[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