[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32159-32171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13594]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund
AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview Information
Investing in Innovation Fund
Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY)
2011.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411B
(Validation grants).
Dates:
Applications Available: June 6, 2011.
Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 2, 2011.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: October 3, 2011.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The Investing in Innovation Fund, established
under section 14007 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (ARRA), provides funding to support (1) Local educational agencies
(LEAs), and (2) nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or
more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools. The purpose of this program
is to provide competitive grants to applicants with a record of
improving student achievement and attainment in order to expand the
implementation of, and investment in, innovative practices that are
demonstrated to have an impact on improving student achievement or
student growth (as defined in this notice), closing achievement gaps,
decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school graduation rates, or
increasing college enrollment and completion rates.
These grants will (1) Allow eligible entities to expand and develop
innovative practices that can serve as models of best practices, (2)
allow eligible entities to work in partnership with the private sector
and the philanthropic community, and (3) support eligible entities in
identifying and documenting best practices that can be shared and taken
to scale based on demonstrated success.
Under this program, the Department awards three types of grants:
``Scale-up'' grants, ``Validation'' grants, and ``Development'' grants.
Applicants must specify the type of grant they are seeking at the time
of application. Among the three grant types, there are differences in
terms of the evidence that an applicant is required to submit in
support of its proposed project; the expectations for ``scaling up''
successful projects during or after the grant period, either directly
or through partners; and the funding that a successful applicant is
eligible to receive. This notice invites applications for Validation
grants. Notices inviting applications for Scale-up and Development
grants are published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Validation grants provide funding to support practices, strategies,
or
[[Page 32160]]
programs that show promise, but for which there is currently only
moderate evidence (as defined in this notice) that the proposed
practice, strategy, or program will have a statistically significant
effect on improving student achievement or student growth, closing
achievement gaps, decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school
graduation rates, or increasing college enrollment and completion rates
and that, with further study, the effect of implementing the proposed
practice, strategy, or program may prove to be substantial and
important. Thus, applications for Validation grants do not need to have
the same level of research evidence to support the proposed project as
is required for Scale-up grants. An applicant may also demonstrate
success through an intermediate variable strongly correlated with these
outcomes, such as teacher or principal effectiveness.
An applicant for a Validation grant must estimate the number of
students to be reached by the proposed project and provide evidence of
its capacity to reach the proposed number of students during the course
of the grant. In addition, an applicant for a Validation grant must
provide evidence of its capacity (e.g., qualified personnel, financial
resources, management capacity) to scale up to a State or regional
level, working directly or through partners either during or following
the grant period. We recognize that LEAs are not typically responsible
for taking to scale their practices, strategies, or programs in other
LEAs and States. However, all applicants, including LEAs, can and
should partner with others to disseminate and take to scale their
effective practice, strategy, and program.
The Department will screen applications that are submitted for
Validation grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice,
and determine which applications have met the eligibility and other
requirements in the notice of final priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria for this program, published in the
Federal Register on March 12, 2010 (75 FR 12004-12071) (2010 i3 NFP).
Peer reviewers will review all eligible Validation grant applications.
However, if the Department determines that an application for a
Validation grant does not meet the definition of moderate evidence in
this notice, or any other eligibility requirement, the Department will
not consider the application for funding.
Finally, we remind LEAs that participate in submitting an i3
application of the continuing applicability of the provisions of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to students who may
be served under these awards. Programs proposed in applications in
which LEAs participate must be consistent with the rights, protections,
and processes of IDEA for students who are receiving special education
and related services or are being evaluated for such services. As
described later in this notice, in connection with making competitive
grant awards, an applicant is required, as a condition of receiving
assistance under this program, to make civil rights assurances,
including an assurance that its program or activity will comply with
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Department's
Section 504 implementing regulations, which prohibit discrimination on
the basis of disability. Regardless of whether students with
disabilities are specifically targeted as ``high-need'' students under
a particular application for a grant program, recipients are required
to comply with the nondiscrimination requirements of these laws. Among
other things, the nondiscrimination requirements of these laws include
an obligation that recipients ensure that students with disabilities
are not discriminated against because benefits provided to all students
under the recipient's program are inaccessible to students because of
their disability. The Department also enforces Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act and Title II implementing regulations,
which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability by public
entities, with respect to certain public educational entities.
Priorities: This competition includes five absolute priorities and
five competitive preference priorities that are explained in the
following paragraphs.\1\ These priorities are from the 2010 i3 NFP and
from the notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for
discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on
December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486-78511) (Supplemental Priorities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The notice of final revisions to priorities, requirements,
and selection criteria for this program, published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register, establishes that the Secretary may
use any of the priorities established in the 2010 i3 NFP when
establishing the priorities for a particular Investing in Innovation
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note on removing Absolute Priority 2--Innovations That Improve the
Use of Data: For this year's competition, the Secretary chooses not to
use the priority Innovations That Improve the Use of Data (Absolute
Priority 2 in the 2010 i3 NFP). This action is not intended to
discourage applicants from proposing projects that improve the use of
data, so long as the proposal addresses one of the absolute priorities
in this notice. Specifically, proposed projects that address Absolute
Priority 1--Innovations That Support Effective Teachers and Principals,
Absolute Priority 3--Innovations That Complement the Implementation of
High Standards and High-Quality Assessments, and Absolute Priority 4--
Innovations That Turn Around Persistently Low-Performing Schools may
also include using data in innovative ways to support the broader aims
of the absolute priorities. The Secretary recognizes the importance of
data collection, analysis, and use, and believes that focusing on these
strategies in the context of the remaining absolute priorities meets
the goals of the Investing in Innovation program and the overall
education reform goals of ARRA.
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2011 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet one of these
priorities. Under this competition for Validation grants, each of the
five absolute priorities constitutes its own funding category. The
Secretary intends to award grants under each absolute priority for
which applications of sufficient quality are submitted.
An applicant for a Validation grant must choose one of the five
absolute priorities contained in this notice and address that priority
in its application. An applicant must provide information on how its
proposed project addresses the selection criteria in the project
narrative section of its application.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Innovations That Support Effective Teachers and
Principals
Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support
practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to increase the
number or percentages of teachers or principals who are highly
effective teachers or principals or reduce the number or percentages of
teachers or principals who are ineffective, especially for teachers of
high-need students, by identifying, recruiting, developing, placing,
rewarding, and retaining highly effective teachers or principals (or
removing ineffective teachers or principals). In such initiatives,
teacher or principal effectiveness should be determined through an
evaluation system that is rigorous, transparent, and fair; performance
should be
[[Page 32161]]
differentiated using multiple rating categories of effectiveness;
multiple measures of effectiveness should be taken into account, with
data on student growth as a significant factor; and the measures should
be designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement. (2010
i3 NFP)
Absolute Priority 2--Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Education.
Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support
projects that are designed to address one or more of the following
areas:
(a) Providing students with increased access to rigorous and
engaging coursework in STEM.
(b) Increasing the number and proportion of students prepared for
postsecondary or graduate study and careers in STEM.
(c) Increasing the opportunities for high-quality preparation of,
or professional development for, teachers or other educators of STEM
subjects.
(d) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally
underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with
disabilities, and women, who are provided with access to rigorous and
engaging coursework in STEM or who are prepared for postsecondary or
graduate study and careers in STEM.
(e) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally
underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with
disabilities, and women, who are teachers or educators of STEM subjects
and have increased opportunities for high-quality preparation or
professional development. (Supplemental Priorities)
Absolute Priority 3--Innovations That Complement the Implementation of
High Standards and High-Quality Assessments
Under this priority, the Department provides funding for practices,
strategies, or programs that are designed to support States' efforts to
transition to standards and assessments that measure students' progress
toward college- and career-readiness, including curricular and
instructional practices, strategies, or programs in core academic
subjects (as defined in section 9101(11) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA)) that are aligned
with high academic content and achievement standards and with high-
quality assessments based on those standards.\2\ Proposed projects may
include, but are not limited to, practices, strategies, or programs
that are designed to: (a) Increase the success of under-represented
student populations in academically rigorous courses and programs (such
as Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate courses; dual-
enrollment programs; ``early college high schools;'' and science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics courses, especially those that
incorporate rigorous and relevant project-, inquiry-, or design-based
contextual learning opportunities); (b) increase the development and
use of formative assessments or interim assessments, or other
performance-based tools and ``metrics'' that are aligned with high
student content and academic achievement standards; or (c) translate
the standards and information from assessments into classroom practices
that meet the needs of all students, including high-need students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Consistent with the Race to the Top Fund, the Department
interprets the core academic subject of ``science'' under section
9101(11) of the ESEA to include STEM education (science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics) which encompasses a wide-range of
disciplines, including computer science.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under this priority, an eligible applicant must propose a project
that is based on standards that are at least as rigorous as its State's
standards. If the proposed project is based on standards other than
those adopted by the eligible applicant's State, the applicant must
explain how the standards are aligned with and at least as rigorous as
the eligible applicant's State's standards as well as how the standards
differ. (2010 i3 NFP)
Absolute Priority 4--Innovations That Turn Around Persistently Low-
Performing Schools
Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support
strategies, practices, or programs that are designed to turn around
schools that are in any of the following categories: (a) Persistently
lowest-achieving schools (as defined in the final requirements for the
School Improvement Grants program); \3\ (b) Title I schools that are in
corrective action or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA; or
(c) secondary schools (both middle and high schools) eligible for but
not receiving Title I funds that, if receiving Title I funds, would be
in corrective action or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA.
These schools are referred to as Investing in Innovation Fund Absolute
Priority 4 schools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Under the final requirements for the School Improvement
Grants program, ``persistently lowest-achieving schools'' means, as
determined by the State, (a) Any Title I school in improvement,
corrective action, or restructuring that (i) Is among the lowest-
achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective
action, or restructuring or the lowest-achieving five Title I
schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the
State, whichever number of schools is greater; or (ii) is a high
school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b)
that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; and (b) any
secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I
funds that (i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of
secondary schools or the lowest-achieving five secondary schools in
the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds,
whichever number of schools is greater; or (ii) is a high school
that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that
is less than 60 percent over a number of years. See http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/faq.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed projects must include strategies, practices, or programs
that are designed to turn around Investing in Innovation Fund Absolute
Priority 4 schools through either whole-school reform or targeted
approaches to reform. Applicants addressing this priority must focus on
either:
(a) Whole-school reform, including, but not limited to,
comprehensive interventions to assist, augment, or replace Investing in
Innovation Fund Absolute Priority 4 schools, including the school
turnaround, restart, closure, and transformation models of intervention
supported under the Department's School Improvement Grants program (see
Final Requirements for School Improvement Grants as Amended in January
2010 (January 28, 2010) at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/faq.html);
or
(b) Targeted approaches to reform, including, but not limited to:
(1) Providing more time for students to learn core academic content by
expanding or augmenting the school day, school week, or school year, or
by increasing instructional time for core academic subjects (as defined
in section 9101(11) of the ESEA); (2) integrating ``student supports''
into the school model to address non-academic barriers to student
achievement; or (3) creating multiple pathways for students to earn
regular high school diplomas (e.g., by operating schools that serve the
needs of over-aged, under-credited, or other students with an
exceptional need for support and flexibility pertaining to when they
attend school; awarding credit based on demonstrated evidence of
student competency; and offering dual-enrollment options). (2010 i3
NFP)
Absolute Priority 5--Improving Achievement and High School Graduation
Rates (Rural Local Educational Agencies)
Under this priority, the Department provides funding to support
projects that are designed to address accelerating learning and helping
to improve high
[[Page 32162]]
school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) and college
enrollment rates for students in rural local educational agencies (as
defined in this notice). (Supplemental Priorities).
Note: The Secretary encourages applicants that choose to
respond to Absolute Priority 5 to also address how their
applications meet one of the other Absolute Priorities. In addition,
applicants that choose to respond to Absolute Priority 5 should
identify in the application and the i3 Applicant Information Sheet
all rural LEAs (as defined in this notice) where the project will be
implemented, or identify in the application how the applicant will
choose any rural LEAs where the project will be implemented, and
explain how the proposed innovative practices, strategies, or
programs address the unique challenges of high-need students in
schools within a rural LEA, resulting in accelerated learning and
improved high school graduation and college enrollment rates.
Applicants may also provide information on the applicant's
experience and skills, or the experience and skills of their
partners, in serving high-need students in rural LEAs in responding
to Selection Criterion D. Quality of the Management Plan and
Personnel.
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2011 and any subsequent
year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from
this competition, these priorities are competitive preference
priorities. Applicants may address more than one of the competitive
preference priorities; however, the Department will review and award
points only for a maximum of two of the competitive preference
priorities. Therefore, an applicant must identify in the project
narrative section of its application the priority or priorities it
wishes the Department to consider for purposes of earning the
competitive preference priority points.
Note: The Department will not review or award points under any
competitive preference priority for an application that (1) Fails to
clearly identify the competitive preference priorities it wishes the
Department to consider for the purposes of earning the competitive
preference priority points, or (2) identifies more than two
competitive preference priorities.
These priorities are:
Competitive Preference Priority 6--Innovations for Improving Early
Learning Outcomes (Zero or One Point)
We give competitive preference to applications for projects that
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are
designed to improve educational outcomes for high-need students who are
young children (birth through 3rd grade) by enhancing the quality of
early learning programs. To meet this priority, applications must focus
on (a) Improving young children's school readiness (including social,
emotional, and cognitive readiness) so that children are prepared for
success in core academic subjects (as defined in section 9101(11) of
the ESEA); (b) improving developmental milestones and standards and
aligning them with appropriate outcome measures; and (c) improving
alignment, collaboration, and transitions between early learning
programs that serve children from birth to age three, in preschools,
and in kindergarten through third grade. (2010 i3 NFP)
Competitive Preference Priority 7--Innovations That Support College
Access and Success (Zero or One Point)
We give competitive preference to applications for projects that
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are
designed to enable kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) students,
particularly high school students, to successfully prepare for, enter,
and graduate from a two- or four-year college. To meet this priority,
applications must include practices, strategies, or programs for K-12
students that (a) Address students' preparedness and expectations
related to college; (b) help students understand issues of college
affordability and the financial aid and college application processes;
and (c) provide support to students from peers and knowledgeable
adults. (2010 i3 NFP)
Competitive Preference Priority 8--Innovations To Address the Unique
Learning Needs of Students With Disabilities and Limited English
Proficient Students (Zero or One Point)
We give competitive preference to applications for projects that
would implement innovative practices, strategies, or programs that are
designed to address the unique learning needs of students with
disabilities, including those who are assessed based on alternate
academic achievement standards, or the linguistic and academic needs of
limited English proficient students. To meet this priority,
applications must provide for the implementation of particular
practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to improve
academic outcomes, close achievement gaps, and increase college- and
career-readiness, including increasing high school graduation rates (as
defined in this notice), for students with disabilities or limited
English proficient students. (2010 i3 NFP)
Competitive Preference Priority 9--Improving Productivity (Zero or One
Point)
We give competitive preference to applications for projects that
are designed to significantly increase efficiency in the use of time,
staff, money, or other resources while improving student learning or
other educational outcomes (i.e., outcome per unit of resource). Such
projects may include innovative and sustainable uses of technology,
modification of school schedules and teacher compensation systems, use
of open educational resources (as defined in this notice), or other
strategies. (Supplemental Priorities)
Competitive Preference Priority 10--Technology (Zero or One Point)
We give competitive preference to applications for projects that
are designed to improve student achievement \4\ or teacher
effectiveness through the use of high-quality digital tools or
materials, which may include preparing teachers to use the technology
to improve instruction, as well as developing, implementing, or
evaluating digital tools or materials. (Supplemental Priorities)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For purposes of this priority, the Supplemental Priorities
define student achievement as follows:
Student achievement means--
(a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) A student's score on the
State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA; and, as
appropriate, (2) other measures of student learning, such as those
described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are
rigorous and comparable across classrooms; and
(b) For non-tested grades and subjects: alternative measures of
student learning and performance such as student scores on pre-tests
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement
that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions
The Secretary establishes the following definitions for the
Investing in Innovation Fund. We may apply these definitions in any
year in which this program is in effect.
Note: This notice invites applications for Validation grants.
The following definitions apply to the three types of grants under
the i3 program (Scale-up, Validation, or Development). Therefore,
some definitions included in this section may be more applicable to
applications for Scale-up grants.
Definitions Related to Evidence
Carefully matched comparison group design means a type of quasi-
experimental study that attempts to approximate an experimental study.
More specifically, it is a design in which
[[Page 32163]]
project participants are matched with non-participants based on key
characteristics that are thought to be related to the outcome. These
characteristics include, but are not limited to: (1) Prior test scores
and other measures of academic achievement (preferably, the same
measures that the study will use to evaluate outcomes for the two
groups); (2) demographic characteristics, such as age, disability,
gender, English proficiency, ethnicity, poverty level, parents'
educational attainment, and single- or two-parent family background;
(3) the time period in which the two groups are studied (e.g., the two
groups are children entering kindergarten in the same year as opposed
to sequential years); and (4) methods used to collect outcome data
(e.g., the same test of reading skills administered in the same way to
both groups).
Experimental study means a study that employs random assignment of,
for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or districts to
participate in a project being evaluated (treatment group) or not to
participate in the project (control group). The effect of the project
is the average difference in outcomes between the treatment and control
groups.
Independent evaluation means that the evaluation is designed and
carried out independent of, but in coordination with, any employees of
the entities who develop a practice, strategy, or program and are
implementing it. This independence helps ensure the objectivity of an
evaluation and prevents even the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Interrupted time series design \5\ means a type of quasi-
experimental study in which the outcome of interest is measured
multiple times before and after the treatment for program participants
only. If the program had an impact, the outcomes after treatment will
have a different slope or level from those before treatment. That is,
the series should show an ``interruption'' of the prior situation at
the time when the program was implemented. Adding a comparison group
time series, such as schools not participating in the program or
schools participating in the program in a different geographic area,
substantially increases the reliability of the findings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ A single subject or single case design is an adaptation of
an interrupted time series design that relies on the comparison of
treatment effects on a single subject or group of single subjects.
There is little confidence that findings based on this design would
be the same for other members of the population. In some single
subject designs, treatment reversal or multiple baseline designs are
used to increase internal validity. In a treatment reversal design,
after a pretreatment or baseline outcome measurement is compared
with a post treatment measure, the treatment would then be stopped
for a period of time, a second baseline measure of the outcome would
be taken, followed by a second application of the treatment or a
different treatment. A multiple baseline design addresses concerns
about the effects of normal development, timing of the treatment,
and amount of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs by using
a varying time schedule for introduction of the treatment and/or
treatments of different lengths or intensity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderate evidence means evidence from previous studies whose
designs can support causal conclusions (i.e., studies with high
internal validity) but have limited generalizability (i.e., moderate
external validity), or studies with high external validity but moderate
internal validity. The following would constitute moderate evidence:
(1) At least one well-designed and well-implemented (as defined in this
notice) experimental or quasi-experimental study (as defined in this
notice) supporting the effectiveness of the practice, strategy, or
program, with small sample sizes or other conditions of implementation
or analysis that limit generalizability; (2) at least one well-designed
and well-implemented (as defined in this notice) experimental or quasi-
experimental study (as defined in this notice) that does not
demonstrate equivalence between the intervention and comparison groups
at program entry but that has no other major flaws related to internal
validity; or (3) correlational research with strong statistical
controls for selection bias and for discerning the influence of
internal factors.
Quasi-experimental study means an evaluation design that attempts
to approximate an experimental design and can support causal
conclusions (i.e., minimizes threats to internal validity, such as
selection bias, or allows them to be modeled). Well-designed quasi-
experimental studies include carefully matched comparison group designs
(as defined in this notice), interrupted time series designs (as
defined in this notice), or regression discontinuity designs (as
defined in this notice).
Regression discontinuity design study means, in part, a quasi-
experimental study design that closely approximates an experimental
study. In a regression discontinuity design, participants are assigned
to a treatment or comparison group based on a numerical rating or score
of a variable unrelated to the treatment such as the rating of an
application for funding. Another example would be assignment of
eligible students, teachers, classrooms, or schools above a certain
score (``cut score'') to the treatment group and assignment of those
below the score to the comparison group.
Strong evidence means evidence from previous studies whose designs
can support causal conclusions (i.e., studies with high internal
validity), and studies that in total include enough of the range of
participants and settings to support scaling up to the State, regional,
or national level (i.e., studies with high external validity). The
following are examples of strong evidence: (1) More than one well-
designed and well-implemented (as defined in this notice) experimental
study (as defined in this notice) or well-designed and well-implemented
(as defined in this notice) quasi-experimental study (as defined in
this notice) that supports the effectiveness of the practice, strategy,
or program; or (2) one large, well-designed and well-implemented (as
defined in this notice) randomized controlled, multisite trial that
supports the effectiveness of the practice, strategy, or program.
Well-designed and well-implemented means, with respect to an
experimental or quasi-experimental study (as defined in this notice),
that the study meets the What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards,
with or without reservations (see http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1 and in particular the
description of ``Reasons for Not Meeting Standards'' at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/Doc.aspx?docId=19&tocId=4#reasons).
Other Definitions
Applicant means the entity that applies for a grant under this
program on behalf of an eligible applicant (i.e., an LEA or a
partnership in accordance with section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA).
Consortium of schools means two or more public elementary or
secondary schools acting collaboratively for the purpose of applying
for and implementing an Investing in Innovation Fund grant jointly with
an eligible nonprofit organization.
Formative assessment means assessment questions, tools, and
processes that are embedded in instruction and are used by teachers and
students to provide timely feedback for purposes of adjusting
instruction to improve learning.
Highly effective principal means a principal whose students,
overall and for each subgroup as described in section
1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e., economically disadvantaged
students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, migrant
students, students with disabilities, students with limited English
proficiency, and
[[Page 32164]]
students of each gender), achieve high rates (e.g., one and one-half
grade levels in an academic year) of student growth. Eligible
applicants may include multiple measures, provided that principal
effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, based on student
growth. Supplemental measures may include, for example, high school
graduation rates; college enrollment rates; evidence of providing
supportive teaching and learning conditions, support for ensuring
effective instruction across subject areas for a well-rounded
education, strong instructional leadership, and positive family and
community engagement; or evidence of attracting, developing, and
retaining high numbers of effective teachers.
Highly effective teacher means a teacher whose students achieve
high rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of
student growth. Eligible applicants may include multiple measures,
provided that teacher effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part,
based on student growth. Supplemental measures may include, for
example, multiple observation-based assessments of teacher performance
or evidence of leadership roles (which may include mentoring or leading
professional learning communities) that increase the effectiveness of
other teachers in the school or LEA.
High-need student means a student at risk of educational failure,
or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as
students who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools,
who are far below grade level, who are over-age and under-credited, who
have left school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who
are at risk of not graduating with a regular high school diploma on
time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been
incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are limited English
proficient.
High school graduation rate means a four-year adjusted cohort
graduation rate consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and may also
include an extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate consistent
with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if the State in which the proposed project
is implemented has been approved by the Secretary to use such a rate
under Title I of the ESEA.
Interim assessment means an assessment that is given at regular and
specified intervals throughout the school year, is designed to evaluate
students' knowledge and skills relative to a specific set of academic
standards, and produces results that can be aggregated (e.g., by
course, grade level, school, or LEA) in order to inform teachers and
administrators at the student, classroom, school, and LEA levels.
National level, as used in reference to a Scale-up grant, describes
a project that is able to be effective in a wide variety of communities
and student populations around the country, including rural and urban
areas, as well as with the different groups of students described in
section 1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e., economically
disadvantaged students, students from major racial and ethnic groups,
migrant students, students with disabilities, students with limited
English proficiency, and students of each gender).
Nonprofit organization means an entity that meets the definition of
``nonprofit'' under 34 CFR 77.1(c), or an institution of higher
education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of
1965, as amended.
Official partner means any of the entities required to be part of a
partnership under section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA.
Other partner means any entity, other than the applicant and any
official partner, that may be involved in a proposed project.
Regional level, as used in reference to a Scale-up or Validation
grant, describes a project that is able to serve a variety of
communities and student populations within a State or multiple States,
including rural and urban areas, as well as with the different groups
of students described in section 1111(b)(3)(C)(xiii) of the ESEA (i.e.,
economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and
ethnic groups, migrant students, students with disabilities, students
with limited English proficiency, and students of each gender). To be
considered a regional-level project, a project must serve students in
more than one LEA. The exception to this requirement would be a project
implemented in a State in which the State educational agency is the
sole educational agency for all schools and thus may be considered an
LEA under section 9101(26) of the ESEA. Such a State would meet the
definition of regional for the purposes of this notice.
Regular high school diploma means, consistent with 34 CFR
200.19(b)(1)(iv), the standard high school diploma that is awarded to
students in the State and that is fully aligned with the State's
academic content standards or a higher diploma and does not include a
General Education Development (GED) credential, certificate of
attendance, or any alternative award.
Student achievement means--
(a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) A student's score on the
State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA; and, as
appropriate, (2) other measures of student learning, such as those
described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are
rigorous and comparable across classrooms; and
(b) For non-tested grades and subjects: alternative measures of
student learning and performance such as student scores on pre-tests
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement that
are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
Student growth means the change in student achievement data for an
individual student between two or more points in time. Growth may be
measured by a variety of approaches, but any approach used must be
statistically rigorous and based on student achievement data, and may
also include other measures of student learning in order to increase
the construct validity and generalizability of the information.
Definition From Supplemental Priorities
Note: These definitions are from the Supplemental Priorities and
apply to Absolute Priority 5 and Competitive Preference Priority 9.
Open educational resources (OER) means teaching, learning, and
research resources that reside in the public domain or have been
released under an intellectual property license that permits their free
use or repurposing by others.
Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency
(LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA)
program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized
under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine
whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to
information on the Department's Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html.
Program Authority: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009, Division A, Section 14007, Public Law 111-5.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
(b) The notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria for this program, published in the Federal Register
on March 12, 2010
[[Page 32165]]
(75 FR 12004-12071). (c) The notice of final revisions to priorities,
requirements, and selection criteria for this program, published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register) (2011 Notice of Final
i3 Revisions). (d) The notice of final supplemental priorities and
definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486-78511).
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements or discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: $148,200,000.
These estimated available funds are for all three types of grants
under the i3 program (Scale-up, Validation, and Development).
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of the
applications received, we may make additional awards in FY 2012 or
later years from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards
Scale-up grants: Up to $25,000,000.
Validation grants: Up to $15,000,000.
Development grants: Up to $3,000,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards
Scale-up grants: $24,000,000.
Validation grants: $12,000,000.
Development grants: $2,800,000.
Estimated Number of Awards:
Scale-up grants: Up to 2 awards.
Validation grants: Up to 5 awards.
Development grants: Up to 15 awards.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: 36-60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Providing Innovations That Improve Achievement for High-Need
Students: All eligible applicants must implement practices, strategies,
or programs for high-need students (as defined in this notice). (2010
i3 NFP)
2. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for Investing in
Innovation Fund grants include: (a) An LEA or (b) a partnership between
a nonprofit organization and (1) One or more LEAs or (2) a consortium
of schools. An eligible applicant that is a partnership applying under
section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA must designate one of its official
partners (as defined in this notice) to serve as the applicant in
accordance with the Department's regulations governing group
applications in 34 CFR 75.127 through 75.129. (2010 i3 NFP)
3. Eligibility Requirements: To be eligible for an award, an
eligible applicant must--except as specifically set forth in the Note
About Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant That Includes a Nonprofit
Organization that follows:
(1)(A) Have significantly closed the achievement gaps between
groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA
(economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and
ethnic groups, students with limited English proficiency, students with
disabilities); or
(B) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student
academic achievement for all groups of students described in that
section;
(2) Have made significant improvements in other areas, such as
graduation rates or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality
teachers and principals, as demonstrated with meaningful data;
(3) Demonstrate that it has established one or more partnerships
with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations,
and that the private sector will provide matching funds in order to
help bring results to scale; and
(4) In the case of an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit
organization, provide in the application the names of the LEAs with
which the nonprofit organization will partner, or the names of the
schools in the consortium with which it will partner. If an eligible
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization intends to partner
with additional LEAs or schools that are not named in the application,
it must describe in the application the demographic and other
characteristics of these LEAs and schools and the process it will use
to select them as either official or other partners. An applicant must
identify its specific partners before a grant award will be made. (2010
i3 NFP)
Note: Applicants should provide information addressing the
eligibility requirements in Appendix C, under ``Other Attachments
Form,'' of their applications.
Note about LEA Eligibility: For purposes of this program, an LEA
is an LEA located within one of the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (2010 i3 NFP)
Note About Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant That Includes a
Nonprofit Organization:
The authorizing statute (as amended) specifies that an eligible
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization is considered to
have met the requirements in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the
eligibility requirements for this program if the nonprofit
organization has a record of significantly improving student
achievement, attainment, or retention. For an eligible applicant
that includes a nonprofit organization, the nonprofit organization
must demonstrate that it has a record of significantly improving
student achievement, attainment, or retention through its record of
work with an LEA or schools. Therefore, an eligible applicant that
includes a nonprofit organization does not necessarily need to
include as a partner for its Investing in Innovation Fund grant an
LEA or a consortium of schools that meets the requirements in
paragraphs (1) and (2).
In addition, the authorizing statute (as amended) specifies that
an eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization is
considered to have met the requirements of paragraph (3) of the
eligibility requirements in this notice if the eligible applicant
demonstrates that it will meet the requirement relating to private-
sector matching. (2010 i3 NFP)
1. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an
eligible applicant must demonstrate that it has established one or more
partnerships with an entity or organization in the private sector,
which may include philanthropic organizations, and that the entity or
organization in the private sector will provide matching funds in order
to help bring project results to scale. An eligible applicant must
obtain matching funds or in-kind donations equal to at least 10 percent
of its grant award.\6\ Selected eligible applicants must submit
evidence of the full amount of private-sector matching funds following
the peer review of applications. An award will not be made unless the
applicant provides adequate evidence that the full amount of the
private-sector match has been committed or the Secretary approves the
eligible applicant's request to reduce the matching-level requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions modified the ``Cost
Sharing and Matching'' requirement established in the 2010 i3 NFP by
providing that the Secretary will specify the amount of required
private-sector matching funds or in-kind donations in the notice
inviting applications for the specific i3 competition. For this
competition, the Secretary establishes a matching requirement of at
least 10 percent of the grant award.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Secretary may consider decreasing the matching requirement in
the most exceptional circumstances, on a case-by-case basis. An
eligible applicant that anticipates being unable to meet the full
amount of the private-sector matching requirement must include in its
application a request to the Secretary to reduce the matching-level
requirement, along with a statement of the basis for the request. (2010
i3 NFP, as revised by the 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions)
[[Page 32166]]
2. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for
the Investing in Innovation Fund. We may apply these requirements in
any year in which this program is in effect.
Evidence Standards: To be eligible for an award, an
application for a Validation grant must be supported by moderate
evidence (as defined in this notice). (2010 i3 NFP)
Note: Applicants should provide information addressing the
required evidence standards in Appendix D, under ``Other Attachments
Form,'' of their applications.
Funding Categories: An applicant must state in its
application whether it is applying for a Scale-up, Validation, or
Development grant. An applicant may not submit an application for the
same proposed project under more than one type of grant. An applicant
will be considered for an award only for the type of grant for which it
applies. (2010 i3 NFP)
Subgrants: In the case of an eligible applicant that is a
partnership between a nonprofit organization and (1) One or more LEAs
or (2) a consortium of schools, the partner serving as the applicant
may make subgrants to one or more official partners (as defined in this
notice). (2010 i3 NFP)
Limits on Grant Awards: (a) No grantee may receive more
than two new grant awards of any type under the i3 program in a single
year; (b) In any two-year period, no grantee may receive more than one
new Scale-up or Validation grant; and (c) No grantee may receive more
than $55 million in new grant awards under the i3 program in a single
year. (2010 i3 NFP, as revised by the 2011 Notice of Final i3
Revisions)
Evaluation: A grantee must comply with the requirements of
any evaluation of the program conducted by the Department. In addition,
the grantee is required to conduct an independent evaluation (as
defined in this notice) of its project and must agree, along with its
independent evaluator, to cooperate with any technical assistance
provided by the Department or its contractor. The purpose of this
technical assistance will be to ensure that the evaluations are of the
highest quality and to encourage commonality in evaluation approaches
across funded projects where such commonality is feasible and useful.
Finally, the grantee must make broadly available through formal (e.g.,
peer-reviewed journals) or informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, and
in print or electronically, the results of any evaluations it conducts
of its funded activities. For Scale-up and Validation grants, the
grantee must also ensure the data from their evaluations are made
available to third-party researchers consistent with applicable privacy
requirements. (2010 i3 NFP)
Participation in ``Communities of Practice:'' Grantees are
required to participate in, organize, or facilitate, as appropriate,
communities of practice for the Investing in Innovation Fund. A
community of practice is a group of grantees that agrees to interact
regularly to solve a persistent problem or improve practice in an area
that is important to them. Establishment of communities of practice
under the Investing in Innovation Fund will enable grantees to meet,
discuss, and collaborate with each other regarding grantee projects.
(2010 i3 NFP)
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Submission of Proprietary Information:
Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications
for the Investing in Innovation Fund, some applications may include
proprietary information as it relates to confidential commercial
information. Confidential commercial information is defined as
information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to
cause substantial competitive harm. Upon submission, applicants should
identify any information contained in their application that they
consider to be confidential commercial information. Consistent with the
process followed in the FY 2010 i3 competition, we plan on posting the
project narrative section of funded Validation applications on the
Department's Web site. Identifying proprietary information in your
application will help facilitate this public disclosure process.
Applicants are encouraged to identify only the specific information
that the applicant considers to be proprietary and list the page
numbers on which this information can be found in the appropriate
Appendix section, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' of their
applications. In addition to identifying the page number on which that
information can be found, eligible applicants will assist the
Department in making determinations on public release of the
application by being as specific as possible in identifying the
information they consider proprietary. Please note that, in many
instances, identification of entire pages of documentation would not be
appropriate.
2. Address To Request Application Package:
You can obtain an application package via the Internet or from the
Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the
Internet, use the following address: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or
call the following: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box
22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. Fax:
(703) 605-6794. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: http://www.EDPubs.gov or at its e-mail address: [email protected].
If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify
this program or competition as follows: CFDA number 84.411B.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
3. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing
grant applications if we know the approximate number of applicants that
intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the
Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify us of
the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding by
completing a web-based form. When completing this form, applicants will
provide (1) The applicant organization's name and address, (2) the type
of grant for which the applicant intends to apply, (3) the one absolute
priority the applicant intends to address, and (4) a maximum of two of
the competitive preference priorities the applicant wishes the
Department to consider for purposes of earning the competitive
preference priority points. Applicants may access this form online at
http://go.usa.gov/bsG. Applicants that do not complete this form may
still apply for funding.
Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. Applicants are strongly
encouraged to limit the application narrative [Part III] for a
Validation application to no more than 35 pages. Applicants are also
strongly encouraged not to include lengthy appendices that contain
information
[[Page 32167]]
that could not be included in the narrative. Applicants should use the
following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
The suggested page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet;
Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-
page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of
support. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application
narrative section [Part III].
4. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: June 6, 2011.
Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: June 23, 2011.
Pre-Application Meeting: The i3 program intends to hold pre-
application meetings designed to provide technical assistance to
interested applicants for all three types of grants. Detailed
information regarding the pre-application meeting locations, dates, and
times will be provided in a separate notice in the Federal Register.
Once the notice is published, it will be available, along with
registration information, on the Investing in Innovation (i3) Web site
at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 2, 2011.
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your
application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, please refer to section IV. 8. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: October 3, 2011.
5. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this
competition.
6. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
7. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, and Central Contractor Registry: To do business with the
Department of Education, you must--
a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the Central
Contractor Registry (CCR), the Government's primary registrant
database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active CCR registration with current information
while your application is under review by the Department and, if you
are awarded a grant, during the project period.
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number
can be created within one business day.
If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or
organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service.
If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal
Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a
new TIN, please allow 2-5 weeks for your TIN to become active.
The CCR registration process may take five or more business days to
complete. If you are currently registered with the CCR, you may not
need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN
associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will
need to update your CCR registration on an annual basis. This may take
three or more business days to complete.
In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov,
you must (1) Be designated by your organization as an Authorized
Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with
Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined in the
Grants.gov 3-Step Registration Guide (see http://www.grants.gov/section910/Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf).
8. Other Submission Requirements:
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement
in accordance with the instructions in this section.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
Applications for grants under the Investing in Innovation Fund,
CFDA number 84.411B (Validation grants), must be submitted
electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at http://www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy
of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and
submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a
grant application to us.
We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
You may access the electronic grant application for Investing in
Innovation Fund at http://www.Grants.gov. You must search for the
downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA
number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search
(e.g., search for 84.411, not 84.411B).
Please note the following:
When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find
information about submitting an application electronically through the
site, as well as the hours of operation.
Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must
be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as
[[Page 32168]]
otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if
it is received--that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov
system--after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply
with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from
Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application
because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after
4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.
The amount of time it can take to upload an application
will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
You should review and follow the Education Submission
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures
pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5
system home page at http://www.G5.gov.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your
application in paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
all information you typically provide on the following forms: the
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications.
You must upload any narrative sections and all other
attachments to your application as files in a .PDF (Portable Document)
format only. If you upload a file type other than a .PDF or submit a
password-protected file, we will not review that material.
Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send
a second notification to you by e-mail. This second notification
indicates that the Department has received your application and has
assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified
identifying number unique to your application).
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues
with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
If you are prevented from electronically submitting your
application on the application deadline date because of technical
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension
until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing
instructions described elsewhere in this notice.
If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed
under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice and
provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with
Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will
accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem
occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your
ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after
a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted.
Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply
only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the
Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed
to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before
the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem
you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.
Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an
exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your
application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application
through the Grants.gov system because--
You do not have access to the Internet; or
You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to
the Grants.gov system; and
No later than two weeks before the application deadline
date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the
application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business
day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement
to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception
prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application.
If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be
postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline
date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must
receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the
application deadline date.
Address and mail or fax your statement to: Thelma Leenhouts, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W302,
Washington, DC 20202-5900. Fax: (202) 401-8466.
Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the
mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a
commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail
the original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.411B), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
[[Page 32169]]
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated
postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your
local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper
application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original
and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.411B), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.
Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by the
Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix
letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your
application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification
of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this
notification within 15 business days from the application deadline
date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application
Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from the 2010 i3 NFP and from 34 CFR 75.210.\7\ The points assigned
to each criterion are indicated in the parenthesis next to the
criterion. Applicants may earn up to a total of 100 points.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The 2011 Notice of Final i3 Revisions establishes that the
Secretary may use one or more of the selection criteria established
in the 2010 i3 NFP, any of the selection criteria in 34 CFR 75.210,
criteria based on the statutory requirements for the i3 program in
accordance with 34 CFR 75.209, or any combination of these when
establishing selection criteria for each particular type of grant
(Scale-up, Validation, and Development) in an i3 competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The selection criteria for the Validation grant competition are as
follows:
A. Need for the Project (up to 25 points).
The Secretary considers the need for the project.
In determining the need for the project, the Secretary considers
the following factors:
(1) The magnitude of the need for the services to be provided or
the activities to be carried out by the proposed project.
(2) The extent to which the proposed project represents an
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities established for the
competition.
(3) The importance and magnitude of the effect expected to be
obtained by the proposed project, including the extent to which the
project will substantially and measurably improve student achievement
or student growth, close achievement gaps, decrease dropout rates,
increase high school graduation rates, or increase college enrollment
and completion rates. The evidence in support of the importance and
magnitude of the effect would be the research-based evidence provided
by the eligible applicant to support the proposed project. (2010 i3
NFP)
Note Linking Magnitude of Effect to Presented Evidence: The
Secretary notes that the extent to which the proposed project is
consistent with the research evidence provided by the eligible
applicant to support the proposed project is relevant to addressing
the third factor of Selection Criterion A and, therefore, will be
considered by the Secretary in evaluating the importance and/or
magnitude of the impact expected to be obtained by the proposed
project.
B. Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed
project.
In determining the quality of the project design, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the proposed project has a clear set of
goals and an explicit strategy, with actions that are (a) Aligned with
the priorities the eligible applicant is seeking to meet, and (b)
expected to result in achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes of
the proposed project. (2010 i3 NFP)
(2) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(3) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective
practice.
(4) The eligible applicant's estimate of the cost of the proposed
project, which includes the start up and operating costs per student
per year (including indirect costs) for reaching the total number of
students proposed to be served by the project. The eligible applicant
must include an estimate of the costs for the eligible applicant or
others (including other partners) to reach 100,000, 250,000, and
500,000 students. (2010 i3 NFP)
Note: The Secretary considers cost estimates both (a) To assess
the reasonableness of the costs relative to the objectives, design,
and potential significance for the total number of students to be
served by the proposed project, which is determined by the eligible
applicant, and (b) to understand the possible costs for the eligible
applicant or others (including other partners) to reach the scaling
targets of 100,000, 250,000, and 500,000 students for Validation
grants. An eligible applicant is free to propose how many students
it will serve under its project, and is expected to reach that
number of students by the end of the grant period. The scaling
targets, in contrast, are theoretical and allow peer reviewers to
assess the cost-effectiveness generally of proposed projects,
particularly in cases where initial investment may be required to
support projects that operate at reduced cost in the future, whether
implemented by the eligible applicant or any other entity. Grantees
are not required to reach these numbers during the grant period.
(5) The potential and planning for the incorporation of project
purposes, activities, or benefits into the ongoing work of the eligible
applicant and any other partners at the end of the Validation grant.
(2010 i3 NFP)
C. Quality of Project Evaluation (up to 25 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the project evaluation.
In determining the quality of the project evaluation to be
conducted, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will include a
well-designed experimental study or a well-designed quasi-experimental
study. (2010 i3 NFP)
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
high-quality implementation data and performance feedback, and permit
periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.
(2010 i3 NFP)
(3) The extent to which the evaluation will provide sufficient
information about the key elements and approach of the project so as to
facilitate replication or testing in other settings. (2010 i3 NFP)
(4) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes
sufficient resources to carry out the project evaluation effectively.
(2010 i3 NFP)
Note: We encourage eligible applicants to review the following
technical assistance resources on evaluation: (1) What Works
[[Page 32170]]
Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1; and (2)
IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/.
D. Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel (up to 25 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan and
personnel for the proposed project.
In determining the quality of the management plan and personnel for
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks, as well as tasks related to the sustainability and
scalability of the proposed project. (2010 i3 NFP)
(2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director and key project personnel, especially in
managing complex projects. (2010 i3 NFP)
(3) The eligible applicant's capacity (e.g., in terms of qualified
personnel, financial resources, or management capacity) to bring the
proposed project to scale on a State or regional level (as appropriate,
based on the results of the proposed project) working directly, or
through other partners, either during or following the end of the grant
period. (2010 i3 NFP)
2. Review and Selection Process: The Department will screen
applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in this
notice, and will determine which applications have met eligibility and
other statutory requirements.
The Department will use independent reviewers from various
backgrounds and professions including: pre-kindergarten-12 teachers and
principals, college and university educators, researchers and
evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grant makers
and managers, and others with education expertise. The Department will
thoroughly screen all reviewers for conflicts of interest to ensure a
fair and competitive review process.
Reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation, and score the
applications assigned to their panel, using the selection criteria
provided in this notice. For Validation grant applications, the
Department intends to conduct a two-tier review process to review and
score all eligible applications. Reviewers will review and score all
eligible Validation applications on the following three criteria: A.
Need for the Project; B. Quality of the Project Design; D. Quality of
the Management Plan and Personnel. If eligible applicants have chosen
to address a maximum of two of the competitive preference priorities
for purposes of earning the competitive preference priority points,
reviewers will review and score those competitive preference
priorities. If points are awarded, those points will be added to the
eligible applicant's score. Eligible applications that score highly on
these three criteria will then have the remaining criterion reviewed
and scored by a different panel of reviewers. The remaining criterion
is C. Quality of the Project Evaluation.
We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in
any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under
34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying
out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement
of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The
Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a
timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable
quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary
may impose special conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is
not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance;
has a financial or other management system that does not meet the
standards in 34 CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has not fulfilled
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN). We may notify you informally, also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the Investing in
Innovation program is to expand the implementation of, and investment
in, innovative practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on
improving student achievement or student growth for high-need students.
We have established several performance measures for the Investing in
Innovation Validation grants.
Short-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees
that reach their annual target number of students as specified in the
application; (2) the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies
supported by a Validation grant with ongoing well-designed and
independent evaluations that will provide evidence of their
effectiveness at improving student outcomes; (3) the percentage of
programs, practices, or strategies supported by a Validation grant with
ongoing evaluations that are providing high-quality implementation data
and performance feedback that allow for periodic assessment of progress
toward achieving intended outcomes; and (4) the cost per student
actually served by the grant.
Long-term performance measures: (1) The percentage of grantees that
reach the targeted number of students specified in the application; (2)
the percentage of programs, practices, or strategies supported by a
Validation
[[Page 32171]]
grant that implement a completed well-designed, well-implemented and
independent evaluation that provides evidence of their effectiveness at
improving student outcomes; (3) the percentage of programs, practices,
or strategies supported by a Validation grant with a completed well-
designed, well-implemented and independent evaluation that provides
information about the key elements and the approach of the project so
as to facilitate replication or testing in other settings; and (4) the
cost per student for programs, practices, or strategies that were
proven to be effective at improving educational outcomes for students.
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thelma Leenhouts, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W302, Washington, DC
20202-5900. Fax: (202) 401-8466. Telephone: (202) 453-7122 or by e-
mail: http://[email protected].
If you use a TDD, call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package 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 in section VII of this notice.
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: May 26, 2011.
James H. Shelton, III,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2011-13594 Filed 6-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P