[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48517-48523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-12502]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter VI

[ED-2024-OPE-0069]


Postsecondary Student Success Grant

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) proposes priorities, 
requirements, and definitions for use in the Postsecondary Student 
Success Grant (PSSG) program, Assistance Listing Number 84.116M. The 
Department may use one or more of these priorities, requirements, and 
definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2024 and later years. 
We intend for these priorities, requirements, and definitions to 
support projects that equitably improve postsecondary student outcomes, 
including retention, upward transfer, and completions of value, by 
leveraging data and implementing, scaling, and rigorously evaluating 
evidence-based activities to support data-driven decisions and actions 
that lead to credentials that support economic success and further 
education.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 8, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at www.regulations.gov. However, if you require an accommodation 
or cannot otherwise submit your comments via www.regulations.gov, 
please contact the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT. The Department will not accept comments submitted 
by fax or by email, or comments submitted after the comment period 
closes. To ensure the Department does not receive duplicate copies, 
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the 
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit 
your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, 
including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting 
comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under 
``FAQ.''
    Note: The Department's policy is generally to make comments 
received from members of the public available for public viewing in 
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include 
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly 
available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nemeka Mason-Clercin, U.S. Department 
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 987-1340. Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S. Department 
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5C127, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7953. 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: 
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. To ensure that 
your comments have maximum effect in developing the final priorities, 
requirements, and definitions, we urge you to clearly identify the 
specific section of the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 and their 
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result 
from these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. Please 
let us know of any further ways we could reduce potential costs or 
increase potential

[[Page 48518]]

benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of 
the program.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect public 
comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions 
by accessing Regulations.gov. To inspect comments in person, please 
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the 
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate 
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who 
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the 
public rulemaking record for these proposed priorities, requirements, 
and definitions. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type 
of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the PSSG program is to equitably 
improve postsecondary student outcomes, including retention, upward 
transfer, and completions of value, by leveraging data and 
implementing, scaling, and rigorously evaluating evidence-based 
activities to support data-driven decisions and actions that lead to 
credentials that support economic success and further education.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d.

Proposed Priorities

    We propose five priorities. We may use one or more of these 
priorities in any year in which this program is in effect.

Background

    In today's economy, 67 percent of U.S. jobs require a postsecondary 
credential, and by 2031, this percentage is projected to grow to 71 
percent.\1\ Data show that as educational attainment increases, median 
earnings steadily increase.\2\ One in three first-time students at two-
year colleges, and two in three first-time students at four-year 
colleges, graduate from the first institution they attend within three 
and six years respectively.\3\ Students from low-income backgrounds, 
first-generation students, students of color, adult students, students 
with disabilities, veterans, and other students who have been 
historically underserved in postsecondary education often fare 
worse.\4\ It is critical for institutions of higher education (IHEs) to 
provide student support systems to improve retention, progression, and 
completion rates for all students, while decreasing economic and social 
equity gaps for students of color and students from low-income 
backgrounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Van Der Werf, M., & Quinn, M.C. 
(2023). After Everything: Projections of jobs, education, and 
training requirements through 2031. Georgetown University--
Georgetown Public Policy Institute Center on Education and the 
Workforce.
    \2\ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2023, September 6). 
Education pays--Earnings and unemployment rates by educational 
attainment, 2023.
    \3\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education, 
National Center for Education Statistics (2024). Retrieved from: 
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.20.asp.
    \4\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020237.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Students of color and students from low-income backgrounds still 
face barriers to successfully enrolling in and completing 
college.5 6 Between 2018 and 2022, there was a seven percent 
decrease in undergraduate enrollment overall, but larger decreases for 
Black (8 percent), American Indian/Alaska Native (10 percent) students, 
and Pacific Islander students (13 percent). From 2018 to 2022, there 
also has been a decrease in enrollment for Pell Grant recipients (13 
percent).\7\ In addition, while graduation rates (within 6 years after 
entry) have increased in four-year institutions overall (5.2 percentage 
points) since 2015 (2009 cohort), double-digit graduation rate gaps 
between some underrepresented students of color and White students 
remain (e.g., 22 percentage point gap for Black students), and there is 
a 17 percentage point gap in completers (within 8 years after entry) 
between Pell and non-Pell full-time, first-time students in public 
four-year institutions.\8\ The same issues are occurring in two-year 
institutions, with a modest overall graduation rate (within 3 years 
after entry) increase (3.1 percentage points) since 2012 (2009 cohort), 
but declining rates for Black and Hispanic students, which has 
increased the graduation gap between White students and some 
underrepresented students of color.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Thiem, K.C., & Dasgupta, N. (2022). From precollege to 
career: Barriers facing historically marginalized students and 
evidence[hyphen]based solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review, 
16(1), 212-251.
    \6\ Rabourn, K.E., BrckaLorenz, A., & Shoup, R. (2018). 
Reimagining student engagement: How nontraditional adult learners 
engage in traditional postsecondary environments. The Journal of 
Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 22-33.
    \7\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_306.10.asp and College Board. (2023, 
October). Trends in Higher Education Series: Trends in Student Aid 
2023.
    \8\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (2023). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.10.asp and U.S. Department of Education, 
National Center for Education Statistics (2023). Retrieved from 
nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?query=&query2=&resultType=all&page=1&sortBy=date_desc&surveyComponents=Outcome%20Measures%20(OM)&collectionYears=2021-
22&sources=Tables%20Library&overlayTableId=36029.
    \9\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (2024). Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_326.20.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, as more underserved students attend college, 
additional and different resources are often required to support them 
in successfully completing their credentials. Today, 25 percent of 
postsecondary students are age 25 or older,\10\ about 70 percent of 
students work while enrolled,\11\ and 22 percent of students are 
parents.\12\ At public, 2-year degree-granting institutions, 31 percent 
of students enrolled are age 25 or older,\13\ and 42 percent of all 
student parents attend community colleges.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ National Center for Education Statistics (2022). Retrieved 
from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
    \11\ Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Melton, M., & Price, E.W. 
(2015). Learning while earning: The new normal. Georgetown 
University--Georgetown Public Policy Institute Center on Education 
and the Workforce.
    \12\ Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D., & Polk, P. 
(2019). Parents in College: By the Numbers. Institute for Women's 
Policy Research.
    \13\ National Center for Education Statistics (2022). Retrieved 
from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes.
    \14\ Cruse, L.R., Holtzman, T., Gault, B., Croom, D., & Polk, P. 
(2019). Parents in College: By the Numbers. Institute for Women's 
Policy Research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Research has found that IHEs can employ a multifaceted and 
integrated approach and mitigate the barriers that hinder students in 
their educational trajectories, by addressing academic, financial, and 
other challenges.\15\ Moreover, IHEs that have improved completion 
rates, including for underserved students, use timely, disaggregated, 
actionable data to identify institutional barriers to student success, 
implement interventions, and evaluate impact on an ongoing basis.\16\

[[Page 48519]]

Institutional leadership is critical to ensure that the student 
experience is intentionally designed to increase student retention, 
progression, and completion rates.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Scrivener, S., Weiss, M.J., Ratledge, A., Rudd, T., Sommo, 
C., & Fresques, H. (2015). Doubling Graduation Rates: Three-Year 
Effects of CUNY's Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) for 
Developmental Education Students. New York: MDRC.
    \16\ Phillips, B.C., & Horowitz, J.E. (2013). Maximizing data 
use: A focus on the completion agenda. In Special Issue: The College 
Completion Agenda-Practical Approaches for Reaching the Big Goal. 
New Directions for Community Colleges, 2013(164), 17-25.
    \17\ McNair, T.B., Albertine, S., McDonald, N., Major Jr., T., & 
Cooper, M.A. (2022). Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture 
of leadership for student success (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The first three proposed priorities in this document would 
establish a multitier structure to enable the Department to link the 
amount of funding an applicant may receive to the quality of evidence 
supporting the efficacy of a proposed project and to the proposed 
project's plan to scale the evidence-based strategy. This approach 
would enable the Department to meet the congressional intent outlined 
in the House Report 117-403 and the explanatory statement accompanying 
Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (117 Pub. L. 
328) to execute the grant program as a tiered-evidence competition in 
the same structure as the Education Innovation and Research (EIR) 
program. Congress continued this directive to the Department through 
the explanatory statement accompanying Division D of the Further 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (118 Pub. L. 47). The first 
proposed priority would give the Department the flexibility to select 
either Demonstrates a Rationale or Promising Evidence as the applicable 
evidence standard for Early Phase grants in a particular competition. 
The second and third proposed priorities would establish the applicable 
evidence and scale requirements for Mid Phase and Expansion Phase 
grants. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments 
on our proposed scale requirements under these two priorities, which 
have been determined by taking into consideration prior grantee awards.
    The fourth proposed priority would establish a priority for 
applicants who use data for continuous improvement in their programs. 
The fifth proposed priority would incentivize strategies that focus on 
credentials that lead to career outcomes that support graduates' 
economic success.

Proposed Priorities

    Proposed Priority 1--Early Phase.
    Projects that are designed to improve postsecondary success for 
underserved students, including retention, upward transfer, and 
completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further 
education, and are supported by evidence that meets the definition of 
Demonstrates a Rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) or Promising 
Evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1).
    Proposed Priority 2--Mid-Phase: Projects Supported by Moderate 
Evidence.
    Projects that are designed to improve success for underserved 
students, including retention, upward transfer, and completions of 
value that lead to economic success and/or further education, and are 
supported by evidence that meets the definition of Moderate Evidence 
(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1). Projects under this priority must be 
implemented at multiple institutions of higher education or multiple 
campuses of the same institution and propose to serve at least 2,000 
students.
    Proposed Priority 3--Expansion: Projects Supported by Strong 
Evidence.
    Projects that are designed to improve postsecondary success for 
underserved students, including retention, upward transfer, and 
completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further 
education, and are supported by evidence that meets the definition of 
Strong Evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1). Projects under this 
priority must be implemented at multiple institutions of higher 
education and propose to serve at least 10,000 students.
    Proposed Priority 4--Using Data for Continuous Improvement.
    Projects that propose to build upon demonstrated progress toward 
improved student outcomes, or that propose a plan to improve student 
outcomes, for underserved students by using data to continually assess 
and improve the outcomes associated with funded activities and sustain 
data-driven continuous improvement processes at the institution after 
the grant period.
    Applicants addressing this priority must--
    (a) Identify, or describe how they will develop, the performance 
and outcome measures they will use to monitor and evaluate 
implementation of the intervention(s), including baseline data, 
intermediate and annual targets, and disaggregation by student 
subgroups;
    (b) Describe how they will assess and address gaps in current data 
systems, tools, and capacity, and how they will monitor and respond to 
performance and outcome data to improve implementation of the 
intervention(s) on an ongoing basis and as part of formative and 
summative evaluation of the intervention(s); and
    (c) Describe how institutional leadership will be involved with, 
and supportive of, project leadership and how the project relates to 
the institution's broader student success priorities and improvement 
processes.
    Proposed Priority 5--Projects That Support College-to-Career 
Pathways and Supports.
    Projects that propose to build upon demonstrated progress toward 
integrating, or that propose a plan to integrate, career-connected 
learning and advising support into their postsecondary success 
strategies to ensure students earn credentials of value that lead to 
economic success and/or further education that leads to career 
progression. Projects may include aligning academic coursework with 
career pathways and outcomes; developing and implementing program-level 
credential maps to create college-to-career pathways, including across 
institutions via transfer; integrating career planning, counseling, and 
coaching into holistic advising support; offering work-based learning 
opportunities aligned with students' programs of study; and providing 
navigation support to help graduates transition from college to career.

Types of Priorities

    When inviting applications for a competition using one or more 
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal 
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
    Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only 
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR
    75.105(c)(3)).
    Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference 
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) 
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the 
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of 
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
    Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are 
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. 
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Proposed Requirements

     The Department proposes the following program requirements for 
this program. We may apply one or more of these requirements in any 
year in which this program is in effect and may limit the application 
of these requirements to one or more of the proposed priorities. The 
Department will announce within the notice inviting applications the 
final requirements that will apply to a

[[Page 48520]]

particular grant competition, and whether those requirements will apply 
to grantees applying under each proposed priority for this program.
    Proposed Requirement-1--Uses of Funds.
    Background: PSSG is funded under the Fund for the Improvement of 
Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) authority and was first authorized in 
FY 2023 as described in the explanatory statement accompanying Division 
H of the Consolidated Appropriation Act, 2023 (117 Pub. L. 328). In 
order to fully implement this program in the manner that Congress has 
directed, the Department proposes Uses of Funds to clarify to 
applicants and grantees flexibility, where applicable, and also 
specificity about the allowable activities under this program. The 
Department believes each of these activities would support the overall 
goal of the PSSG program.
    Proposed Requirement 1 would also clarify flexibility around using 
PSSG funding to provide financial assistance to students. Many of the 
strategies that meet the Moderate and Strong Evidence standard, 
including the evidence-based interventions explicitly mentioned in the 
explanatory statement, include financial assistance as a key project 
component. The Department believes that this program cannot fulfill 
congressional intent without providing the flexibility to use funding 
for this activity. We do, however, note that under section 741(d) of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA) these funds cannot 
be used to provide direct financial assistance to students who do not 
meet the eligibility requirements of section 484(a).

Proposed Requirement

    Program funds must be used for one or more of the following 
allowable uses of funds:
    (a) Developing and using data systems, tools, and training to 
implement data-driven processes and interventions as part of a 
comprehensive continuous improvement effort; and
    (b) Implementing student success strategies, including whole-
college improvement models such as Guided Pathways; course redesign to 
implement co-requisite remediation or career-connected math pathways; 
intensive, integrated advising models including program maps with 
progress checks, case management approaches, and coaching; financial 
support, including need-based aid, emergency aid, and basic needs and 
behavioral health support and services; transfer support (as 
applicable), including four-year transfer maps, co-enrollment and co-
advising across institutions, and regional transfer partnerships; 
career support, including integrated career planning, counseling, and 
coaching, work-based learning opportunities, and college-to-career 
navigation support; or other evidence-based student success strategies.
    Proposed Requirement 2--Indirect Cost Rate Information.
    Background: To maximize the grant resources that support direct 
costs, the Department is proposing to limit indirect costs to eight 
percent of a modified total direct cost base.

Proposed Requirement

    A grantee's indirect cost reimbursement is limited to eight percent 
of a modified total direct cost base. For more information regarding 
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please 
see www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
    Proposed Requirement 3--Matching Requirements and Exceptions.
    Background: The Department proposes to require that grantees 
provide a ten percent match of non-Federal to Federal contributions. 
This proposed requirement is intended to leverage the Federal funds and 
to ensure alignment of such activities to the institution's strategic 
plan. The Department also proposes waiver authority so that 
institutions located in high-poverty areas, that enroll high numbers of 
low-income students, or that are otherwise under-resourced such that 
complying with this matching requirement would be overly burdensome, 
can still benefit from this program.
    Proposed Requirement 3:
    (a) Matching Requirement. Grantees must provide a ten percent 
match, which may include in-kind donations.
    (b) Waiver Authority. The Secretary may waive the matching 
requirement on a case-by-case basis upon a showing of any of the 
following exceptional circumstances:
    (1) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program to serve 
as an area with high rates of poverty in the lead applicant's 
geographic location, defined as a Census tract, a set of contiguous 
Census tracts, an American Indian Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal 
Statistical Area (as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau), Alaska Native 
Village Statistical Area or Alaska Native Regional Corporation Area, 
Native Hawaiian Homeland Area, or other Tribal land or county that has 
a poverty rate of at least 25 percent as determined every 5 years using 
American Community Survey 5-Year data;
    (2) Serving a significant population of students from low-income 
backgrounds at the lead applicant location, defined as at least 50 
percent (or the eligibility threshold for the appropriate institutional 
sector available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.html#app) of degree-seeking enrolled students receiving 
need-based grant aid under title IV of the HEA; or
    (3) Significant economic hardship as demonstrated by low average 
educational and general expenditures per full-time equivalent 
undergraduate student at the lead applicant institution, in comparison 
with the average educational and general expenditures per full-time 
equivalent undergraduate student of institutions that offer similar 
instruction without need of a waiver, as determined by the Secretary in 
accordance with the annual process of designation of title III and 
title V institutions.
    Proposed Requirement 4: Limitation on Grant Awards.
    Background: The Department proposes to allow the Secretary, in a 
given PSSG competition, to limit eligibility for new awards to 
applicants without current active grants under this program. The 
Department believes that this proposed requirement is necessary to 
support the program's evidence-building objective by ensuring the 
integrity of the project evaluations funded under this program. 
Supporting multiple PSSG projects for the same grantee could introduce 
bias that would negatively impact the quality of the evaluations. For 
example, if project participants receive support under multiple PSSG 
grants, the evaluation of the PSSG-supported strategies may overstate 
the results of a specific project. Similarly, if students in the 
comparison group for one PSSG project are receiving services under a 
separate PSSG project, then the evaluation of the initial project could 
understate the impact of the intervention.

Proposed Requirement

    The Department will make awards to only applicants that are not the 
individual or lead applicant in a current active grant from the PSSG 
grant program.
    Proposed Requirement 5: Supplement-not-Supplant.
    Background: The Department recognizes that many institutions are 
engaged in efforts to increase postsecondary success for their students 
using both Federal and non-Federal funding. To ensure that the PSSG 
funding does not either duplicate or replace, but instead augments such

[[Page 48521]]

efforts, we are proposing a supplement-not-supplant requirement.

Proposed Requirement

    Grant funds must be used so that they supplement and, to the extent 
practical, increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the 
activities to be carried out under the grant and in no case supplant 
those funds.
    Proposed Requirement 6: Independent Evaluation.
    Background: The Department proposes to require grantees to conduct 
an independent evaluation of the project and submit the evaluation 
report to ERIC, the Department of Education's comprehensive 
bibliographic and full-text database of education research and 
information, sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). 
ERIC is available at https://eric.ed.gov. This proposed requirement 
would enable the Department to meet the congressional intent outlined 
in the House Report 117-403 and the Explanatory Statement accompanying 
Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328) that all grantees carry out rigorous independent evaluations of 
their projects. By requiring timely sharing of the evaluations with IES 
so that the evaluations can be reviewed by the What Works 
Clearinghouse, the Department would meet its goals of both supporting 
the implementation of evidence-based interventions and building the 
evidence base about what works to improve retention, upward transfer, 
and completions of value that lead to economic success and/or further 
education.

Proposed Requirement

    Grantees must conduct an independent evaluation of the 
effectiveness of the project and submit the evaluation report to ERIC, 
available at https://eric.ed.gov/, in a timely manner.
    Proposed Requirement 7: Eligible Entities.
    Background: The Department proposes limiting eligibility to 
institutions that are designated as eligible under the HEA titles III 
and V programs, nonprofits that are not IHEs or associated with an IHE 
in partnership with institutions that are designated as eligible under 
the HEA titles III and V programs, States in partnerships with 
institutions that are designated as eligible under the HEA titles III 
and V programs, and systems of public institutions of higher education. 
Institutions designated as eligible under titles III and V include 
Historically Black Colleges or Universities (HBCUs), Tribally 
Controlled Colleges or Universities (TCCUs), Minority-Serving 
Institutions (MSIs), and other institutions with high enrollment of 
needy students and below average full-time equivalent (FTE) 
expenditures, including community colleges. The Department believes 
that targeting funding to these IHEs is the best use of the available 
funding because these institutions disproportionately enroll students 
from groups who are underrepresented among college completers, such as 
low-income students. Supporting retention, upward transfer, and 
completion strategies at these institutions offers the greatest 
potential to close gaps in postsecondary outcomes and to increase 
economic mobility in this country. Additionally, these under-resourced 
institutions are most in need of Federal assistance to implement and 
evaluate evidence-based postsecondary college retention, upward 
transfer, and completion interventions.

Proposed Requirement

    Eligible entities are title III or V institutions; nonprofits in 
partnership with title III or V institutions; States in partnership 
with title III or V institutions; or systems of public institutions of 
higher education.

Proposed Definitions

    The Department proposes the following definitions for this program. 
We propose to define ``English learner,'' ``Historically Black College 
or University,'' ``minority-serving institution,'' ``Tribal College or 
University,'' and ``underserved student'' similarly to the definitions 
in the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for 
Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on 
December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612). The Department also proposes a novel 
definition of ``students with disabilities'' which we believe would be 
less burdensome for eligible applicants to administer while providing 
full coverage for the range of students with disabilities enrolled at 
an institution of higher education who may benefit from receiving 
support services under this program. We may apply these definitions in 
any year in which this program is in effect.
    Completions of value means credentials that lead to further 
education through upward transfer or graduate education and/or that 
lead to economic mobility through earning enough to experience a 
premium over high school graduates and earning enough to recoup 
investment in postsecondary education.
    Continuous improvement means using plans for collecting and 
analyzing data about a project component's implementation and outcomes 
(including the pace and extent to which project outcomes are being met) 
to inform necessary changes throughout the project. These plans may 
include strategies to gather ongoing feedback from participants and 
stakeholders on the implementation of the project component.
    English learner means an individual who is an English learner as 
defined in section 8101(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual who is an English language 
learner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and 
Opportunity Act.
    Historically Black College or University means an institution that 
meets the eligibility requirements under section 322(2) of the HEA.
    Independent evaluation means an evaluation of a project component 
that is designed and carried out independently of, but in coordination 
with, the entities that develop or implement the project component.
    Minority-serving institution means an institution that is eligible 
to receive assistance under sections 317 through 320 of part A of title 
III, or under title V of the HEA.
    Student with a disability means any student enrolled at an 
institution of higher education (including those accepted for dual 
enrollment) who meets the definition of an individual with a disability 
as defined in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 
(42 U.S.C. 12102).
    Tribal College or University has the meaning ascribed it in section 
316(b)(3) of the HEA.
    Underserved student means a student in one or more of the following 
subgroups:
    (a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools with 
high concentrations of students living in poverty.
    (b) A student of color.
    (c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian 
Tribe.
    (d) An English learner.
    (e) A student with a disability.
    (f) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.
    (g) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, or 
intersex (LGBTQI+) student.
    (h) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.
    (i) A student who is the first in their family to attend 
postsecondary education.
    (j) A student enrolling in or seeking to enroll in postsecondary 
education for the first time at the age of 20 or older.

[[Page 48522]]

    (k) A student who is working full-time while enrolled in 
postsecondary education.
    (l) A student who is enrolled in, or is seeking to enroll in, 
postsecondary education who is eligible for a Pell Grant.
    (m) An adult student in need of improving their basic skills or an 
adult student with limited English proficiency.

Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions

    We will announce the final priorities, requirements, and 
definitions in a document in the Federal Register. We will determine 
the final priorities, requirements, and definitions after considering 
public comments on the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions and other information available to the Department. This 
document does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities, 
requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting 
applicable rulemaking requirements.
    Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, requirements, 
and definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal 
Register.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, 
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and 
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 
amended by Executive Order 14094, defines a ``significant regulatory 
action'' as an action likely to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more 
(adjusted every three years by the Administrator of Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic 
product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector 
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, 
public health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or Tribal 
governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would 
meaningfully further the President's priorities, or the principles set 
forth in this Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely 
manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
    We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under 
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the 
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review 
established in Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 
14094. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires 
that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing these proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would 
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory 
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net 
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes 
that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in 
Executive Order 13563.
    The potential costs associated with these priorities, requirements, 
and definitions would be minimal, while the potential benefits are 
significant. The Department believes that this proposed regulatory 
action would not impose significant costs on eligible entities. 
Participation in this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on 
applicants by this regulatory action would be limited to paperwork 
burden related to preparing an application. The potential benefits of 
implementing the program would outweigh the costs incurred by 
applicants, and the costs of carrying out activities associated with 
the application would be paid for with program funds. For these 
reasons, we have determined that the costs of implementation would not 
be burdensome for eligible applicants, including small entities.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those 
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.

Clarity of the Regulations

    Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write 
regulations that are easy to understand. The Secretary invites comments 
on how to make these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions 
easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the 
following:
     Are the requirements in the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions clearly stated?
     Do the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions 
contain technical terms or other wording that interferes with their 
clarity?
     Does the format of the proposed priorities, requirements, 
and definitions (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, 
paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
     Would the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions be easier

[[Page 48523]]

to understand if we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
     Could the description of the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 
of this preamble be more helpful in making the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions easier to understand? If so, how?
     What else could we do to make the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions easier to understand?
    To send any comments that concern how the Department could make 
these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions easier to 
understand, see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
    Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive 
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the 
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental 
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies 
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination 
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
actions for this program.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The Secretary certifies that these proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would 
affect are institutions that meet the applicable eligibility 
requirements. The Secretary believes that the costs imposed on 
applicants by the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions 
would be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an 
application and that the benefits would outweigh any costs incurred by 
applicants.
    Participation in this program is voluntary. For this reason, the 
proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions would impose no 
burden on small entities unless they applied for funding under the 
program. We expect that in determining whether to apply for PSSG 
program funds, an eligible applicant would evaluate the requirements of 
preparing an application and any associated costs and weigh them 
against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving PSSG funds. 
Eligible applicants most likely would apply only if they determine that 
the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an application. The 
likely benefits include the potential receipt of a grant as well as 
other benefits that may accrue to an entity through its development of 
an application.
    This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant 
economic impact on any small entity once it receives a grant because it 
would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided 
under this program. We invite comments from eligible small entities as 
to whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a 
significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to 
support that belief.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    These proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions do not 
contain any information collection requirements.
    Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities 
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will 
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich 
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, 
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible 
format.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may 
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of 
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this 
document, as well as all other documents of this Department published 
in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To 
use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at 
the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2024-12502 Filed 6-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P