[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27870-27876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09412]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Mental Health Personnel Technical
Assistance Center
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the Mental Health
Personnel Technical Assistance Center (MHP TA Center), Assistance
Listing Number 84.184U. This notice relates to the approved information
collection under OMB control number 1894-0006.
DATES:
Applications Available: May 3, 2023.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 2, 2023.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 3, 2023.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 31, 2023.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: The Department will hold a
preapplication presentation via webinar for prospective applicants on
May 23, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. Eastern time. To register, please visit the
program website at: https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formula-grants/safe-supportive-schools/.
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
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede
the version published on December 27, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlette Kyser Pegram, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E257, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: 202-453-6732. 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 purpose of the MHP TA Center is to provide
technical assistance to current Department grantees awarded funds under
the fiscal years 2022 and 2023 Mental Health Service Professional
Demonstration (MHSP) and the School-Based Mental Health Services (SBMH)
grant programs and to disseminate resources and information to support
State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs),
institutions of higher education (IHEs), and other stakeholders, more
broadly, in the preparation of school-based mental health services
providers.
Background: The Department awarded nearly 300 MHSP and SBMH grants
with historic funding provided under the Bipartisan Safer Communities
Act (BSCA) and the Fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations to address
the critical need in prekindergarten (PK)-12 schools for school-based
mental health services providers, a need exacerbated by the COVID-19
pandemic. Findings from the Department's Institute of Education
Sciences April 2022 School Pulse Panel reinforce the challenges schools
face in addressing student mental health needs. Specifically, 70
percent of public schools reported that the percentage of students who
have sought mental health services increased since the start of the
COVID-19 pandemic, and 29 percent of public schools reported that the
percentage of staff who have sought mental health services increased
since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (U.S. Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
Statistics, School Pulse Panel (April 12-25, 2022)).
To help address the need for additional school-based mental health
services providers, the MHSP program provides competitive grants to
support and demonstrate innovative partnerships among SEAs, LEAs, and
consortia of LEAs and IHEs to train school-based mental health services
providers for employment in schools and LEAs, with the goal of
increasing the number and diversity of high-quality, trained providers
available to address the shortages of school-based mental health
services providers in high-need LEAs. The SBMH program provides
competitive grants to SEAs, LEAs, and consortia of LEAs to increase the
number of credentialed school-based mental health services providers
providing mental health services to students in LEAs with demonstrated
need. Collectively, both programs aim to significantly increase the
ability of schools to address the mental health needs of students and
staff and help ensure safer, healthier, more inclusive, and positive
school environments.
The MHP TA Center will support MHSP and SBMH grantees in meeting
the goals and objectives of their respective grants. The Center will
also identify, develop, and disseminate resources to enhance the
efforts of IHEs, SEAs, LEAs, and schools to address the social,
emotional, and mental health needs of PK-12 students and staff.
Priority: This competition has one absolute priority. We are
establishing this priority for the FY 2023 grant competition and any
subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition, in accordance with section
437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C.
1232(d)(1).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
A project to--
(1) Provide technical assistance to fiscal years 2022 and 2023 MHSP
and SBMH grantees (grantees) through a tiered approach that includes
universal support to all grantees, targeted support on select topics
for subsets of grantees, and intensive support for individual grantees,
as directed by the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education;
(2) Support high-quality grantee data through--
(a) Developing a system for collecting, reviewing, and analyzing
specific performance data (e.g., common annual performance measures
across the MHSP and SBMH grant programs);
[[Page 27871]]
(b) Assisting MHSP and SBMH grantees in submitting valid and
reliable data in the annual and final performance reports; and
(c) Conducting a review and analysis of the annual and final
performance reports, aggregating the data, and preparing a report for
the Department describing successes, challenges, exemplars, and
noteworthy trends; and
(3) Disseminate best practices in credentialing, recruiting,
training and developing, and retaining school-based mental health
services providers, including best practices on establishing and
sustaining partnerships with IHEs to create and provide innovative
high-quality training and credentialing options and maintain a robust
pipeline of school-based mental health services providers.
Requirements: We are establishing the following program
requirements and application requirements for the FY 2023 grant
competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the
list of unfunded applications from this competition, in accordance with
GEPA.
Program Requirements: The project must--
(a) Include at least one partnership with a Historically Black
College and University (HBCU), Tribal College and University (TCU), or
other Minority Serving Institution (MSI) in order to address a key
focus of the MHSP and SBMH programs, specifically ensuring a pipeline
of school-based mental health services providers from diverse
backgrounds or from the communities that they serve;
(b) Develop and maintain a 508-compliant website to assist the MHP
TA Center to (1) disseminate best practices in credentialing,
recruiting, training and developing, and retaining school-based mental
health services providers, including mental health service providers
from diverse backgrounds or from the communities that they serve; and
(2) disseminate free, online open educational resources (OER) that can
be used to (i) meet ongoing training and professional development
requirements for school-based mental health services providers and
other school staff and (ii) provide training alternatives, such as
micro-credentials, professional development certificates, and online
courses, for new students pursuing a credential to provide mental
health services in schools that States may choose to incorporate as
part of their credentialing process, including OERs that address school
climate (e.g., ensuring inclusive environments for all students;
ensuring school and school-related activities where students are free
from bullying and harassment; and promoting strong relationships among
students, teachers, families, and schools);
(c) Provide technical assistance (such as webinars or virtual
meetings) for preparing, collecting, and submitting valid and reliable
data to be included in annual and final performance reports; annually
review and analyze annual and final reports; and annually prepare a
report for the Department aggregating the data from annual and final
performance reports and describing successes, challenges, exemplars,
and noteworthy trends;
(d) Disseminate information (e.g., instructional videos, toolkits,
and briefs), best practices, and evidence-based practices to a variety
of education stakeholders, including IHE and SEA and LEA personnel, via
multiple mechanisms such as the MHP TA Center website, social media,
and other channels, as appropriate, regarding how these entities can
work together to increase the number and diversity of school-based
mental health services providers and ensure continuity of mental health
services as students progress through PK-12 schooling and postsecondary
education;
(e) Annually provide forums (such as communities of practice) for
grantees to share resources and experiences related to specific areas
of MHSP and SBMH grant implementation. Specific areas should include
creating culturally and linguistically inclusive and identity-safe
environments for all students and other areas to be identified based on
input from grantees, the Department, and other stakeholders, obtained
through focus groups, for example; and
(f) Develop, identify, and disseminate information regarding
evaluation of the implementation and impact of MHSP and SBMH grants,
including providing webinars or other convenings focused specifically
on conducting such evaluations and using ongoing data yielded from such
evaluations to engage in continuous improvement of grant programs.
Application Requirements: In the application, an applicant must--
(a) Explain how the applicant's program design will create high-
quality technical assistance for MHSP and SBMH grantees, including by
providing a logic model that articulates a tiered approach to providing
support to MHSP and SBMH grantees, a cycle of continuous improvement,
and a process for program adjustments based on ongoing and emergent
grantee needs;
(b) Demonstrate expert knowledge in credentialing, recruiting,
training, developing, and retaining school-based mental health services
providers;
(c) Demonstrate expert knowledge in--
(1) The statutory and regulatory requirements related to the MHSP
and SBMH grant programs;
(2) Best practices in supporting school-based mental health
services providers along the continuum from credentialing to retention
in high-need schools; and
(3) Evidence-based approaches to supporting student and staff
social, emotional, and mental health and well-being;
(d) Describe their experience in providing training, information,
and support to IHEs, SEAs, LEAs, schools, and other organizations on
evidence-based strategies to support pre- and in-service training that
enhance the skills and knowledge of school-based mental health services
providers and contribute to creating and maintaining supportive,
positive, identity-safe, and inclusive school climates;
(e) Describe their experience providing training and resources to
IHEs, LEAs, schools, and school-based mental health services providers
regarding evidence-based practices, to ensure access to services for
student groups not limited to but including students with disabilities,
students experiencing homelessness, LGBTQ+ students, and English
learners; and
(f) Describe their expertise in approaches to supporting valid and
reliable data, conducting data quality reviews, collecting and
analyzing data, and evaluating the effectiveness of programs intended
to support student social, emotional, and mental health and well-being.
Definitions: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition,
the following definitions apply. The definitions of ``demonstrates a
rationale,'' ``evidence-based,'' ``experimental study,'' ``logic
model'' ``moderate evidence,'' ``project component,'' ``promising
evidence,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' ``relevant outcome,''
``strong evidence,'' and ``What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks'' are
from 34 CFR 77.1(c). The definitions of ``local educational agency''
and ``State educational agency'' are from section 8101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The
definition of ``school-based mental health services provider'' is from
section 4102(6) of the ESEA.
Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in
the
[[Page 27872]]
project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings
that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant
outcomes.
Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by
one or more of strong evidence, moderate evidence, promising evidence,
or evidence that demonstrates a rationale.
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.
Local educational agency (LEA) means:
(a) In General. A public board of education or other public
authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative
control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public
elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township,
school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or
for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in
a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools
or secondary schools.
(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any
other public institution or agency having administrative control and
direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.
(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an
elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian
Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the
school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not
provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does
not have a student population that is smaller than the student
population of the LEA receiving assistance under the ESEA with the
smallest student population, except that the school shall not be
subject to the jurisdiction of any SEA (as defined in this notice)
other than the Bureau of Indian Education.
(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational
service agencies and consortia of those agencies.
(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the SEA in a State
in which the SEA is the sole educational agency for all public schools.
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.
Moderate evidence means that there is evidence of effectiveness of
a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample
that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive that
component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``strong evidence base''
or ``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding practice guide
recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1,
3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``positive effect''
or ``potentially positive effect'' on a relevant outcome based on a
``medium to large'' extent of evidence, with no reporting of a
``negative effect'' or ``potentially negative effect'' on a relevant
outcome; or
(iii) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental design
study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or
4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using
version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that--
(A) Meets WWC standards with or without reservations;
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;
(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative
effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a
corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and
(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State,
county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at
least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies
of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs
(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the
requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D).
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
[[Page 27873]]
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation
(e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being
compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet
WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks.
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.
School-based mental health services provider means a State-licensed
or State-certified school counselor, school psychologist, school social
worker, or other State-licensed or certified mental health professional
qualified under State law to provide mental health services to children
and adolescents.
State educational agency means the agency primarily responsible for
the State supervision of public elementary schools and secondary
schools.
Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness
of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample
that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive
that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``strong evidence base''
for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1,
3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a ``positive effect''
on a relevant outcome based on a ``medium to large'' extent of
evidence, with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC
using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise
assessed by the Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as
appropriate, and that--
(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;
(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative
effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a
corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0,
4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and
(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State,
county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at
least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies
of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs
(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the
requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D).
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbooks (WWC Handbooks) means the
standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Standards Handbook,
Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1,
or in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version
2.1 (all incorporated by reference, see Sec. 77.2). Study findings
eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards without
reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or not meet WWC
standards. WWC practice guides and intervention reports include
findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the WWC
Handbooks documentation.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested parties
the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria. Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA,
however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking requirements
regulations governing the first grant competition under a new or
substantially revised program authority. This is the first grant
competition for this program under section 4631(a)(1)(B) of the ESEA,
and therefore qualifies for this exemption. In order to ensure timely
grant awards, the Secretary has decided to forgo public comment on the
priorities and requirements under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. These
priorities and requirements will apply to the FY 2023 grant competition
and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Program Authority: Section 4631(a)(1)(B) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.
7281).
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal
civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grant/cooperative agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $2,600,000 annually for 48 months,
provided that the grantee and the Department may agree to extend an
additional 12 months for up to $1,300,000.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,600,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 48 months, provided that the grantee and the
Department may agree to extend an additional 12 months for a total of
60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: Research organizations, institutions,
agencies, institutions of higher education, private nonprofit
organizations, and for-profit organizations, or partnerships among such
entities, in each case with the demonstrated ability or capacity to
carry out the activities described.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform
Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application.
[[Page 27874]]
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 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to
submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions
supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.
2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of
projects that may be proposed in applications for the MHP TA Center
program, 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: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to no more than 30 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.
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 and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes,
the bibliography, or the 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 us of their intent to submit an
application. To do so, please email the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT with the subject line ``Intent to
Apply,'' and include the applicant's name and a contact person's name
and email address. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to
apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice
of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information
provided.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210. 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.
The selection criteria are as follows:
(a) Quality of the project design (up to 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 the following factors:
(1) 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. (up to 8 points)
(2) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a
rationale (as defined in this notice). (up to 8 points)
(3) The extent to which performance feedback and continuous
improvement are integral to the design of the proposed project. (up to
9 points)
(b) Quality of project services (up to 30 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the project services. In
determining the quality of the project services of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) 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. (up to 15 points)
(2) 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. (up to 5 points)
(3) 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. (up to 10 points)
(c) Quality of project personnel (up to 20 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 been
traditionally underrepresented based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability. (up to 10 points)
(2) In addition, the Secretary considers the qualifications,
including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.
(up to 10 points)
(d) Quality of the management plan (up to 20 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. (up to 5 points)
(2) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
[[Page 27875]]
improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (up to 5 points)
(3) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project. (up to 5 points)
(4) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project. (up to 5 points)
(e) Quality of the project evaluation (up to 5 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) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes. (up to 2
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. (up to 3 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 on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other 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
[[Page 27876]]
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) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, we have established three performance measures for
the MHP TA Center program: (1) The percentage of grantees reporting
valid and reliable data on their progress as evidenced in annual
performance reports; (2) The percentage of MHSP and SBMH grantees who
report improvements and progress toward grant goals and objectives as
evidenced in annual performance reports; and (3) The extent to which
MHSP and SBMH grantees are satisfied with the quality, usefulness, and
relevance of technical assistance provided as evidenced by surveys.
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.
James F. Lane,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Delegated the Authority to
Perform the Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2023-09412 Filed 5-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P