[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