81 FR 30279 - Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund-Validation Grants

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 94 (May 16, 2016)

Page Range30279-30291
FR Document2016-11522

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30279-30291]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11522]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Investing in Innovation Fund--
Validation Grants

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

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

Overview Information

Investing in Innovation Fund--Validation Grants

    Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 
2016.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.411B 
(Validation Grants).

Dates: Applications Available: May 18, 2016. Deadline for Notice of 
Intent to Apply: June 6, 2016. Deadline for Transmittal of 
Applications: July 15, 2016. Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: 
September 13, 2016.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The Investing in Innovation Fund (i3), 
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 i3 program is designed to generate and validate solutions to 
persistent educational challenges and to support the expansion of 
effective solutions to serve substantially larger numbers of students. 
The central design element of the i3 program is its multi-tier 
structure that links the amount of funding that an applicant may 
receive to the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the 
proposed project. Applicants proposing practices supported by limited 
evidence can receive relatively small grants that support the 
development and initial evaluation of promising practices and help to 
identify new solutions to pressing challenges; applicants proposing 
practices supported by evidence from rigorous evaluations, such as 
large randomized controlled trials, can receive sizable grants to 
support expansion across the country. This structure provides 
incentives for applicants to build evidence of effectiveness of their 
proposed projects and to address the barriers to serving more students 
across schools, districts, and States.
    As importantly, all i3 projects are required to generate additional 
evidence of effectiveness. All i3 grantees must use part of their 
budgets to conduct independent evaluations (as defined in this notice) 
of their projects. This requirement ensures that projects funded under 
the i3 program contribute significantly to improving the information 
available to practitioners and policymakers about which practices work, 
for which types of students, and in what contexts.
    The Department awards three types of grants under this program: 
``Development'' grants, ``Validation'' grants, and ``Scale-up'' grants. 
These grants differ in terms of the level of prior evidence of 
effectiveness required for consideration of funding, the level of scale 
the funded project should reach, and, consequently, the amount of 
funding available to support the project.
    This notice invites applications for Validation grants only. The 
notice inviting applications for Scale-up grants is published elsewhere 
in this issue of the Federal Register. The notice inviting applications 
for Development grants

[[Page 30280]]

was published in the Federal Register on April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24070) 
and is available at https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-04-25/pdf/2016-09436.pdf.
    Validation grants provide funding to support expansion of projects 
supported by moderate evidence of effectiveness (as defined in this 
notice) to the regional level (as defined in this notice) or to the 
national level (as defined in this notice). In addition, as Validation 
projects seek to improve outcomes for students in high need schools, 
they also generate important information about an intervention's 
effectiveness and the contexts for which a practice is most effective. 
We expect that Validation grants will increase practitioners' and 
policymakers' understanding of the implementation of proven practices, 
and help identify effective approaches to expanding such practices 
while also maintaining or increasing their effectiveness across 
contexts.
    All Validation grantees must evaluate the effectiveness of the i3-
supported practice that the project implements and expands. The 
evaluation of a Validation project must identify the core elements of, 
and codify, the i3-supported practice that the project implements in 
order to support adoption or replication by other entities. We also 
expect that evaluations of Validation grants will be conducted and 
disaggregated in a variety of contexts and for a variety of students in 
order to determine the context(s) and population(s) for which the i3-
supported practice is most effective.
    We remind LEAs of the continuing applicability of the provisions of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for students who 
may be served under i3 grants. Any grants in which LEAs participate 
must be consistent with the rights, protections, and processes 
established under IDEA for students who are receiving special education 
and related services or who are in the process of being evaluated to 
determine their eligibility for such services.
    As described later in this notice, 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, as 
amended, and the Department's section 504 implementing regulations, 
which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. Regardless of 
whether a student with disabilities is specifically targeted as a 
``high-need student'' (as defined in this notice) in a particular grant 
application, recipients are required to comply with all legal 
nondiscrimination requirements, including, but not limited to the 
obligation to ensure that students with disabilities are not denied 
access to the benefits of the recipient's program because of their 
disability. The Department also enforces title II of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as the regulations implementing title 
II of the ADA, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability 
by public entities.
    Furthermore, title VI and title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 
prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national 
origin, and sex, respectively. On December 2, 2011, the Departments of 
Education and Justice jointly issued guidance that explains how 
educational institutions can promote student diversity or avoid racial 
isolation within the framework of title VI (e.g., through consideration 
of the racial demographics of neighborhoods when drawing assignment 
zones for schools or through targeted recruiting efforts). The 
``Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid 
Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools'' is available on 
the Department's Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/guidance-ese-201111.pdf.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In both 2013 and 2014, the Departments reiterated the 
continued viability of this 2011 guidance after two relevant Supreme 
Court decisions. Those guidance documents may be found at 
www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201309.pdf, www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/dcl-qa-201309.pdf, and www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201405-schuette-guidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    Through its competitions, the i3 program seeks to improve the 
academic achievement of students in high-need schools by identifying 
and scaling promising solutions to pressing challenges in kindergarten 
through grade 12 (K-12). Now in its seventh year, the i3 program has 
invested over $1.3 billion--matched by over $200 million in private 
sector resources--in a portfolio of solutions and rigorous evaluations 
of several approaches that address critical challenges in education. 
When selecting the priorities for a given competition, the Department 
considers several factors including policy priorities, the need for new 
solutions in a particular priority area, the extent of the existing 
evidence supporting effective practices in a particular priority area, 
whether other available funding exists for a particular priority area, 
and the results and lessons learned from funded projects from prior i3 
competitions. This year's competition does not include specific 
priorities for students with disabilities and English learners, as the 
program has successfully funded a range of projects serving these high-
need populations under i3's broader priorities in previous 
competitions. Additionally, all applicants continue to be required to 
serve high-need student populations, and we continue to encourage 
applicants to consider how their proposed projects could serve students 
with disabilities or English learners. Applicants are encouraged to 
design an evaluation that will report findings on English learners, 
students with disabilities, and other subgroups.
    All i3 grantees are expected to improve academic outcomes for high-
need students (as defined in this notice). The FY 2016 Validation 
competition includes four absolute priorities. These absolute 
priorities are intended to address persistent challenges in public 
education for which there are solutions that are supported by rigorous 
evidence. We are particularly interested in supporting such efforts in 
rural areas. As such, and consistent with the past three competitions, 
applicants applying under the Serving Rural Communities priority 
(Absolute Priority 4) must also address one of the other three absolute 
priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 Validation competition. This 
structure has resulted in a strong set of grantees that are addressing 
the unique challenges in rural communities. We also include one 
competitive preference priority for novice i3 applicants.
    First, we include an absolute priority for projects designed to 
implement, and support the transition to, internationally benchmarked, 
college- and career-ready academic content standards and associated 
assessments. Many States have raised the expectations for what schools 
should teach and their students should learn and do across the K-12 
grade span by adopting new, more rigorous standards and assessments 
aligned to the demands of college and careers. Emerging research 
confirms that these exams are aligned to more rigorous standards.\2\ 
Educators are now faced with the important task of effectively 
implementing these higher standards and ensuring their students are 
adequately prepared for the associated assessments in order to ensure 
that all students are ready for

[[Page 30281]]

post-secondary opportunities and their careers. Furthermore, throughout 
this continuing transition to higher standards and new assessments, 
schools and school districts need to continue to develop evidence-based 
approaches to increase the rigor of teaching and learning across 
various academic settings. For example, efforts are underway in 
districts across the country to provide teachers and school leaders 
with rich, student-specific information based on formative and 
summative assessments to help educators understand why students might 
be struggling--thereby enabling them to better align their subsequent 
instruction. Through this priority, the Department seeks to invest in 
strategies that leverage data and results from internationally 
benchmarked, college- and career-ready assessments to inform 
instruction and, ultimately, to support and improve student 
achievement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Doorey, N. and Polikoff, M. Evaluating the Content and 
Quality of Next Generation Assessments (2016). Washington, DC: 
Thomas Fordham Institute. Available at: http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/%2802.09%20-%20Final%20Published%29%20Evaluating%20the%20Content%20and%20Quality%20of%20Next%20Generation%20Assessments.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, we include an absolute priority for projects promoting 
science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. 
Ensuring that all students can access and excel in STEM fields--which 
includes coding and computer science--is essential to meeting the needs 
of our Nation's economy and to our future prosperity.\3\ For example, 
the President highlights computer science specifically in his Computer 
Science for All Initiative.\4\ Careers in STEM fields are growing, as 
are the knowledge and skills required to compete for and succeed in 
these specialized jobs.\5\ Recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows 
that, between 2010 and 2020, employment in STEM occupations is expected 
to expand faster than employment in non-STEM occupations (by 17 versus 
14 percent).\6\ Also, by 2018, 51 percent of STEM jobs are projected to 
be in computer science-related fields.\7\ Moreover, STEM-related 
skills, such as data analysis and computational and technical literacy, 
are relevant to a wide array of postsecondary educational and 
professional pursuits. The Department seeks to provide students with 
increased access to rigorous and engaging STEM programs and instruction 
grounded in authentic STEM experiences (as defined in this notice), in 
both formal and informal learning settings, and resulting in improved 
STEM-related academic outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., and Doms, 
M. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics 
Administration. STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the Future (July 2011). 
ESA Issue Brief #03-11. Available at: www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf.
    \4\ Smith, Megan. Computer Science for All (January 2016). 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/30/computer-science-all.
    \5\ Chairman's Staff of the Joint Economic Committee. 
Calculations using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
Employment Projections: 2010-20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment 
and Job Openings Data, Projected 2010-20, and Worker 
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at: http://iedse.org/temp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/www.iedse_.org_documents_STEM-Education-Preparing-for-the-Jobs-of-the-Future-.pdf. For the purposes of this calculation, STEM 
occupations are defined as in the U.S. Department of Commerce's 
Economics and Statistics Administration report, STEM: Good Jobs Now 
and for the Future. ESA Issue Brief #03-11. July 2011.
    \6\ Chairman's Staff of the Joint Economic Committee. 
Calculations using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
Employment Projections: 2010-20. Table 1.7 Occupational Employment 
and Job Openings Data, Projected 2010-20, and Worker 
Characteristics, 2010. February 2012. Available at: http://bls.gov/emp/. For the purposes of this calculation, STEM occupations are 
defined as in the U.S. Department of Commerce's Economics and 
Statistics Administration report, STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the 
Future. ESA Issue Brief #03-11. July 2011.
    \7\ Carnevale, A., Smith, N., and Melton, M. Center on Education 
and the Workforce, Georgetown University. Science Technology 
Engineering Mathematics (2014). Available at: https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/stem-complete.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, we include an absolute priority focused on improving low-
performing schools. The Department looks to support whole-school models 
and strategies that lead to significant and sustained improvement in 
individual student performance and overall school performance and 
culture. Thousands of schools do not adequately prepare students to 
achieve at grade level and struggle to overcome the gaps in student 
performance across socioeconomic and racial groups.\8\ Research shows 
that the greatest portion of the gap in performance between Black and 
White students comes from the differences within a school as opposed to 
differences across school settings.\9\ Furthermore, while graduation 
rates have been steadily improving nationwide, in 17 States, less than 
70 percent of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds 
graduate from high school.\10\ While considerable attention has been 
paid to these schools in recent years, the pace of progress continues 
to be slow and school turnaround successes tend to be isolated rather 
than systematic. Whole-school models that successfully transform school 
culture and student outcomes can be comprised of a range of strategies, 
such as harnessing teacher leadership,\11\ creating small learning 
communities, academic interventions, and school redesign. Overall, we 
seek to support projects that work across schools and districts in 
multiple regions to transform the learning environment by instituting a 
range of evidence-based practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ PISA Results from 2012. Country Note: United States. 
www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-US.pdf.
    \9\ Bohrnstedt, G., Kitmitto, S., Ogut, B., Sherman, D., and 
Chan, D. (2015). School Composition and the Black-White Achievement 
Gap (NCES 2015-018). U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC: 
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved September 24, 
2015 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
    \10\ U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 
Statistics (NCES): https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/tables/ACGR_RE_and_characteristics_2013-14.asp.
    \11\ School Turnarounds: How Successful Principals Use Teacher 
Leadership. (March 2016). http://publicimpact.com/school-turnarounds-how-successful-principals-use-teacher-leadership/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we include an absolute priority for serving rural 
communities. Students living in rural communities face unique 
challenges, such as lack of access to specialized courses or college 
advising. Applicants applying under this priority must also address one 
of the other three absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 i3 
Validation competition, while serving students enrolled in rural local 
educational agencies (as defined in this notice).
    We also include one competitive preference priority in the FY 2016 
Validation competition. To expand the reach of the i3 program and 
encourage entities that have not previously received an i3 grant to 
apply, the Department includes a competitive preference priority for 
novice i3 applicants. A novice i3 applicant is an applicant that has 
never received a grant under the i3 program. An applicant must identify 
whether it is a novice applicant when completing the applicant 
information sheet. Instructions on how to complete the applicant 
information sheet are included in the application package.
    Applicants should carefully review all of the requirements in the 
Eligibility Information section of this notice for instructions on how 
to demonstrate moderate evidence of effectiveness and for information 
on the other eligibility, program, and application requirements. In 
summary, applications must address one of the first three absolute 
priorities for this competition and propose projects designed to 
implement practices that serve students who are in grades K-12 at some 
point during the funding period. If an applicant chooses to also 
address the absolute priority regarding students in rural LEAs, that 
applicant must also address one of the other three absolute priorities 
established for the FY 2016 i3 Validation competition, while serving 
students enrolled in rural LEAs (as defined in this notice). 
Additionally,

[[Page 30282]]

applicants must be able to show moderate evidence of effectiveness for 
the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice included in their 
applications. To meet the eligibility requirement regarding the 
applicant's record of improvement, an applicant must provide, in its 
application, sufficient supporting data or other information to allow 
the Department to determine whether the applicant has met the 
eligibility requirements. Note that, to address the statutory 
eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b) of the 
statutory eligibility requirements (provided in the Eligibility 
Information section), applicants must provide data that demonstrate a 
change due to the work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In 
other words, applicants must provide data for at least two definitive 
points in time when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their 
applications. Additional information for this requirement can be found 
under the Eligibility Information section of this notice.
    The i3 program includes a statutory requirement for a private-
sector match for all i3 grantees. For Validation grants, an applicant 
must obtain matching funds or in-kind donations from the private sector 
equal to at least 10 percent of its grant award. Each highest-rated 
application, as identified by the Department following peer review of 
the applications, must submit evidence of at least 50 percent of the 
required private-sector match prior to the awarding of an i3 grant. An 
applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 percent of the 
required private-sector match no later than three months after the 
project start date (i.e., for the FY 2016 competition, three months 
after January 1, 2017, or by April 1, 2017). The grant will be 
terminated if the grantee does not secure its private-sector match by 
the established deadline.
    This notice includes selection criteria for the FY 2016 Validation 
competition that are designed to ensure that applications selected for 
funding have the potential to generate substantial improvements in 
student achievement (and other key outcomes) and include well-
articulated plans for the implementation and evaluation of the proposed 
projects. Applicants should review the selection criteria and 
submission instructions carefully to ensure their applications address 
this year's criteria.
    An entity that submits an application for a Validation grant should 
include the following information in its application: An estimate of 
the number of students to be served by the project; evidence of the 
applicant's ability to implement and appropriately evaluate the 
proposed project; and information about its capacity (e.g., management 
capacity, financial resources, and qualified personnel) to implement 
the project at a national or regional level, working directly or 
through partners. We recognize that LEAs are not typically responsible 
for taking their practices, strategies, or programs to scale; however, 
all applicants can and should partner with others to disseminate their 
effective practices, strategies and programs and take them to scale.
    The Department will screen applications that are submitted for 
Validation grants in accordance with the requirements in this notice 
and determine which applications meet the eligibility and other 
requirements. Peer reviewers will review all applications for 
Validation grants that are submitted by the established deadline.
    Applicants should note, however, that we may screen for eligibility 
at multiple points during the competition process, including before and 
after peer review; applicants that are determined to be ineligible will 
not receive a grant award regardless of peer reviewer scores or 
comments. If we determine that a Validation grant application is not 
supported by moderate evidence of effectiveness, or that the applicant 
does not demonstrate the required prior record of improvement, or does 
not meet any other i3 requirement, the application will not be 
considered for funding.
    Please note that on December 10, 2015, the Every Student Succeeds 
Act (ESSA), which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965, was signed into law. ESSA establishes the Education 
Innovation and Research Program (EIR), a new program that builds on the 
work led by the i3 program and its grantees. Accordingly, this FY 2016 
i3 competition will be the final i3 competition under current statute 
and regulations. Pending congressional appropriations, the Department 
will launch the first EIR competition in FY 2017.
    Priorities: This competition includes four absolute priorities and 
one competitive preference priority. Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 are 
from the Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and 
definitions for discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal 
Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425) (Supplemental Priorities). 
Absolute Priorities 3 and 4 and the competitive preference priority are 
from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria for this program, published in the Federal Register 
on March 27, 2013 (78 FR 18681) (2013 i3 NFP).
    Absolute Priorities: For FY 2016 and any subsequent year in which 
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet one of these 
priorities.
    Applicants must address one of the first four absolute priorities. 
An applicant that addresses Absolute Priority 4, Serving Rural 
Communities, must also address one of the first three absolute 
priorities. Because applications will be rank ordered by absolute 
priority, applicants must clearly identify the specific absolute 
priority that the proposed project addresses. Applications submitted 
under Absolute Priority 4 will be ranked with other applications under 
Absolute Priority 4 and not included in the ranking for the additional 
priority that the applicant identified. This design helps us ensure 
that applications under Absolute Priority 4 receive an ``apples to 
apples'' comparison with other applicants addressing the Serving Rural 
Communities priority.
    These priorities are:
    Absolute Priority 1--Implementing Internationally Benchmarked 
College- and Career-Ready Standards and Assessments.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to support the implementation of, and transition to, 
internationally benchmarked college- and career-ready standards and 
assessments, including developing and implementing strategies that use 
the standards and information from assessments to inform classroom 
practices that meet the needs of all students.
    Absolute Priority 2--Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, 
and Mathematics (STEM) Education.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that are 
designed to improve Student Achievement or other related outcomes by 
providing students with increased access to rigorous and engaging STEM 
coursework and Authentic STEM Experiences (as defined in this notice) 
that may be integrated across multiple settings.
    Absolute Priority 3--Improving Low-Performing Schools.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address 
designing whole-school models and implementing processes that lead to 
significant and sustained improvement

[[Page 30283]]

in individual student performance and overall school performance and 
culture. These models may incorporate such strategies as providing 
strong school leadership; strengthening the instructional program; 
embedding professional development that provides teachers with frequent 
feedback to increase the rigor and effectiveness of their instructional 
practice; redesigning the school day, week, or year; using data to 
inform instruction and improvement; establishing a school environment 
that promotes a culture of high expectations; addressing non-academic 
factors that affect student achievement; and providing ongoing 
mechanisms for parent and family engagement.
    Other requirements related to Priority 3:
    To meet this priority, a project must serve schools among (1) the 
lowest-performing schools in the State on academic performance 
measures; (2) schools in the State with the largest within-school 
performance gaps between student subgroups described in section 
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA; or (3) secondary schools in the State with the 
lowest graduation rate over a number of years or the largest within-
school gaps in graduation rates between student subgroups described in 
section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA. Additionally, projects funded under 
this priority must complement the broader turnaround efforts of the 
school(s), LEA(s), or State(s) where the projects will be implemented.
    Absolute Priority 4--Serving Rural Communities.
    Under this priority, we provide funding to projects that address 
one of the absolute priorities established for the FY 2016 Validation 
i3 competition and under which the majority of students to be served 
are enrolled in rural local educational agencies (as defined in this 
notice).
    Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2016 and any subsequent 
year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications 
from this competition, this priority is a competitive preference 
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award three additional points 
to applications that meet the competitive preference priority.
    The priority is:
    Competitive Preference Priority--Supporting Novice i3 Applicants (0 
or 3 points).
    Eligible applicants that have never directly received a grant under 
this program.
    Definitions:
    The definition of ``authentic STEM experiences'' is from the 
Supplemental Priorities. The definitions of ``large sample,'' ``logic 
model,'' ``moderate evidence of effectiveness,'' ``multi-site sample,'' 
``national level,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' ``randomized 
controlled trial,'' ``regional level,'' ``relevant outcome,'' and 
``What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Evidence Standards'' are from 34 CFR 
77.1. All other definitions are from the 2013 i3 NFP. We may apply 
these definitions in any year in which this program is in effect.
    Authentic STEM experiences means laboratory, research-based, or 
experiential learning opportunities in a STEM (science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics) subject in informal or formal settings.
    Consortium of schools means two or more public elementary or 
secondary schools acting collaboratively for the purpose of applying 
for and implementing an i3 grant jointly with an eligible nonprofit 
organization.
    High-minority school is defined by a school's LEA in a manner 
consistent with the corresponding State's Teacher Equity Plan, as 
required by section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the ESEA. The applicant must 
provide, in its i3 application, the definition(s) used.
    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 (as defined 
in this notice), who are far below grade level, who have left school 
before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at risk of not 
graduating with a diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster 
care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are 
English learners.
    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.
    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 process, product, strategy, or practice and 
are implementing it.
    Innovation means a process, product, strategy, or practice that 
improves (or is expected to improve) significantly upon the outcomes 
reached with status quo options and that can ultimately reach 
widespread effective usage.
    Large sample means an analytic sample of 350 or more students (or 
other single analysis units), or 50 or more groups (such as classrooms 
or schools) that contain 10 or more students (or other single analysis 
units).
    Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a well-
specified conceptual framework that identifies key components of the 
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice (i.e., the active 
``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the 
relevant outcomes) and describes the relationships among the key 
components and outcomes, theoretically and operationally.
    Moderate evidence of effectiveness means that (i) There is at least 
one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or 
practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse 
Evidence Standards without reservations, found a statistically 
significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome (as defined in this 
notice) (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable 
impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in 
other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the 
What Works Clearinghouse), and includes a sample that overlaps with the 
populations or settings proposed to receive the process, product, 
strategy, or practice. (ii) There is at least one study of the 
effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being 
proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards 
with reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact 
on a relevant outcome (as defined in this notice) (with no 
statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that 
outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of 
the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works 
Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations or 
settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or 
practice, and includes a large sample (as defined in this notice) and a 
multi-site sample (as defined in this notice). (Note: Multiple studies 
can cumulatively meet the large and multisite sample requirements as 
long as each study meets the other requirements in this paragraph).
    Multi-site sample means more than one site, where site can be 
defined as an LEA, locality, or State.
    National level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a 
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to be effective in 
a wide variety of communities, including rural and urban areas, as well 
as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and 
ethnic groups, migrant populations,

[[Page 30284]]

individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals 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.
    Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that 
attempts to approximate an experimental design by identifying a 
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important 
respects. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can 
meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations (but 
not What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations).
    Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random 
assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or 
districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment 
group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The 
estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between 
the average outcomes for the treatment group and for the control group. 
These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What 
Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations.
    Regional level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a 
process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to serve a variety 
of communities within a State or multiple States, including rural and 
urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically 
disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations, 
individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of 
each gender). For an LEA-based project to be considered a regional-
level project, a process, product, strategy, or practice must serve 
students in more than one LEA, unless the process, product, strategy, 
or practice is implemented in a State in which the State educational 
agency is the sole educational agency for all schools.
    Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) (or the ultimate 
outcome if not related to students) the proposed process, product, 
strategy or practice is designed to improve; consistent with the 
specific goals of a program.
    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.
    Student achievement means--
    (a) For grades and subjects in which assessments are required under 
ESEA section 1111(b)(3): (1) A student's score on such assessments and 
may include (2) other measures of student learning, such as those 
described in paragraph (b), provided they are rigorous and comparable 
across schools within an LEA.
    (b) For grades and subjects in which assessments are not required 
under ESEA section 1111(b)(3): Alternative measures of student learning 
and performance such as student results on pre-tests, end-of-course 
tests, and objective performance-based assessments; student learning 
objectives; student performance on English language proficiency 
assessments; and other measures of student achievement that are 
rigorous and comparable across schools within an LEA.
    Student growth means the change in student achievement (as defined 
in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in 
time. An applicant may also include other measures that are rigorous 
and comparable across classrooms.
    What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set 
forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook 
(Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link: 
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19.
    Program Authority: ARRA, Division A, Section 14007, Public Law 111-
5.
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 
84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget 
Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension 
(Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as 
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform 
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements 
for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as 
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The 2013 i3 NFP. 
(e) The Supplemental Priorities.

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants 
except federally recognized Indian tribes.


    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: $103,100,000.
    These estimated available funds are the total available for all 
three types of grants under the i3 program (Development, Validation, 
and Scale-up grants). Contingent upon the availability of funds and the 
quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 or 
later years from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition.
    Estimated Range of Awards:
    Development grants: Up to $3,000,000.
    Validation grants: Up to $12,000,000.
    Scale-up grants: Up to $20,000,000.

    Note: The upper limit of the range of awards (e.g., $12,000,000 
for Validation grants) is referred to as the ``maximum amount of 
awards'' under Other in section III of this notice.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards:
    Development grants: $3,000,000.
    Validation grants: $11,500,000.
    Scale-up grants: $19,000,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards:
    Development grants: 9-11 awards.
    Validation grants: 2-3 awards.
    Scale-up grants: 0-2 awards.

    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this 
notice.

    Project Period: 36-60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Innovations that Improve Achievement for High-Need Students: All 
grantees must implement practices that are designed to improve student 
achievement (as defined in this notice) or student growth (as defined 
in this notice), close achievement gaps, decrease dropout rates, 
increase high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice), or 
increase college enrollment and completion rates for high-need students 
(as defined in this notice).
    2. Innovations that Serve Kindergarten-through-Grade-12 (K-12) 
Students: All grantees must implement practices that serve students who 
are in grades K-12 at some point during the funding period. To meet 
this requirement, projects that serve early learners (i.e., infants, 
toddlers, or preschoolers) must provide services or supports that 
extend into kindergarten or later years, and projects that serve 
postsecondary students must provide services or supports during the 
secondary grades or earlier.

[[Page 30285]]

    3. Eligible Applicants: Entities eligible to apply for i3 grants 
include either of the following:
    (a) An LEA.
    (b) A partnership between a nonprofit organization and--
    (1) One or more LEAs; or
    (2) A consortium of schools.
    Statutory Eligibility Requirements: Except as specifically set 
forth in the Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that 
Includes a Nonprofit Organization that follows, to be eligible for an 
award, an eligible applicant must--
    (a)(1) 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
    (2) Have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student 
academic achievement for all groups of students described in that 
section;
    (b) Have made significant improvements in other areas, such as high 
school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) or increased 
recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and principals, as 
demonstrated with meaningful data;
    (c) Demonstrate that it has established one or more partnerships 
with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, 
and that organizations in the private sector will provide matching 
funds in order to help bring results to scale; and
    (d) 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.

    Note: An entity submitting an application should provide, in 
Appendix C, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its application, 
information addressing the eligibility requirements described in 
this section. An applicant must provide, in its application, 
sufficient supporting data or other information to allow the 
Department to determine whether the applicant has met the 
eligibility requirements. Note that, to address the statutory 
eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) or (2), and (b), 
applicants must provide data that demonstrate a change due to the 
work of the applicant with an LEA or schools. In other words, 
applicants must provide data for at least two definitive points in 
time when addressing this requirement in Appendix C of their 
applications. For further guidance, please refer to the definition 
of ``student achievement'' in this notice, and the question and 
answer Webinar for FY 2016 i3 Scale-up and Validation Applications. 
Additionally, information on the statutory eligibility requirements 
can be found on the i3 Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. If the Department 
determines that an applicant provided insufficient information in 
its application, the applicant will not have an opportunity to 
provide additional information.

    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.

    Note about Eligibility for an Eligible Applicant that Includes a 
Nonprofit Organization: The authorizing statute specifies that an 
eligible applicant that includes a nonprofit organization meets the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) 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 i3 grant an LEA or a consortium of schools that meets the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the eligibility 
requirements in this notice.

    In addition, the authorizing statute specifies that an eligible 
applicant that includes a nonprofit organization meets the requirements 
of paragraph (c) of the eligibility requirements in this notice if the 
eligible applicant demonstrates that it will meet the requirement for 
private-sector matching.
    4. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an 
applicant must demonstrate that one or more private-sector 
organizations, which may include philanthropic organizations, will 
provide matching funds in order to help bring project results to scale. 
An eligible Validation applicant must obtain matching funds, or in-kind 
donations, equal to at least 10 percent of its Federal grant award. The 
highest-rated eligible applicants must submit evidence of 50 percent of 
the required private-sector matching funds following the peer review of 
applications. A Federal i3 award will not be made unless the applicant 
provides adequate evidence that the 50 percent of the required private-
sector match has been committed or the Secretary approves the eligible 
applicant's request to reduce the matching-level requirement. An 
applicant must provide evidence of the remaining 50 percent of required 
private-sector match three months after the project start date.
    The Secretary may consider decreasing the matching requirement on a 
case-by-case basis, and only in the most exceptional circumstances. 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 that the Secretary reduce the matching-level 
requirement, along with a statement of the basis for the request.

    Note: An applicant that does not provide a request for a 
reduction of the matching-level requirement in its application may 
not submit that request at a later time.

    5. Other: The Secretary establishes the following requirements for 
the i3 program. These requirements are from the 2013 i3 NFP. 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 of effectiveness (as defined in this notice).

    Note: An applicant should identify up to two study citations to 
be reviewed against What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards for 
the purposes of meeting the i3 evidence standard requirement. An 
applicant should clearly identify these citations in Appendix D, 
under the ``Other Attachments Form,'' of its application. The 
Department will not review a study citation that an applicant fails 
to clearly identify for review. In addition to the two study 
citations, applicants should include a description of the 
intervention(s) the applicant plans to implement and the intended 
student outcomes that the intervention(s) attempts to impact in 
Appendix D.

    An applicant must either ensure that all evidence is available to 
the Department from publicly available sources and provide links or 
other guidance indicating where it is available; or, in the full 
application, include copies of evidence in Appendix D. If the 
Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient 
information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide 
additional information at a later time. However, if the WWC determines 
that a study does not provide enough information on key aspects of the 
study design, such as sample attrition or equivalence of intervention 
and comparison groups, the WWC will submit a query to the study 
author(s) to gather information for use in determining a study rating.

[[Page 30286]]

Authors are asked to respond to queries within ten business days. 
Should the author query remain incomplete within 14 days of the initial 
contact to the study author(s), the study will be deemed ineligible 
under the grant competition. After the grant competition closes, the 
WWC will continue to include responses to author queries and will make 
updates to study reviews as necessary. However, the competition can 
only take into account information that is available at the time the 
competition is open.

    Note: The evidence standards apply to the prior research that 
supports the effectiveness of the proposed project. The i3 program 
does not restrict the source of prior research providing evidence 
for the proposed project. As such, an applicant could cite prior 
research in Appendix D for studies that were conducted by another 
entity (i.e., an entity that is not the applicant) so long as the 
prior research studies cited in the application are relevant to the 
effectiveness of the proposed project.

     Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered for an 
award only for the type of i3 grant (i.e., Development, Validation, or 
Scale-up grant) for which it applies. An applicant may not submit an 
application for the same proposed project under more than one type of 
grant.
     Limit 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 in a 
single year new i3 grant awards that total an amount greater than the 
sum of the maximum amount of funds for a Scale-up grant and the maximum 
amount of funds for a Development grant for that year. For example, in 
a year when the maximum award value for a Scale-up grant is $20 million 
and the maximum award value for a Development grant is $3 million, no 
grantee may receive in a single year new grants totaling more than $23 
million.
     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 
and, if funded, as the grantee, may make subgrants to one or more 
entities in the partnership.
     Evaluation: The grantee must conduct an independent 
evaluation (as defined in this notice) of its project. This evaluation 
must estimate the impact of the i3-supported practice (as implemented 
at the proposed level of scale) on a relevant outcome (as defined in 
this notice). The grantee must make broadly available digitally and 
free of charge, through formal (e.g., peer-reviewed journals) or 
informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, the results of any evaluations 
it conducts of its funded activities. For Scale-up and Validation 
grants, the grantee must also ensure that the data from its evaluation 
are made available to third-party researchers consistent with 
applicable privacy requirements.
    In addition, the grantee and its independent evaluator must agree 
to cooperate with any technical assistance provided by the Department 
or its contractor and comply with the requirements of any evaluation of 
the program conducted by the Department. This includes providing to the 
Department, within 100 days of a grant award, an updated comprehensive 
evaluation plan in a format and using such tools as the Department may 
require. Grantees must update this evaluation plan at least annually to 
reflect any changes to the evaluation. All of these updates must be 
consistent with the scope and objectives of the approved application.
     Communities of Practice: Grantees must participate in, 
organize, or facilitate, as appropriate, communities of practice for 
the i3 program. 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.
     Management Plan: Within 100 days of a grant award, the 
grantee must provide an updated comprehensive management plan for the 
approved project in a format and using such tools as the Department may 
require. This management plan must include detailed information about 
implementation of the first year of the grant, including key 
milestones, staffing details, and other information that the Department 
may require. It must also include a complete list of performance 
metrics, including baseline measures and annual targets. The grantee 
must update this management plan at least annually to reflect 
implementation of subsequent years of the project.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. 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://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call: 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) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.
    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at 
its email address: [email protected].
    If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to 
identify this 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 compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under 
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
    2.a. 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.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Application: June 6, 2016.
    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 by completing a Web-
based form. When completing this form, applicants will provide (1) the 
applicant organization's name and address and (2) the absolute priority 
the applicant intends to address. Applicants may access this form 
online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/K9ZVJDS. Applicants that do 
not complete this form may still submit an application.
    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 should limit the 
application narrative for a Validation grant application to no more 
than 35 pages. Applicants are also strongly encouraged not to include 
lengthy appendices that contain information that they were unable to 
include within the page limits for 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,

[[Page 30287]]

headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.
     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.
    The page limit for the application 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 of the application. However, the page limit does apply to all 
of the application narrative section of the application.
    b. Submission of Proprietary Information:
    Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications 
for the i3 program, your application may include business information 
that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define ``business 
information'' and describe the process we use in determining whether 
any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from 
disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 
U.S.C. 552, as amended).
    Consistent with the process followed in the prior i3 competitions, 
we plan on posting the project narrative section of funded i3 
applications on the Department's Web site. Accordingly, you may wish to 
request confidentiality of business information. Identifying 
proprietary information in the submitted application will help 
facilitate this public disclosure process.
    Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your 
application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure 
under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your 
application, under ``Other Attachments Form,'' please list the page 
number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional 
information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
    3. Submission Dates and Times:
    Applications Available: May 18, 2016.
    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Submit Applications: June 6, 2016.
    Informational Meetings: The i3 program intends to hold Webinars 
designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants for 
all three types of grants. Detailed information regarding these 
meetings will be provided on the i3 Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/investing-in-innovation-i3/.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 15, 2016.
    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 Other Submission Requirements in section 
IV 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: September 13, 2016.
    4. 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.
    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding 
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
    6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification 
Number, and System for Award Management: 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 System for Award 
Management (SAM) (formerly the Central Contractor Registry), the 
Government's primary registrant database;
    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
    d. Maintain an active SAM 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 at the 
following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be 
created within one-to-two business days.
    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 two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.
    The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business 
days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the 
completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. 
Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial 
assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow 
sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We 
strongly recommend that you register early.

    Note: Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 
hours before you can access the information in, and submit an 
application through, Grants.gov.

    If you are currently registered with SAM, 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 registration annually. This may take three or more business days.
    Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further 
assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in 
SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov 
Tip Sheet, which you can find at: http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.
    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 at the 
following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.
    7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants for the 
i3 program 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 i3 program, CFDA number 84.411B 
(Validation grants), must be submitted electronically using the 
Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site

[[Page 30288]]

at 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 email 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 the i3 program 
at 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 
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 www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and 
procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please 
refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.
     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 read-only, non-modifiable 
Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or 
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, 
non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a 
password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note 
that this could result in your application not being considered for 
funding because the material in question--for example, the project 
narrative--is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For 
that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload 
all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material 
from other formats to PDF.
     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. Grants.gov 
will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all 
the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors 
(such as submission of your application by someone other than a 
registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an 
attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will 
be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you 
must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.
    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the 
Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you 
an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.
    These emails do not mean that your application is without any 
disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully 
validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application 
requirements as specified in this notice and in the application 
instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure 
to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to 
submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant 
eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your 
submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.
     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 4:30:00 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 4:30:00 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

[[Page 30289]]

technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the 
problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will 
contact you after we determine 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 
prevents 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: Kelly Terpak, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W312, 
Washington, DC 20202. FAX: (202) 401-4123.
    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.
    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    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.

    We will not consider applications postmarked after the application 
deadline date.
    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 7039, Potomac Center 
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily 
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 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 the Validation 
competition are from the 2013 i3 NFP and 34 CFR 75.210, and are listed 
below.
    The points assigned to each criterion are indicated in the 
parentheses next to the criterion. An applicant may earn up to a total 
of 100 points based on the selection criteria for the application.
    A. Significance (up to 15 points).
    In determining the significance of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (1) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the 
proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The extent to which the proposed project involves the 
development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, 
or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project represents an 
exceptional approach to the priority or priorities established for the 
competition. (34 CFR 75.210)
    B. Strategy to Scale (up to 30 points).
    In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates there is unmet 
demand for the process, product, strategy or practice that will enable 
the applicant to reach the level of scale that is proposed in the 
application. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The extent to which the applicant will use grant funds to 
address a particular barrier or barriers that prevented the applicant, 
in the past, from reaching the level of scale proposed in the 
application. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (3) The feasibility of successful replication of the proposed 
project, if favorable results are obtained, in a variety of settings 
and with a variety of populations. (34 CFR 75.210)
    C. Quality of the Project Design and Management Plan (up to 35 
points).
    In determining the quality of the proposed project design, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. 
(34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks. (34 CFR 75.210)

[[Page 30290]]

    (3) The clarity and coherence of the applicant's multi-year 
financial and operating model and accompanying plan to operate the 
project at a national or regional level (as defined in this notice) 
during the project period. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (4) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous 
improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210)
    D. Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 20 points).
    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, if well 
implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness that 
would meet the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without 
reservations. (34 CFR 75.210)
    (2) The clarity and importance of the key questions to be addressed 
by the project evaluation, and the appropriateness of the methods for 
how each question will be addressed. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (3) The extent to which the evaluation will study the project at 
the proposed level of scale, including, where appropriate, generating 
information about potential differential effectiveness of the project 
in diverse settings and for diverse student population groups. (2013 i3 
NFP)
    (4) The extent to which the evaluation plan includes a clear and 
credible analysis plan, including a proposed sample size and minimum 
detectable effect size that aligns with the expected project impact, 
and an analytic approach for addressing the research questions. (2013 
i3 NFP)
    (5) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the 
key components and outcomes of the project, as well as a measurable 
threshold for acceptable implementation. (2013 i3 NFP)
    (6) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes 
sufficient resources to carry out the project evaluation effectively. 
(2013 i3 NFP)

    Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical 
assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC 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/. In addition, 
applicants may view two optional Webinar recordings that were hosted 
by the Institute of Education Sciences. The first Webinar discussed 
strategies for designing and executing well-designed quasi-
experimental design studies and is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=23. The second Webinar focused on more 
rigorous evaluation designs and discussed strategies for designing 
and executing studies that meet WWC evidence standards without 
reservations. This Webinar is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=18.

    2. Review and Selection Process: Before making awards, we will 
screen applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in 
this notice to determine whether applications have met eligibility and 
other requirements. This screening process may occur at various stages 
of the process; applicants that are determined to be ineligible will 
not receive a grant, regardless of peer reviewer scores or comments.
    For the application review process, we will use independent peer 
reviewers with varied backgrounds and professions including pre-
kindergarten-grade 12 teachers and principals, college and university 
educators, researchers and evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy 
consultants, grant makers and managers, and others with education 
expertise. All reviewers will be thoroughly screened for conflicts of 
interest to ensure a fair and competitive review process.
    Peer reviewers will read, prepare a written evaluation of, and 
score the assigned applications, using the selection criteria provided 
in this notice. For Validation grant applications, we intend to conduct 
a single tier review. If an eligible applicant addresses the 
competitive preference priority (Supporting Novice i3 Applicants), the 
Department will review its list of previous i3 grantees in scoring this 
competitive preference priority.
    We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in 
any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 
34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying 
out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement 
of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The 
Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a 
timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable 
quality.
    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary 
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal 
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or 
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department 
of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
    3. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 
200.205, before awarding grants under this program the Department 
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 
3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in 
appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the 
applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of 
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system 
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not 
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not 
responsible.

VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your 
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award 
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to 
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, 
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 multiyear 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 www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

[[Page 30291]]

    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee 
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In 
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
    4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the i3 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 i3 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 at scale; (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 grant that implement a completed well-designed, well-
implemented and independent evaluation that provides evidence of their 
effectiveness at improving student outcomes at scale; (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.
    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee 
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of 
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is 
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the 
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the 
performance targets in the grantee's approved application.
    In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers 
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in 
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil 
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities 
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

VII. Agency Contact

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W312, Washington, DC 20202. 
Telephone: (202) 453-7122. FAX: (202) 401-4123 or by email: [email protected].
    If you use a TDD or a TTY, 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 compact disc) on request to 
either 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: www.thefederalregister.org/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 PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat 
Reader, which is available free at the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

    Dated: May 11, 2016.
Nadya Chinoy Dabby,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 2016-11522 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4000-01-P


Current View
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionNotice.
DatesApplications Available: May 18, 2016. Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 6, 2016. Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 15, 2016. Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 13, 2016.
ContactKelly Terpak, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W312, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-7122. FAX: (202) 401-4123 or by email: [email protected]
FR Citation81 FR 30279 

2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR