[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 61 (Thursday, March 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19111-19116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06583]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Asian American and Native American
Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions Program
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the
Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving
Institutions (AANAPISI) Program, Assistance Listing Number 84.031L.
This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB
control number 1840-0798.
DATES:
Applications Available: March 30, 2023.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 30, 2023.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 28, 2023.
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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045), and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554. Please note that these Common
Instructions supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pearson Owens, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 2B109, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7997. Email: [email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The AANAPISI Program provides grants to
eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) to enable them to
improve and expand their capacity to serve Asian American and Native
American Pacific Islander students. Institutions may use these grants
to plan, develop, or implement activities that strengthen the
institution's services leading to student success.
Background: While the population of Asian American and Pacific
Islanders (AAPI) continues to grow on college campuses, research shows
these students are least likely to seek help when it comes to both
academic and social emotional supports. For example, research shows
that two out of 10 AAPI college students experiencing a mental health
issue receives treatment.\1\ To combat these problems, this competition
includes two competitive preference priorities aimed at providing
comprehensive student supports. Additionally, the competition includes
a priority that seeks to encourage applicants to rethink how to promote
student success by providing wraparound services, utilizing data
systems that help target student needs, and coordinating and partnering
with other organizations that address student success outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Nathan Stewart, Supporting the health and well-being of
Asian American and Pacific Islander college students. https://timely.md/blog/supporting-aapi-students-and-communities/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priorities: This notice contains two competitive preference
priorities. The priorities are from the Secretary's Supplemental
Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published
in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612)
(Supplemental Priorities).
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2023 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 up to an additional
5 points to an application for each priority, depending on how well the
application meets the priorities. Applicants may respond to one or both
[[Page 19112]]
priorities, for a total of up to 10 additional points.
Applicants that address one or both of the competitive preference
priorities must include in the one-page abstract submitted with the
application a statement indicating that they have done so. If the
applicant has addressed one or both competitive preference priorities,
this information must also be listed on the AANAPISI Program Profile
Form in the application booklet.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 1: Meeting Student Social,
Emotional, and Academic Needs (up to 5 points).
Projects that are designed to improve students' social, emotional,
academic, and career development, with a focus on underserved students,
by creating a positive, inclusive, and identity-safe climate at IHEs
through one or more of the following activities:
(a) Fostering a sense of belonging and inclusion for underserved
students.
(b) Implementing evidence-based practices for advancing student
success for underserved students.
(c) Providing evidence-based professional development opportunities
designed to build asset-based mindsets for faculty and staff on campus
and that are inclusive with regard to race, ethnicity, culture,
language, and disability status.
Competitive Preference Priority 2: Increasing Postsecondary
Education Access, Affordability, Completion, and Post-Enrollment
Success (up to 5 points).
Projects that are designed to increase postsecondary access,
affordability, completion, and success for underserved students by
addressing one or more of the following priority areas:
(a) Increasing postsecondary education access and reducing the cost
of college by creating clearer pathways for students between
institutions and making transfer of course credits more seamless and
transparent.
(b) Increasing the number and proportion of underserved students
who enroll in and complete postsecondary education programs, which may
include strategies related to college preparation, awareness,
application, selection, advising, counseling, and enrollment.
(c) Establishing a system of high-quality data collection and
analysis, such as data on persistence, retention, completion, and post-
college outcomes, for transparency, accountability, and institutional
improvement.
(d) Supporting the development and implementation of student
success programs that integrate multiple comprehensive and evidence-
based services or initiatives, such as academic advising, structured/
guided pathways, career services, credit-bearing academic undergraduate
courses focused on career, and programs to meet basic needs, such as
housing, childcare, transportation, student financial aid, and access
to technological devices.
Note: Under 34 CFR 607.10(c)(13), grantees may not use funds
awarded under this program to pay directly for childcare and
transportation expenses.
Definitions: The definitions below are from 34 CFR 77.1 and the
Supplemental Priorities.
Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by
evidence that demonstrates a rationale.
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.
English learner means an individual who is an English learner as
defined in section 8101(20) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual who is an English language
leaner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act.
Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by
evidence that demonstrates a rationale.
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.
Note: In developing logic models, applicants may want to use
resources such as the Regional Educational Laboratory Program's (REL
Pacific) Education Logic Model Application, available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/regions/pacific/pdf/ELMUserGuideJune2014.pdf. Other
sources include: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.pdf, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014007.pdf, and https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2015057.pdf.
Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention,
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s)
the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the
specific goals of the program.
Underserved student means a student in postsecondary education 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) An English learner.
(d) A migrant student.
(e) A student without documentation of immigration status.
(f) A student who is the first in their family to attend
postsecondary education.
(g) A student enrolling in or seeking to enroll postsecondary
education for the first time at the age of 20 or older.
(h) A student who is working full-time while enrolled in
postsecondary education.
(i) A student who is enrolled in or is seeking to enroll in
postsecondary education who is eligible for a Pell Grant.
(j) An adult student in need of improving their basic skills or an
adult student with limited English proficiency.
English learner means an individual who is an English learner as
defined in section 8101(20) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual who is an English language
leaner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1059g (title III, part A, of the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA)).
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal
civil rights laws.
Note: In 2008, the HEA was amended by the Higher Education
Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA), Public Law 110-315. Please note that
the regulations for the AANAPISI Program in 34 CFR part 607 have not
been updated to reflect these statutory changes.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 82, 84, 86, 97,
98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
[[Page 19113]]
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 607. (e)
The Supplemental Priorities.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Five-year Individual
Development Grants and Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants will
be awarded in FY 2023.
Note: A cooperative arrangement is an arrangement to carry out
allowable grant activities between an institution eligible to receive a
grant under this part and another eligible or ineligible IHE, under
which the resources of the cooperating institutions are combined and
shared to better achieve the purposes of this part and avoid costly
duplication of effort.
Estimated Available Funds: $5,623,365.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years from
the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
Individual Development Grants:
Estimated Range of Awards: $350,000-$400,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $375,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $400,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 12.
Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants:
Estimated Range of Awards: $450,000-$500,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $475,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $500,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. (a) Eligible Applicants: To qualify as an eligible institution
under the AANAPISI Program, an institution must be--
(i) Accredited or pre-accredited by a nationally recognized
accrediting agency or association that the Secretary has determined to
be a reliable authority as to the quality of education or training
offered;
(ii) Legally authorized by the State in which it is located to be a
junior or community college or to provide an educational program for
which it awards a bachelor's degree; and
(iii) Designated as an ``eligible institution,'' as defined in 34
CFR 600.2, by demonstrating that it has (1) an enrollment of needy
students as described in 34 CFR 607.3, and (2) low average educational
and general expenditures per full-time equivalent (FTE) undergraduate
student as described in 34 CFR 607.4.
Note: The notice announcing the FY 2023 process for designation of
eligible institutions, and inviting applications for waiver of
eligibility requirements, was published in the Federal Register on
January 17, 2023 (88 FR 2611). Only institutions that the Department
determines are eligible, or which are granted a waiver under the
process described in that notice, may apply for a grant in this
program.
At the time of submission of their applications, applicants must
certify their total undergraduate headcount enrollment and that 10
percent of the IHE's enrollment is Asian American or Native American
Pacific Islander. An assurance form, which is included in the
application materials for this competition, must be signed by an
official for the applicant and submitted.
b. Relationship between the Title III, Part A Programs and the
Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI) Program:
A grantee under the Developing HSI Program, which is authorized
under title V of the HEA, may not receive a grant under any HEA, title
III, part A program. The title III, part A programs are the
Strengthening Institutions Program, the Tribally Controlled Colleges
and Universities Program, the AANAPISI Program, the Alaska Native and
Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions Program, the Native American-
Serving Nontribal Institutions Program, and the Predominantly Black
Institutions Program. Furthermore, a current Developing HSI Program
grantee may not give up its Developing HSI Program grant in order to be
eligible to receive a grant under the AANAPISI Program or any title
III, part A program as described in 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1).
An eligible HSI that is not a current grantee under the Developing
HSI Program may apply for a FY 2023 grant under all title III, part A
programs for which it is eligible, as well as receive consideration for
a grant under the Developing HSI Program. However, a successful
applicant may receive only one grant as described in 34 CFR
607.2(g)(1).
c. Individual Development and Cooperative Arrangement Grants:
An eligible IHE that submits applications for an Individual
Development Grant and a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant in
this competition may be awarded both in the same fiscal year. However,
we will not award a second Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant to
an otherwise eligible IHE for an award year for which the IHE already
has a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant under the AANAPISI
Program. A grantee with an Individual Development Grant or a
Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant may be a subgrantee in one or
more Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants. The lead institution
in a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant must be an eligible
institution. Partners or subgrantees are not required to be eligible
institutions.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching unless the grantee uses a portion of its grant for
establishing or improving an endowment fund. If a grantee uses a
portion of its grant for endowment fund purposes, it must match those
grant funds with non-Federal funds (20 U.S.C. 1057(d)(1)-(2)).
b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This program involves supplement-not-
supplant funding requirements. Grant funds must be used so that they
supplement and, to the extent practical, increase the funds that would
otherwise be available for the activities to be carried out under the
grant and in no case supplant those funds (34 CFR 607.30).
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application.
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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045),
and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554, which contain
requirements and information on how to apply. Please note that these
Common Instructions supersede the version published on December 27,
2021.
2. 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 program.
3. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR
607.10(c).
[[Page 19114]]
We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the
Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to no more than 50 pages for Individual
Development Grants and no more than 65 pages for Cooperative
Arrangement Development Grants and (2) use the following standards
below. If you are addressing one or both competitive preference
priorities, we recommend that you limit your response to no more than
an additional 6 pages total, 3 additional pages for Competitive
Preference Priority 1 and 3 additional pages for Competitive Preference
Priority 2. Please include a separate heading when responding to one or
both competitive preference priorities.
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, and 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 and certifications; or the one-page abstract and the
bibliography. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of
the application narrative.
Note: The Budget Information-Non-Construction Programs Form (ED
524) Sections A-C are not the same as the narrative response to the
Budget section of the selection criteria.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210. Applicants should address each of the selection
criteria separately for each proposed activity. The selection criteria
are worth a total of 100 points; the maximum score for each criterion
is noted in parentheses. An applicant that also chooses to address the
competitive preference priorities can earn up to 110 points.
(a) Need for project. (Maximum 20 points) The Secretary considers
the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers:
(1) The magnitude of the need for the services to be provided or
the activities to be carried out by the proposed project. (10 points)
(2) The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving
or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals. (5
points)
(3) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses. (5 points)
(b) Quality of the project design. (Maximum 25 points) The
Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project.
In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers:
(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(10 points)
(2) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target
population or other identified needs. (5 points)
(3) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a
rationale (as defined in this notice). (10 points)
(c) Quality of project services. (Maximum 10 points) The Secretary
considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed
project.
(1) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. (3 points)
(2) In addition, the Secretary considers:
(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or
beneficiaries of those services. (3 points)
(ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice. (4 points)
(d) Quality of project personnel. (Maximum 10 points) The Secretary
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed
project.
(1) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. (3 points)
(2) In addition, the Secretary considers:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator. (4 points)
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of key project personnel. (3 points)
(e) Adequacy of resources. (Maximum 5 points) The Secretary
considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In
determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the
Secretary considers:
(1) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project. (3 points)
(2) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(2 points)
(f) Quality of the management plan. (Maximum 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:
(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. (5 points)
(2) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (5 points)
(3) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project. (5 points)
(g) Quality of the project evaluation. (Maximum 15 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:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project. (10 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. (5 points)
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in
[[Page 19115]]
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).
A panel of three non-Federal reviewers will review and score each
application in accordance with the selection criteria. A rank order
funding slate will be made from this review. Awards will be made in
rank order according to the average score received from the peer review
and from the competitive preference priority addressed by the
applicant.
In tiebreaking situations for development grants, under 34 CFR
607.23(b), we award 1 additional point to an application from an IHE
that has an endowment fund of which the current market value, per FTE
enrolled student, is less than the average current market value of the
endowment funds, per FTE enrolled student, at comparable type
institutions that offer similar instruction. We award 1 additional
point to an application from an IHE that has expenditures for library
materials per FTE enrolled student that are less than the average
expenditure for library materials per FTE enrolled student at similar
type institutions. We also add 1 additional point to an application
from an IHE that proposes to carry out one or more of the following
activities:
(1) Faculty development.
(2) Funds and administrative management.
(3) Development and improvement of academic programs.
(4) Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening management
and academic programs.
(5) Joint use of facilities.
(6) Student services.
For the purpose of these funding considerations, we use 2019-2020
data.
If a tie remains after applying the tiebreaker mechanism above,
priority will be given to applicants that have the lowest endowment
values per FTE enrolled student.
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 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 also notify you
informally.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables.
This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting:
(a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must
ensure that you have in place the necessary processes
[[Page 19116]]
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.
5. Performance Measures: The Secretary has established the
following key performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of
the AANAPISI Program:
(a) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking
undergraduate students at 4-year AANAPISIs who were in their first year
of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in
the current year at the same AANAPISI.
(b) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking
undergraduate students at 2-year AANAPISIs who were in their first year
of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in
the current year at the same AANAPISI.
(c) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking
undergraduate students enrolled at 4-year AANAPISIs who graduate within
6 years of enrollment.
(d) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking
undergraduate students enrolled at 2-year AANAPISIs who graduate within
3 years of enrollment.
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 your search to documents published
by the Department.
Nasser H. Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2023-06583 Filed 3-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P