
requirements are detailed in the application package).
Voluntary desegregation plan applicants must submit documentation
of school board approval or documentation of other official adoption of
the plan as required under 34 CFR
[[Page 9593]]
280.20(f)(2) when submitting their application. LEAs that were
previously under a required desegregation plan, but have achieved
unitary status and so are voluntary desegregation plan applicants,
typically would not need to include court orders. Rather, such
applications should provide the documentation discussed in this
section.
5. Single-Sex Programs: An applicant proposing to operate a single-
sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school that offers single-
sex classes or extracurricular activities will undergo a review of its
proposed single-sex educational program to determine compliance with
applicable nondiscrimination laws, including the Equal Protection
Clause of the U.S. Constitution (as interpreted in United States v.
Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), and other cases) and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its
regulations--including 34 CFR 106.34. This review may require the
applicant to provide additional fact-specific information about the
single-sex program.
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 December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979, which contain requirements and
information on how to submit an application. Please note that these
Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13,
2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to
register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to the implementation of the UEI.
More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.
2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the MSAP, your
application may include business information that you consider
proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11, we define ``business information'' and
describe the process we use in determining whether any of that
information is proprietary, and thus protected from disclosure under
Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as
amended).
Because we plan to make successful applications available to the
public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business
information.
Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure
under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your
application, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' please list the page
number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional
information, please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
3. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order
12372 is in the application package for this competition.
4. Funding Restrictions: Unallowable costs are specified in section
4407 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7231f). We reference additional regulations
outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of
this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to 150 pages and (2) use the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the
assurances, certifications, the desegregation plan and related
information, and the tables used to respond to Competitive Preference
Priorities 2 and 3; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, or letters
of support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of
the application narrative.
6. Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to review
grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number
of applicants that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage
each potential applicant to notify the Department of their intent to
submit an application. To do so, please submit your intent to apply by
emailing [email protected] with the subject line, ``[LEA Name(s)] Intent
to Apply.'' Applicants that do not notify the Department of their
intent to apply may still apply for funding.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria are from 34 CFR
75.210 and 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405 of the ESEA.
The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points.
The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses
following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion
also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining
the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.
Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to
any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference
priorities in this notice. The maximum score that an application may
receive under the competitive preference priorities and the selection
criteria is 115 points.
(a) Desegregation (up to 30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the desegregation-related activities, including:
(1) The effectiveness of the applicant's proposed desegregation
strategies for the elimination, reduction, or prevention of MGI in
elementary schools and secondary schools with substantial proportions
of minority students. (ESEA section 4401(b)(1))(up to 6 points)
(2) The effectiveness of its plan to recruit students from
different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds into the
magnet schools. (34 CFR 280.31) (up to 6 points)
(3) How it will foster interaction among students of different
social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in classroom
activities, extracurricular activities, or other activities in the
magnet schools (or, if appropriate, in the schools in which the magnet
school programs operate). (34 CFR 280.31) (up to 6 points)
(4) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 6
points)
(5) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 6 points)
[[Page 9594]]
(b) Quality of the project design (up to 30 points).
The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of
the project design. In determining the quality of the design of the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The manner and extent to which the magnet school program will
increase student academic achievement in the instructional areas
offered by the school, including any evidence, or if such evidence is
not available, a rationale based on current research findings, to
support such description. (ESEA section 4405(b)(1)(B)) (up to 6 points)
(2) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 6
points)
(3) The extent to which each magnet school for which funding is
sought will encourage greater parental decision-making and involvement.
(34 CFR 280.31) (up to 6 points)
(4) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for
maximizing the effectiveness of project services. (34 CFR 75.210) (up
to 6 points)
(5) How it will improve the capacity of the LEAs to continue
operating magnet schools at a high performance level after Federal
funding for the magnet schools is terminated. (ESEA section 4401(b)(5))
(up to 6 points)
(c) Quality of the management plan (up to 15 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. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 5 points)
(2) The extent to which the applicant is committed to the magnet
school project and has identified other resources to continue support
for the magnet school activities when assistance under this program is
no longer available. (34 CFR 280.31) (up to 5 points)
(3) 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. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 5 points)
(d) Quality of personnel (up to 5 points).
(1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the
qualifications of the personnel the applicant plans to use on the
project. The Secretary determines the extent to which--
(a) The project director (if one is used) is qualified to manage
the project;
(b) Other key personnel are qualified to manage the project; and
(c) Teachers who will provide instruction in participating magnet
schools are qualified to implement the special curriculum of the magnet
schools. (34 CFR 280.31) (up to 3 points)
(2) To determine personnel qualifications, the Secretary considers
experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the
project, including the key personnel's knowledge of and experience in
curriculum development and desegregation strategies. (34 CFR 280.31)
(up to 2 points)
(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:
(1) How the applicant will assess, monitor, and evaluate the
impact of the activities funded under this part on student
achievement and integration. (ESEA section 4405(b)(1)(D)) (up to 6
points)
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the
use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to
the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative
and qualitative data to the extent possible. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to
7 points)
(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well
implemented, produce promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1(c)) about the project's effectiveness. (34 CFR 75.210) (up to 7
points)
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, under 2 CFR
3474.10, 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
[[Page 9595]]
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
as well.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we will notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables.
This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements, please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) If awarded a grant, applicants must also submit a final
evaluation report addressing the study to produce promising evidence
under selection criterion factor (e)(3).
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of reporting under 34 CFR
75.110, the following six performance measures have been established
for the MSAP:
(a) The number and percentage of magnet schools receiving
assistance whose student enrollment eliminates, reduces, or prevents
MGI.
(b) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in reading/language arts as
compared to the previous year.
(c) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score
proficient or above on State assessments in mathematics as compared to
the previous year.
(d) The percentage of MSAP-funded magnet schools still operating
magnet school programs three years after Federal funding ends.
(e) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in MSAP-funded magnet schools still operating magnet
school programs who score proficient or above on State assessments in
reading/language arts three years after Federal funding ends as
compared to the final project year.
(f) The percentage increase of students from major racial and
ethnic groups in MSAP-funded magnet schools still operating magnet
school programs who score proficient or above on State assessments in
mathematics three years after Federal funding ends as compared to the
final project year.
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, whether
the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving 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 Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit
[[Page 9596]]
your search to documents published by the Department.
Ruth E. Ryder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Programs, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2022-03643 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P