[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 51 (Thursday, March 14, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18614-18624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-05420]


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

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 for fiscal year (FY) 2024 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: 
    Applications Available: March 14, 2024.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: April 29, 2024.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 13, 2024.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 12, 2024.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than March 28, 2024, 
MSAP will begin holding webinars to provide technical assistance to 
interested applicants on key application-related topics. Interested 
applicants are strongly encouraged to participate or review the 
accompanying materials available online. Updated information and past 
application webinars can be found 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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045), and available at 
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department 
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4B212, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 365-7944. 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: MSAP, authorized under title IV, part D of the 
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.

[[Page 18615]]

    Under 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: As indicated by Congress in MSAP's authorizing 
legislation (section 4401(a) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231(a)), magnet 
schools have been a significant part of the Nation's effort over the 
past 40 years to achieve voluntary school desegregation. ``The use of 
magnet schools has increased dramatically since the inception of MSAP 
under the ESEA, with approximately 2,500,000 students nationwide 
attending such schools, of whom more than 69 percent are non-white,'' 
they state. ``Magnet schools offer a wide range of distinctive programs 
that have served as models for school improvement.'' Research suggests 
that increasing student's access to more diverse student bodies 
provides a range of benefits to all students, including improved 
leadership skills, social mobility, civic engagement, academic success, 
empathy, and understanding.\1\ Unfortunately, now, nearly 70 years 
after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, much of the progress 
toward school desegregation and equity has stalled or even reversed in 
many communities.\2\ For example, demographic isolation has been 
exacerbated by policy choices related to school assignment, zoning, and 
transportation options that create inequitable access to high-quality 
schools. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) documented 
this situation in a 2022 report showing that the ``student population 
has significantly diversified, but many schools remain divided along 
racial, ethnic, and economic lines.'' \3\ This finding builds on a 2016 
report from the GAO which documented the increase in percentages of 
schools with high concentrations of students from families with low 
incomes and high concentrations of students of particular racial 
backgrounds.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Kahlenberg, R.D., Potter, H., & Quick, K. (2019). A bold 
agenda for school integration. The Century Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED603383.
    \2\ Logan, J.R., Minca, E., & Adar, S. (2012). The Geography of 
Inequality: Why Separate Means Unequal in American Public Schools. 
Sociology of Education, 85(3), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040711431588.
    \3\ U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2022). ``K-12 
Education: Student Population Has Significantly Diversified, but 
Many Schools Remain Divided Along Racial, Ethnic, and Economic 
Lines.'' GAO-22-104737. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104737.
    \4\ U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2016). ``K-12 
Education: Better Use of Information Could Help Agencies Identify 
Disparities and Address Racial Discrimination.'' GAO-16-345. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-16-345.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the 1980s, MSAP has supported LEAs with funding to create 
magnet schools, defined under section 4402 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 
7231a, as public elementary or secondary schools or education centers 
that offer ``a special curriculum capable of attracting substantial 
numbers of students of different racial backgrounds,'' as part of their 
efforts to voluntarily desegregate their schools or meet the intended 
outcomes of desegregation plans required by a final order of any court 
of the United States, a court of any State, or any other State agency 
or official of competent jurisdiction (herein referred to as ``required 
plans'' or ``required desegregation plans''). Proposed MSAP projects 
should be designed to foster high-quality educational programs in newly 
developed or revitalized magnet schools, as a means of attracting a 
diverse group of students and families in order to reduce or eliminate 
the isolation of a particular minority group (or prevent such isolation 
from occurring), as well as to provide equitable access for all 
students to courses of instruction that substantially strengthen 
knowledge of academic subjects and the attainment of tangible skills. 
In accordance with section 4405 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231d, 34 CFR 
280.2 and 280.20, as described in section III, paragraph 4 of this 
notice, applicants must demonstrate how Federal funding of the proposed 
magnet schools will assist in achieving objectives related to the 
reduction, prevention, or elimination of MGI either in the proposed 
magnets or in the specific schools from which those students are coming 
(the magnets' feeder schools) to address the goals identified in the 
LEA's required or voluntary desegregation plan. (See section III, 
paragraph 4 for further information regarding desegregation plans). In 
addition, to address another goal of the MSAP program, we encourage 
applicants to strongly consider how the development, implementation, 
and expansion of magnet school programs will assist the LEA in 
achieving systemic reforms to provide students with the opportunity, 
resources and supports to meet challenging State academic standards. 
Finally, should LEAs wish to test new transportation options in order 
to widen student access to magnet programming, we note that under 
section 4407(a)(9) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231f, MSAP permits 
applicants to support student transportation to and from magnet 
schools, provided the costs are sustainable beyond the grant period and 
do not constitute a significant portion of an LEA's grant funds.
    To lead effective magnet schools and implement a MSAP project, LEAs 
work across several different work strands over the grant period. The 
Magnet School Development Framework (https://oese.ed.gov/files/2022/03/Toolkits_MSAP-DevelopmentFramework.pdf) is one tool to help guide 
project development. The framework speaks to five core school-specific 
areas to which to attend: diversity, inclusion, and equity; enrollment 
and recruitment; curriculum and instruction; family engagement; and 
partnership development. It also identifies six key elements for school 
and community leaders in cultivating effective schools: leadership and 
management; communication; data use; theme integration; professional 
development; and planning for sustainability. MSAP funding provides a 
key lever for LEAs to collaborate across schools and districts, as well 
as with key stakeholders, including educators, families and students, 
and external

[[Page 18616]]

governmental, nonprofit, business, and other community partners to 
improve and expand efforts in each of these areas.
    To streamline and, for new applicants, enhance the accessibility of 
the MSAP application process, for the FY 2024 competition there are two 
absolute priorities under which applicants may apply: Absolute Priority 
1, Applications from New Potential Grantees; and Absolute Priority 2, 
Applications from Grantees That Are Not New Potential Grantees. LEAs 
that, as of the deadline date for submission of applications, are 
currently operating an active MSAP grant would apply under Absolute 
Priority 2. The selection criteria, which are used to evaluate 
applications and derived from MSAP's authorizing statute and 34 CFR 
280.31 and 75.210, remain similar for applications submitted under both 
Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2. However, applicants under 
Absolute Priority 2 have an opportunity in their applications to 
demonstrate how the proposed project outlined in this application would 
allow the LEA(s) to extend and build on work currently underway using 
MSAP funds, particularly in their responses to the competitive 
preference priorities.
    As with previous MSAP competitions, the FY 2024 MSAP competition 
includes several competitive preference and invitational priorities. 
Competitive Preference Priorities 1-4 were established by Congress in 
the reauthorization of MSAP under ESEA as specific tools for promoting 
educational equity and commitments to excellence within magnet schools. 
These competitive preference priorities address an LEA's need for MSAP 
funding, the evidence base undergirding the LEA's program design for 
new or significantly revitalized magnet schools, the means of student 
selection for admission including use of lotteries and other non-
academic means, and attention to socioeconomic factors in promoting 
diversity. Applicants under both absolute priorities are encouraged to 
address Competitive Preference Priorities 1-4 while considering the 
development of strong and sustainable magnet schools and programs in 
their projects.
    This competition also includes two additional competitive 
preference priorities which are targeted to only those applicants under 
Absolute Priority 2: Applications from Grantees That Are Not New 
Potential Grantees. These are: Competitive Preference Priority 5, 
Promoting Equity in Student Access to Educational Resources and 
Opportunities and Competitive Preference Priority 6, Supporting a 
Diverse Educator Workforce and Professional Growth to Strengthen 
Student Learning. Competitive Preference Priorities 5 and 6, rooted in 
the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities,\5\ are designed to encourage 
MSAP grantees to address broader systemic, policy, and collaborative 
leadership challenges in the environments in which the magnet schools 
function to further promote their success.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 86 FR 70612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Competitive Preference Priority 5, applicants must review 
sources of inequity, and as part of their MSAP project, plan to develop 
or implement specific strategies to address the root causes of these 
inequities, which include collaboration with other LEAs, other 
governmental or community agencies, or across district leadership to 
effect policy change to address barriers to student's access to 
equitable opportunities. Applicants should consider establishing inter-
district magnet programs, consistent with a 2019 Urban Institute report 
finding that two-thirds of total school segregation in metropolitan 
areas is due to segregation between, rather than within, school 
districts.\6\ The Department is also interested in projects from LEAs 
that propose to coordinate with other relevant government entities--
such as housing and transportation authorities and through similar 
programs such as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Rental Assistance Demonstration program--given the impact that other 
public policy choices may have on the composition of a school's student 
body. Finally, applicants could describe plans related to selection of 
magnet school sites or revising school boundaries, attendance zones, or 
feeder patterns to take into account neighboring communities; and 
formal merging or coordination among multiple educational jurisdictions 
in order to pool and more equitably allocate resources, provide 
transportation, expand curricula and program options, and expand high-
quality public school options for students from low-income backgrounds. 
High-quality responses to Competitive Preference Priority 5 will 
identify how the specific strategies outlined are integrated components 
of their overall MSAP project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Monarrez, T., Kisida, B., Chingos, M. When Is a School 
Segregated? Making Sense of Segregation 65 Years after Brown v. 
Board of Education (2019), Urban Institute, www.urban.org/research/publication/when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation-65-years-after-brown-v-board-education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, to increase the overall diversity of the school 
settings in which students learn and to best support a diverse set of 
learners within proposed magnet schools, under Competitive Preference 
Priority 6, applicants are asked to demonstrate connections between 
their proposed MSAP projects and broader school or district efforts to 
increase students' access to a diverse group of educators who are well-
prepared and supported to provide them with high-quality instruction. 
High-quality responses to Competitive Preference Priority 6 will 
specify how the applicant intends to leverage the LEA's broader human 
resource efforts as an integrated component in meeting the goals and 
objectives of the MSAP project.
    This competition also includes one invitational priority for 
projects that propose to establish whole school magnet programs in 
order to promote equitable access to learning opportunities for 
students in ways that allow all students within a school to 
successfully engage in the special curriculum or program. Whole school 
magnets, in which all students in the school participate in the magnet 
programming, tend to more effectively offer diverse and equitable 
opportunities, where magnet programs within schools can have the effect 
of creating separate tracks and programs for different student 
populations within the school.\7\ While magnet programs within schools 
are permissible for MSAP, consideration should be given as to how these 
will not inadvertently lead to further minority group isolation across 
tracks as well as to how the funded programming may benefit students 
across the whole school.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ George, J., Darling-Hammond, L., & Plasencia, S. (2023). 
Advancing integration and equity through magnet schools [Policy 
brief]. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/advancing-integration-equity-magnet-schools-brief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, for several years the Department has worked to promote the 
effective use of evidence and evaluation in program development. MSAP 
promotes the use of evidence in identifying practices to improve LEAs' 
capacity to continue effectively operating magnet schools beyond the 
funding period. This competition provides opportunities for applicants 
to address the use of evidence in several ways. First, under Selection 
Criterion (a)--Desegregation, outlined in section V, paragraph 1(a) of 
this notice, applicants are encouraged to demonstrate the conceptual 
framework underlying the project, for example, in the form of a logic 
model or similar

[[Page 18617]]

graphic organizer, to demonstrate how, strategically, their proposed 
project activities would allow them to meet the purposes of MSAP. As 
described above, this competition also includes a competitive 
preference priority promoting the use of evidence to undergird proposed 
programming in new and significantly revitalized magnet schools. 
Finally, this competition includes a selection criterion related to the 
quality of the applicant's evaluation plan (see section V, paragraph 
1(c)). The first two factors of this selection criterion address the 
applicant's plan for monitoring the implementation of their project 
activities, both in response to program-wide performance measures (see 
section IV, paragraph 5 of this notice) and the applicant's specific 
project objectives. The third factor applies to the applicant's plans 
to meet the requirement in section VI, paragraph 4(c) that grantees 
conduct an impact analysis of a specific project component or 
components in a study designed to yield results at the level of 
promising evidence. For those applicants applying under Absolute 
Priority 1, a high-quality response to section V, paragraph 1(e)(3) 
will outline the plans to identify the appropriate focus for this 
promising evidence evaluation plan and steps the applicant would take 
to initiate such an evaluation plan. For applicants applying under 
Absolute Priority 2, a high-quality response will describe the specific 
project components to be evaluated through the evaluation plan and the 
steps the applicant would take to create, at a minimum, a well-designed 
and implemented correlational study with statistical controls for 
selection bias designed to produce promising evidence. The Department 
is committed to supporting the use of evidence in developing an LEA's 
capacity for the effective implementation of magnet schools in their 
community, as well as to building the body of evidence supporting 
effective approaches to these efforts. However, we also recognize that 
identifying entities with appropriate expertise to help craft and 
implement such an impact analysis could take time and should not serve 
as a barrier for new potential grantees.
    Priorities: This competition includes two absolute priorities, six 
competitive preference priorities, and one invitational priority. 
Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 are from the Administrative Priorities for 
Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on March 
9, 2020 (85 FR 13640) (Administrative 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. Competitive Preference 
Priorities 5 and 6 are 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).
    Absolute Priorities: For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in which 
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet Absolute Priority 
1 or Absolute Priority 2. Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 constitute 
separate funding categories and will be considered for funding under 
two separate ranked orders. The Secretary intends to award grants under 
the separately ranked orders under each of these absolute priorities 
provided that the applications submitted under each are of sufficient 
quality.
    These priorities are:
    Absolute Priority 1: Applications from New Potential Grantees.
    (a) Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate the 
applicant does not, as of the deadline date for submission of 
applications, have an active grant, including through membership in a 
group application submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-75.129, 
under the program from which it seeks funds.
    (b) For the purpose of this priority, a grant or contract is active 
until the end of the grant's or contract's project or funding period, 
including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee's or 
contractor's authority to obligate funds.
    Absolute Priority 2: Applications from Grantees that are not New 
Potential Grantees.
    (a) Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate the 
applicant has, as of the deadline date for submission of applications, 
an active grant, including through membership in a group application 
submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-75.129, under the program 
from which it seeks funds.
    (b) For the purpose of this priority, a grant or contract is active 
until the end of the grant's or contract's project or funding period, 
including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee's or 
contractor's authority to obligate funds.
    Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2024 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 2 additional 
points to an application depending on how well the application meets 
Competitive Preference Priority 1, up to 3 additional points to an 
application depending on how well the application meets Competitive 
Preference Priority 2, up to 3 additional points to an application 
depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference 
Priority 3, up to 5 additional points to an application depending on 
how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4, up to 
8 additional points to an application depending on how well the 
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 5, and up to 4 
additional points to an application depending on how well the 
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 6. Applicants that 
apply under Absolute Priority 1 may choose to address one or more of 
Competitive Preference Priorities 1-4 for up to a total of 13 
additional points, depending on how well the application meets one or 
more of the priorities. Applicants that apply under Absolute Priority 2 
may choose to address one or more of Competitive Preference Priorities 
1-6 for up to a total of 25 additional points, depending on how well 
the application meets one or more of the priorities.
    These priorities are:
    Competitive Preference Priority 1--Need for Assistance (up to 2 
points).
    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).

[[Page 18618]]

    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 3 
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--Socioeconomic Diversity (up to 5 
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--Promoting Equity in Student 
Access to Educational Resources and Opportunities (up to 8 points).
    Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that it proposes 
a project designed to promote educational equity and adequacy in 
resources and opportunity for underserved students--
    (a) In one or more of the following educational settings:
    (1) Early learning programs.
    (2) Elementary school.
    (3) Middle school.
    (4) High school.
    (5) Career and technical education programs.
    (6) Out-of-school-time settings.
    (7) Alternative schools and programs;
    (b) That examines the sources of inequity and inadequacy and 
implements responses, and that includes increasing student racial or 
socioeconomic diversity, through developing or implementing evidence-
based policies or strategies that may include one or more of the 
following:
    (1) Inter-district coordination.
    (2) Cross-agency collaboration, such as with housing or 
transportation authorities.
    (3) School assignment or admissions policies that are designed to 
promote socioeconomic diversity and provide equitable access to 
educational opportunities for students from low-income backgrounds or 
students residing in neighborhoods experiencing concentrated poverty.
    Competitive Preference Priority 6--Supporting a Diverse Educator 
Workforce and Professional Growth to Strengthen Student Learning (up to 
4 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 (as may be defined in the program statute or 
regulations) districts' capacity to hire, support, and retain an 
effective and diverse educator workforce, through one or more of the 
following:
    (a) Providing beginning educators with evidence-based mentoring or 
induction programs.
    (b) 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.
    (c) Developing data systems, timelines, and action plans for 
promoting inclusive and bias-free human resources practices that 
promote and support development of educator diversity.
    (d) Providing opportunities for educators to be involved in the 
design and implementation of local and district wide initiatives that 
advance systemic changes.
    Invitational Priority: For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in which 
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition, this priority is an invitational priority. All applicants 
may address the invitational priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do 
not give an application that meets this invitational priority a 
competitive or absolute preference over other applications.
    This priority is:
    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 that are offered to less than the entire school 
population.
    Definitions: The definition of ``evidence-based'' is from 20 U.S.C. 
7801. The definitions of ``desegregation,'' ``feeder school,'' ``magnet 
school,'' and ``minority group'' 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-

[[Page 18619]]

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.
    Magnet school means a public elementary school, public secondary 
school, public elementary education center, or public secondary 
education center that offers a special curriculum capable of attracting 
substantial numbers of students of different racial backgrounds.
    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).
    Minority group means the following:
    (1) American Indian or Alaskan Native. A person having origins in 
any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains 
cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community 
recognition.
    (2) Asian or Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of 
the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian 
subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. This area includes, for example, 
China, India, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, and Samoa.
    (3) Black (Not of Hispanic Origin). A person having origins in any 
of the black racial groups of Africa.
    (4) Hispanic. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or 
South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
    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 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 student groups:
    (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.

[[Page 18620]]

    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 WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 4.1), as 
well as the more recent WWC Handbooks released in August 2022 (Version 
5.0), 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 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, 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) 
Administrative Priorities. (f) 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 2024, of which we intend to use an estimated $84,000,000 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 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 2025 from the list of 
unfunded applications from this competition.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $1,500,000-$3,500,000 per budget year.
    Maximum Award: Under section 4408(c) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 
7231h(3), awards to an LEA or a consortium of LEAs must not exceed 
$15,000,000 for the project period. Under section 4408(b) of the ESEA, 
20 U.S.C. 7231h(2), grantees may not expend more than 50 percent of 
year one grant funds and not more than 15 percent of years 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: 9-11.
    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, paragraph 4 of this 
notice.
    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.
    4. Other--Desegregation Plans: Under section 4404 of the ESEA, 20 
U.S.C. 7231c, and 34 CFR 280.20(e) and (f), to establish eligibility to 
receive MSAP assistance, applicants must submit with their applications 
one of the following types of desegregation plans: (i) a desegregation 
plan required by a final 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 outlined in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g) 
in order to satisfy the eligibility requirements in 34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) 
and (b).
    Required information for submission under each type of 
desegregation plan is as follows:
    Required Desegregation Plans
    1. Desegregation plans required by a final court order. An 
applicant submitting a desegregation plan required by a final 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 desegregation 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 otherwise 
permits the inclusion of magnet schools.
    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 development of magnet schools as outlined in 
the proposed project. 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

[[Page 18621]]

or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed modification for 
review and approval to the OCR regional office that approved its 
original plan. Proof of approval for plan modifications should be 
emailed to Gillian Cohen-Boyer at [email protected] or mailed to: U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4B212, 
Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 365-7944.
    Voluntary Desegregation Plans
    Applicants proposing MSAP projects under voluntary desegregation 
plans must submit with their application a copy of the plan documenting 
the applicant's or consortia's intention to use magnet schools as a 
strategy to reduce, eliminate or prevent MGI, either in the proposed 
magnet schools or in the schools to which the magnet school students 
would otherwise attend had the magnet schools not been available, the 
``feeder'' schools, as well as documentation of school board approval 
(or documentation of other official adoption of the plan by a governing 
authority for the LEA (or consortium of LEAs) as required under 34 CFR 
280.20(f)(2)).
    Under 34 CFR 280.2(b), the Secretary approves a voluntary 
desegregation plan only if it is determined that for each magnet school 
for which funding is sought, the magnet school will reduce, eliminate, 
or prevent MGI within the period of the grant award, either in the 
magnet school or in a feeder school, as appropriate. A voluntary 
desegregation plan must be approved by the Department each time an 
application is considered for funding.
    Please note that while applicants with voluntary desegregation 
plans must provide evidence of school board approval as a part of the 
required application materials for consideration in this competition, 
these plans do not require Department approval prior to application 
submission. Under section 4404 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231c, and 34 CFR 
280.2(b), as part of the eligibility review, the Department will review 
applicants' voluntary desegregation plans and determine on a case-by-
case basis, consistent with 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(1), whether, 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. The 
Department's 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. LEAs that were previously subject to a required 
desegregation plan but have achieved unitary status are considered 
voluntary desegregation plan applicants and should provide the 
documentation discussed in this section.
    To assist the Department in conducting this review and applicants 
in submitting succinct and comprehensive information, the application 
package for this competition includes a Desegregation Plan Form OMB-
1855-0011 for applicants to summarize the specific goals and objectives 
of their desegregation plan and explain how MSAP funding will assist in 
achieving their objectives related to the reduction, prevention, or 
elimination of MGI either in the proposed magnet schools or feeder 
schools. Applicants are encouraged to review the Desegregation Plan 
Form for the full set of instructions. In addition to confirming 
applicants' eligibility for an award, this form is used to inform the 
review of applicants' project narratives against the selection criteria 
in section V, paragraph 1 of this notice.
    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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at 
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.
    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 125 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.

[[Page 18622]]

    The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the 
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the 
assurances, certifications, desegregation plan and related information; 
or the one-page abstract, the resumes, or letters of support. The 
recommended page limit applies only to the application narrative. 
Please note that the Guidance for Applicants available on the MSAP 
website competition page specifically identifies how language for 
competitive priorities and selection criteria can be cross-referenced 
to reduce redundancies and streamline responses.
    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, 
preferably by April 15, 2024 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, 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231 
and 7231d.
    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.
    (a) Desegregation (up to 25 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. (section 4401(b)(1) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231) 
(up to 10 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(a)(2)(v)) (up to 5 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(c)(2)(i)) (up to 5 points)
    (4) 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(c)(2)(iii)) (up to 5 points)
    (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 area or 
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. (section 4405(b)(1)(B) of the 
ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231d(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(d)(3)(v)) (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(c)(2)(iv)) (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(d)(3)(ix)) (up to 6 points)
    (5) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes, 
activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or 
organization at the end of Federal funding. (34 CFR 75.210(f)(2)(vii)) 
(up to 6 points)
    (c) Quality of the management plan (up to 10 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(g)(2)(i)) (up to 5 points)
    (2) 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(f)(2)(v)) (up to 5 points)
    (d) Quality of personnel (up to 20 points).
    (1) The Secretary determines the extent to which--
    (i) The project director (if one is used) is qualified to manage 
the project; (34 CFR 280.31(b)(2)(i))
    (ii) Other key personnel are qualified to manage the project; (34 
CFR 280.31(b)(2)(ii)) and
    (iii) Teachers who will provide instruction in participating magnet 
schools are qualified to implement the special curriculum of the magnet 
schools. (34 CFR 280.31(b)(2)(iii)) (up to 15 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(b)(3)) (up to 5 points)
    (e) Quality of the project evaluation (up to 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 the following factors:
    For applications under Absolute Priority 1:
    (1) How the applicant will assess, monitor, and evaluate the impact 
of the activities funded under this part on student achievement and 
integration. (section 4405(b)(1)(D) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231d 
(b)(1)(D)) (up to 5 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(h)(2)(iv)) (up 
to 5 points)
    (3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for 
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies. (34 
CFR 75.210(h)(2)(iii)) (up to 5 points).
    For applications under Absolute Priority 2:
    (1) How the applicant will assess, monitor, and evaluate the impact 
of the activities funded under this part on student achievement and 
integration. (section 4405(b)(1)(D) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231d 
(b)(1)(D)) (up to 5 points)
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
of objective performance measures that are

[[Page 18623]]

clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will 
produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible. (34 
CFR 75.210(h)(2)(iv)) (up to 5 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 5 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 
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 the applicant has an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
    (b) At the end of the project period, you must submit a final 
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the 
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award recipient, grantees 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 report 
with the results of a study designed to yield results at the level of 
promising evidence or higher, undertaken during the grant to assist the 
LEA in building capacity to continue operating magnet schools at a high 
performance level after Federal funding ends. The plans for this study, 
which may be narrowly tailored to a specific project component(s), are 
specifically what is being assessed under selection criterion factor 
(e)(3).

[[Page 18624]]

    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 for all students, 
disaggregated for each racial and ethnic group, 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 for all students across 
each racial and ethnic group 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 3 years after Federal funding ends.
    (e) The percentage increase of students for all students across 
each racial and ethnic group in MSAP-funded magnet schools still 
operating magnet school programs who score proficient or above on State 
assessments in reading/language arts 3 years after Federal funding ends 
as compared to the final project year.
    (f) The percentage increase of students for all students across 
each racial and ethnic group in MSAP-funded magnet schools still 
operating magnet school programs who score proficient or above on State 
assessments in mathematics 3 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 your search to documents published 
by the Department.

Adam Schott,
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. 2024-05420 Filed 3-13-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P