[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