[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40898-40903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17491]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
RIN 1855-ZA08
[CFDA Number 84.282M]
Final Priorities, Requirements, and Selection Criteria; Charter
Schools Program (CSP) Grants for Replication and Expansion of High-
Quality Charter Schools
AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
announces priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria
under the CSP-Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools
grant program. The Assistant Deputy Secretary may use these priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for competitions in
fiscal year (FY) 2011 and later years. We intend to use these
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria to award
grants to eligible applicants to enable them to replicate or
substantially expand high-quality charter schools with demonstrated
records of success, including success in increasing student academic
achievement.
DATES: Effective Date: These priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria are effective August 11, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Pfeltz, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W255, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 205-3525 or by e-mail: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the CSP is to increase national
understanding of the charter school model and to expand the number of
high-quality charter schools available to students across the Nation by
providing financial assistance for the planning, program design,
initial implementation, and expansion of charter schools; and to
evaluate the effects of charter schools, including their effects on
students, student academic achievement, staff, and parents.
The purpose of the CSP-Replication and Expansion of High-Quality
Charter Schools grant program (CFDA 84.282M) is to award grants to
eligible applicants to enable them to replicate or expand high-quality
charter schools with demonstrated records of success, including success
in increasing student academic achievement.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7221-7221j; Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010, Division D, Title III, Public Law 111-117;
Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act,
2011, Division B, Title VIII, Public Law 112-10.
We published a notice of proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria (NPP) for the CSP-Replication and
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grant program in the Federal
Register on March 25, 2011 (76 FR 16754). That notice contained
background information and our reasons for proposing the particular
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria.
There are differences between the priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria proposed in the NPP and these final
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, as
discussed in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section elsewhere in
this notice.
Public Comment: In response to the NPP, three parties submitted
comments on the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes. In
addition, we do not address general comments that raised concerns not
directly related to the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions,
or selection criteria.
Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and
any changes in the priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria since publication of the NPP follows.
Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic
Comment: One commenter suggested that we modify this priority to
require an applicant to demonstrate that at least 50 percent (rather
than 60 percent, as proposed in the NPP) of all students in the charter
schools it currently operates or manages are individuals from low-
income families.
Discussion: We decline to make the requested change because we
intend for this program to focus on serving educationally disadvantaged
students, which include individuals from low-income families (as
defined in this notice). The definition of individual from a low-income
family includes an individual determined by a State educational agency
(SEA) or local educational agency (LEA) to be a child between the ages
of 5 and 17 from a low-income family on the basis of data on children
eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act. The 60 percent threshold in this priority is
consistent with the average percentage of students in large urban
school districts receiving free- or reduced-price lunches (as reported
by the Council of Great City Schools, http://www.cgcs.org/about/fact_sheet.aspx). Our definition of individual from a low-income family
includes free or reduced-price lunch as one indicator. We believe that
it is appropriate to align the threshold for the percentage of students
from low-income families served by the applicant's current charter
schools in Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic with the average
percentage of students in large urban school districts receiving free-
or reduced-price lunches so that schools funded under this competition
will be able to serve students residing in such districts as well as
students in districts that have a higher poverty percentage.
Changes: None.
Priority 4--Promoting Diversity
Comment: One commenter suggested that we revise the language in
Priority 4--Promoting Diversity. Specifically, the commenter expressed
concern that the language, which focuses on promoting racial and ethnic
diversity and avoiding racial isolation, would, in effect, encourage
applicants to use classifications based on race and ethnicity to
achieve some predetermined racial and ethnic mix in their programs.
Discussion: This priority is based on the ``Promoting Diversity''
priority established in the Department's
[[Page 40899]]
Supplemental Priorities, which were published in the Federal Register
on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and is designed to serve the same
purpose (e.g., to focus on the racial and ethnic diversity of students
in order to promote cross-racial understanding, break down racial
stereotypes, and prepare students for an increasingly diverse workforce
and society). Nevertheless, we have added a note to the priority to
clarify the purpose of the priority and ensure that proposals to meet
the priority comply with current law.
In addition, on further review of this priority, we believe that
certain wording changes in the priority are appropriate. First, we
believe that we can make the language more consistent with the
``Promoting Diversity'' priority from the Supplemental Priorities by
referring to ``student diversity'' rather than ``diversity in their
student bodies.'' In addition, to eliminate any possibility that the
language might encourage applicants to create charter schools with
disproportionate enrollments, we believe it is appropriate to require
that an applicant take active measures to serve students with
disabilities and English learners at a rate at least comparable to the
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the
surrounding area--rather than at a rate equal to or higher than the
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the
surrounding area.
Changes: We have added a Note following Priority 4--Promoting
Diversity to provide further information for applicants on responding
to Priority 4. This note invites an applicant to discuss how the
project will encourage approaches by charter schools that help bring
together students of different backgrounds to attain the benefits that
flow from a diverse student body and how it will ensure that those
approaches to promoting diversity among its schools are permissible
under current law.
In addition we have revised paragraph (a) of the priority to refer
to promoting ``student diversity'' rather than ``diversity in their
student bodies.'' Finally, we have revised the standard in paragraphs
(b) and (c) to require applicants to demonstrate, in order to meet the
priority, a record of, and intent to continue, taking active measures
to serve students with disabilities (paragraph (b)) and English
learners (paragraph (c)) at a rate that is at least comparable to the
rate at which these students are served in public schools in the
surrounding area.
Comment: One commenter suggested that we revise Proposed Priority
4--Promoting Diversity so that an applicant can meet the priority if
the applicant meets any one of the three listed factors in the
priority.
Discussion: We decline to revise this priority as requested because
we want to maintain flexibility to use the priority differently,
depending on the objectives in a specific competition. For example, if
we designate this priority as an absolute priority or an ``all or
nothing'' competitive preference priority, an applicant would need to
meet all of the factors under the priority in order to meet the
priority. In contrast, if we elect to use this priority as a
competitive preference priority under which applicants can receive up
to a certain number of points, then an applicant might very well be
able to receive competitive preference points under the priority if it
satisfies one or some, but not all of, the factors listed in the
priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that we designate certain
proposed priorities as absolute, competitive, or invitational.
Discussion: This notice is designed only to establish the
priorities that we may choose to use in CSP Replication and Expansion
of High-Quality Charter School grant competitions in fiscal year 2011
and future years. As noted elsewhere in this notice, we do not
designate whether a priority will be absolute, competitive, or
invitational in this notice. When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more priorities, we will designate the type of
each priority through a notice in the Federal Register.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter encouraged the Department to make State and
school subgroup data more readily accessible so that applicants will be
better able to address Priority 4--Promoting Diversity and the Proposed
Requirements.
Discussion: At present, the Department is looking into ways we can
make more data at the State, district and school levels, with
information on subgroups, available to the public in a manner that
protects the privacy of individuals.
Changes: None.
Requirements
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department establish a
maximum limit of approximately $600,000 for the start-up of new schools
under the CSP Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools
grants program.
Discussion: In the Reasonable and Necessary Costs section
(paragraph (c)) of the Proposed Program Requirements, the Secretary
reserves the right to impose a maximum limit on the amount of funds
that may be awarded per charter school replicated, per charter school
substantially expanded, or per new school seat created. We decline to
make the change requested by the commenter regarding the establishment
of a fixed maximum limit for the start-up of new schools because the
requirements in this notice may be used in future competitions. In
order to be able to respond to future needs or new information on the
start-up costs of new or expanding charter schools, we believe it is
prudent to preserve the Secretary's flexibility in making the
determination of a maximum amount, or whether one is needed, on a
competition-by-competition basis.
Changes: None.
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon further review of paragraph (j) in the Application
Requirements, we have determined that the paragraph does not clearly
state that the applicant should describe how all students in the
community will be informed, and given an equal opportunity to attend,
the proposed new or substantially expanded schools.
Changes: We have inserted ``all'' into paragraph (j) of the
Application Requirements section, before ``students in the community''.
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon further review of the Application Requirements, we
have determined that applicants should be aware that small data groups
can lead to the disclosure of personally identifiable information
(PII).
Changes: In paragraphs (m), (n)(2), and (n)(3) of the Application
Requirements section, we have inserted ``maintaining standards to
protect personally identifiable information'' as a parenthetical.
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon further review of paragraph (n)(3) in the
Application Requirements, we have determined that the National Center
for Education Statistics report to which we referred as an example of
the scale of State proficiency standards is of limited value to
applicants because the data in the report are based on State standards
in 2007. Given that there is not a more recent version of this report,
and because we do not want to provide a static example while State
standards continue to change, we believe it is appropriate to remove
this example.
Changes: We have removed the parenthetical referencing the ``report
available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/
[[Page 40900]]
2010456.pdf'' from paragraph (n)(3) of the Application Requirements
section.
Final Priorities:
The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
establishes the following four priorities for the CSP Replication and
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may apply
one or more of these priorities in any year in which this program is in
effect.
Priority 1--Experience Operating or Managing High-Quality Charter
Schools.
This priority is for projects that will provide for the replication
or expansion of high-quality charter schools by applicants that
currently operate or manage more than one high-quality charter school
(as defined in this notice).
Priority 2--Low-Income Demographic.
To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that at least
60 percent of all students in the charter schools it currently operates
or manages are individuals from low-income families (as defined in this
notice).
Priority 3--School Improvement.
To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that its
proposed replication or expansion of one or more high-quality charter
schools will occur in partnership with, and will be designed to assist,
one or more LEAs in implementing academic or structural interventions
to serve students attending schools that have been identified for
improvement, corrective action, closure, or restructuring under section
1116 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended
(ESEA), and as described in the notice of final requirements for School
Improvement Grants, published in the Federal Register on October 28,
2010 (75 FR 66363).
Priority 4--Promoting Diversity.
This priority is for applicants that demonstrate a record of (in
the schools they currently operate or manage), as well as an intent to
continue (in schools that they will be creating or substantially
expanding under this grant), taking active measures to--
(a) Promote student diversity, including racial and ethnic
diversity, or avoid racial isolation;
(b) Serve students with disabilities at a rate that is at least
comparable to the rate at which these students are served in public
schools in the surrounding area; and
(c) Serve English learners at a rate that is at least comparable to
the rate at which these students are served in public schools in the
surrounding area.
In support of this priority, applicants must provide enrollment
data as well as descriptions of existing policies and activities
undertaken or planned to be undertaken.
Note: An applicant addressing this priority is invited to
discuss how the proposed design of its project will encourage
approaches by charter schools that help bring together students of
different backgrounds, including students from different racial and
ethnic backgrounds, to attain the benefits that flow from a diverse
student body. The applicant should discuss in its application how it
would ensure that those approaches are permissible under current
law.
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)).
FINAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS:
The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
establishes the following program requirements for the CSP Replication
and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may
apply one or more of these requirements in any year in which this
program is in effect.
(a) Eligibility: To be eligible for an award, an applicant must
meet the statutory requirements. The requirement listed below is
statutory; we are including it here for clarity:
Eligible applicants for this program are non-profit charter
management organizations (CMOs) and other not-for-profit entities.
Eligible applicants may also apply as a group or consortium.
(b) Funding Restrictions: Grantees under this program must use the
grant funds to replicate or substantially expand the charter school
model or models for which the applicant has presented evidence of
success. Grant funds must be used to carry out allowable activities, as
described in section 5204(f)(3) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221c(f)(3)).
Note: A grantee may use up to 20 percent of grant funds for
initial operational costs associated with the expansion or
improvement of the grantee's oversight or management of its charter
schools, provided that: (i) The specific charter schools being
created or substantially expanded under the grant are the intended
beneficiaries of such expansion or improvement, and (ii) such
expansion or improvement is intended to improve the grantee's
ability to manage or oversee the charter schools created or
substantially expanded under the grant.
(c) Reasonable and Necessary Costs: The Secretary may elect to
impose a maximum limit on the amount of grant funds that may be awarded
per charter school replicated, per charter school substantially
expanded, or per new charter school seat created.
Note: Applicants must ensure that all costs included in the
proposed budget are reasonable and necessary in light of the goals
and objectives of the proposed project. Any costs determined by the
Secretary to be unreasonable or unnecessary will be removed from the
final approved budget.
(d) Other CSP Grants: A charter school that receives funds under
this competition is ineligible to receive funds for the same purpose
under section 5202(c)(2) of the ESEA, including for planning and
program design or the initial implementation of a charter school (i.e.,
CFDA 84.282A or 84.282B).
A charter school that has received CSP funds for replication
previously, or that has received funds for planning or initial
implementation of a charter school (i.e., CFDA 84.282A or 84.282B), may
not use funds under this grant for the same purpose. However, such
charter schools may be eligible to receive funds under this competition
to substantially expand the charter school beyond the existing grade
levels or student count.
Final Application Requirements:
The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
establishes the following application requirements for the CSP
Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants. We
may apply one or more of these application requirements in any year in
which this program is in effect. An applicant may choose to respond to
these application requirements in the context of its responses to the
selection criteria.
(a) Describe the objectives of the project for replicating or
substantially expanding high-quality charter schools and the methods by
which the applicant
[[Page 40901]]
will determine its progress toward achieving those objectives.
(b) Describe how the applicant currently operates or manages the
charter schools for which it has presented evidence of success, and how
the proposed new or substantially expanded charter schools will be
operated or managed. Include a description of central office functions,
governance, daily operations, financial management, human resources
management, and instructional management. If applying as a group or
consortium, describe the roles and responsibilities of each member of
the group or consortium and how each member will contribute to the
proposed project.
(c) Describe how the applicant will ensure that each proposed new
or substantially expanded charter school receives its commensurate
share of Federal education funds that are allocated by formula each
year, including during the first year of operation of the school and
any year in which the school's enrollment substantially expands.
(d) Describe the educational program to be implemented in the
proposed new or substantially expanded charter schools, including how
the program will enable all students (including educationally
disadvantaged students) to meet State student academic achievement
standards, the grade levels or ages of students to be served, and the
curriculum and instructional practices to be used.
(e) Describe the administrative relationship between the charter
school or schools to be replicated or substantially expanded by the
applicant and the authorized public chartering agency.
(f) Describe how the applicant will provide for continued operation
of the proposed new or substantially expanded charter school or schools
once the Federal grant has expired.
(g) Describe how parents and other members of the community will be
involved in the planning, program design, and implementation of the
proposed new or substantially expanded charter school or schools.
(h) Include a request and justification for waivers of any Federal
statutory or regulatory provisions that the applicant believes are
necessary for the successful operation of the proposed new or
substantially expanded charter schools.
(i) Describe how the grant funds will be used, including how these
funds will be used in conjunction with other Federal programs
administered by the Secretary, and with any matching funds.
(j) Describe how all students in the community, including students
with disabilities, English learners, and other educationally
disadvantaged students, will be informed about the proposed new or
substantially expanded charter schools and given an equal opportunity
to attend such schools.
(k) Describe how the proposed new or substantially expanded charter
schools that are considered to be LEAs under State law, or the LEAs in
which the new or substantially expanded charter schools are located,
will comply with sections 613(a)(5) and 613(e)(1)(B) of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act.
(l) Provide information on any significant compliance issues
identified within the past three years for each school managed by the
applicant, including compliance issues in the areas of student safety,
financial management, and statutory or regulatory compliance.
(m) For each charter school currently operated or managed by the
applicant, provide the following information: The year founded, the
grades currently served, the number of students, the address, the
percentage of students in each subgroup of students described in
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA, results on the State
assessment for the past three years (if available) by subgroup,
attendance rates, student attrition rates for the past three years, and
(if the school operates a 12th grade) high school graduation rates and
college attendance rates (maintaining standards to protect personally
identifiable information).
(n) Provide objective data showing applicant quality. In
particular, the Secretary requires the applicant to provide the
following data:
(1) Performance (school-wide and by subgroup) for the past three
years (if available) on statewide tests of all charter schools operated
or managed by the applicant as compared to all students in other
schools in the State or States at the same grade level, and as compared
with other schools serving similar demographics of students;
(2) Annual student attendance and retention rates (school-wide and
by subgroup) for the past three years (or over the life of the school,
if the school has been open for fewer than three years), and
comparisons with other similar schools (maintaining standards to
protect personally identifiable information); and
(3) Where applicable and available, high school graduation rates,
college attendance rates, and college persistence rates (school-wide
and by subgroup) for the past three years (if available) of students
attending schools operated or managed by the applicant, and the
methodology used to calculate these rates (maintaining standards to
protect personally identifiable information). When reporting data for
schools in States that may have particularly demanding or low standards
of proficiency, applicants are invited to discuss how their academic
success might be considered against applicants from across the country.
(o) Provide such other information and assurances as the Secretary
may require.
Definitions:
The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
establishes the following definitions for the CSP Replication and
Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants. We may apply one or
more of these definitions in any year in which this program is in
effect.
Charter management organization (CMO) is a nonprofit organization
that operates or manages multiple charter schools by centralizing or
sharing certain functions and resources among schools.
Educationally disadvantaged students includes, but is not
necessarily limited to, individuals from low-income families (as
defined elsewhere in this notice), English learners, migratory
children, children with disabilities, and neglected or delinquent
children.
High-quality charter school is a school that shows evidence of
strong academic results for the past three years (or over the life of
the school, if the school has been open for fewer than three years),
based on the following factors:
(1) Increasing student academic achievement and attainment for all
students, including, as applicable, educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the
applicant.
(2) Either (i) Demonstrated success in closing historic achievement
gaps for the subgroups of students, described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools operated or
managed by the applicant, or
(ii) No significant achievement gaps between any of the subgroups
of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at
the charter schools operated or managed by the applicant and
significant gains in student academic achievement with all populations
of students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the
applicant.
(3) Achieved results (including performance on statewide tests,
annual student attendance and retention rates, high school graduation
rates, college attendance rates, and college persistence
[[Page 40902]]
rates where applicable and available) for low-income and other
educationally disadvantaged students served by the charter schools
operated or managed by the applicant that are above the average
academic achievement results for such students in the State.
(4) No significant compliance issues (as defined in this notice),
particularly in the areas of student safety and financial management.
Individual from a low-income family means an individual who is
determined by an SEA or LEA to be a child, age 5 through 17, from a
low-income family, on the basis of (a) data used by the Secretary to
determine allocations under section 1124 of the ESEA, (b) data on
children eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the Richard
B. Russell National School Lunch Act, (c) data on children in families
receiving assistance under part A of title IV of the Social Security
Act, (d) data on children eligible to receive medical assistance under
the Medicaid program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, or (e)
an alternate method that combines or extrapolates from the data in
items (a) through (d) of this definition (see 20 U.S.C. 6537(3)).
Replicate means to open one or more new charter schools that are
based on the charter school model or models for which the applicant has
presented evidence of success.
Significant compliance issue means a violation that did, will, or
could lead to the revocation of a school's charter.
Substantially expand means to increase the student count of an
existing charter school by more than 50 percent or to add at least two
grades to an existing charter school over the course of the grant.
Final Selection Criteria:
The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
establishes the following selection criteria for the CSP Replication
and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools grants program. We may
apply one or more of these criteria, alone or in combination with one
or more selection criteria from 34 CFR 75.210 and section 5204 of the
ESEA, in any year in which we award grants for the replication and
expansion of high-quality charter schools. In the notice inviting
applications or the application package, or both, we will announce the
maximum possible points assigned to each criterion.
(a) Quality of the eligible applicant. In determining the quality
of the applicant, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The degree, including the consistency over the past three
years, to which the applicant has demonstrated success in significantly
increasing student academic achievement and attainment for all
students, including, as applicable, educationally disadvantaged
students served by the charter schools operated or managed by the
applicant.
(2) Either (i) The degree, including the consistency over the past
three years, to which the applicant has demonstrated success in closing
historic achievement gaps for the subgroups of students, described in
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools
operated or managed by the applicant, or
(ii) The degree, including the consistency over the past three
years, to which there have not been significant achievement gaps
between any of the subgroups of students described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA at the charter schools operated or
managed by the applicant and to which significant gains in student
academic achievement made with all populations of students served by
the charter schools operated or managed by the applicant.
(3) The degree, including the consistency over the past three
years, to which the applicant has achieved results (including
performance on statewide tests, annual student attendance and retention
rates, high school graduation rates, college attendance rates, and
college persistence rates where applicable and available) for low-
income and other educationally disadvantaged students served by the
charter schools operated or managed by the applicant that are
significantly above the average academic achievement results for such
students in the State.
(b) Contribution in assisting educationally disadvantaged students.
The contribution the proposed project will make in assisting
educationally disadvantaged students served by the applicant to meet or
exceed State academic content standards and State student academic
achievement standards, and to graduate college- and career-ready. When
responding to this selection criterion, applicants must discuss the
proposed locations of schools to be created or substantially expanded
and the student populations to be served.
(c) Quality of the project design.
The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the goals,
objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are
clearly specified, measurable, and attainable. Applicants proposing to
open schools serving substantially different populations than those
currently served by the model for which they have demonstrated evidence
of success must address the attainability of outcomes given this
difference.
(d) Quality of the management plan and personnel.
The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan and
personnel to replicate and substantially expand high-quality charter
schools. In determining the quality of the management plan and
personnel for the proposed project, the Secretary considers:
(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.
(2) The business plan for improving, sustaining, and ensuring the
quality and performance of charter schools created or substantially
expanded under these grants beyond the initial period of Federal
funding in areas including, but not limited to, facilities, financial
management, central office, student academic achievement, governance,
oversight, and human resources of the charter schools.
(3) A multi-year financial and operating model for the
organization, a demonstrated commitment of current and future partners,
and evidence of broad support from stakeholders critical to the
project's long-term success.
(4) The plan for closing charter schools supported, overseen, or
managed by the applicant that do not meet high standards of quality.
(5) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director, chief executive officer or organization
leader, and key project personnel, especially in managing projects of
the size and scope of the proposed project.
This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance
with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have
assessed the potential costs and benefits of this final regulatory
action.
The potential costs associated with this final regulatory action
are those
[[Page 40903]]
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering this program effectively and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this final regulatory action, we have determined
that the benefits of the final priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria justify the costs.
We have determined, also, that this final regulatory action does
not unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
Summary of potential costs and benefits:
The impact of the Charter Schools Program in opening new charter
schools around the country has been well-established. CSP Grants for
the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools program
gives the best CMOs in the country a chance to replicate their high-
performing charter schools and serve more students. The priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria announced in this
notice will ensure that the highest-quality applicants receive funds
and are able to serve the students most in need.
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.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System
at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys. 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 Adobe 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: http://www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: July 7, 2011.
James H. Shelton, III,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2011-17491 Filed 7-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P