§ 75.210 - General selection criteria.

§ 75.210 General selection criteria.

Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70322, Aug. 29, 2024.

Cross Reference

Link to a correction published at 89 FR 79147, Sept. 27, 2024.

In determining the selection criteria to evaluate applications submitted in a grant competition, the Secretary may select one or more of the following criteria and may select from among the list of optional factors under each criterion. The Secretary may define a selection criterion by selecting one or more specific factors within a criterion or assigning factors from one criterion to another criterion.

(a) Need for the project.

(1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The magnitude or severity of the problem data presented (including a comparison to local, State, regional, national, or international data) that demonstrates the issue, challenge, or opportunity to be addressed by the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates the magnitude of the need for the services to be provided or the activities to be carried out by the proposed project.

(iii) The extent to which the proposed project will provide support, resources, or services; or otherwise address the needs of students at risk of educational failurethe target population, including addressing the needs of underserved populations most affected by the issue, challenge, or opportunity, to be addressed by the proposed project and close gaps in educational opportunity.

(iv) The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individualsunderserved populations.

(v) The extent to which the specific nature and magnitude of gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and challenges are identified and the extent to which these gaps or challenges will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknessesservices, supports, infrastructure, or opportunities described in the proposed project.

(vi) The extent to which the proposed project will prepare personnel for fields in which shortages have been demonstratedindividuals from underserved populations for employment in fields and careers in which there are demonstrated shortages.

(b) Significance.

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The national significance of extent to which the proposed project is relevant at the national level.

(ii) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the proposed projectas it affects educational access and opportunity, including the underlying or related challenges for underserved populations.

(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased extent to which findings from the project's implementation will contribute new knowledge to the field by increasing knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, or effective strategieschallenges, including the underlying or related challenges, and effective strategies for addressing educational challenges and their effective implementation.

(iv) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased knowledge or understanding of rehabilitation problems, issues, or effective strategiesimprove the provision of rehabilitative services, increase the number or quality of rehabilitation counselors, or develop and implement effective strategies for providing vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities.

(v) The likelihood that the proposed project will result in system change or systemic change that supports continuous, sustainable, and measurable improvement.

(vi) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in the field of study, including the extent to which the contributions may be used by other appropriate agencies, organizations, institutions, or entities.

(vii) The potential for generalizing from the findings or results of the proposed project.

(viii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to yield findings that may be utilized by other appropriate agencies and organizations.

(ix) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build local

build local, State, regional, or national capacity to provide, improve, sustain, or expand training or services that address the needs of

the target population

underserved populations.

(

x

ix) The extent to which the proposed project involves the development or demonstration of

promising new

innovative and effective strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies.

(x) The extent to which the proposed project is innovative and likely to be more effective compared to other efforts to address a similar problem.

(xi) The likely utility of the products resources (such as information, materials, processes, techniques, or techniquesdata infrastructure) that will result from the proposed project, including the potential for their being used effectively effective use in a variety of other conditions, populations, or settings.

(xii) The extent to which the results resources, tools, and implementation lessons of the proposed project are to will be disseminated in ways to the target population and local community that will enable them and others to use the information or (including practitioners, researchers, education leaders, and partners) to implement similar strategies.

(xiii) The potential effective replicability of the proposed project or strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation in by a variety of populations or settings.

(xiv) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in contributions toward improving teaching practice and student learning and achievement.

(xv) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in employment, independent living services, or both, as appropriate.

(xvi) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project that demonstrate its impact for the targeted underserved populations in terms of breadth and depth of services.

(xvii) The extent to which the proposed project introduces an innovative approach, such as a modification of an evidence-based project component to serve different populations, an extension of an existing evidence-based project component, a unique composition of various project components to explore combined effects, or development of an emerging project component that needs further testing.

(c) Quality of the project design.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable, measurable, and ambitious yet achievable within the project period, and aligned with the purposes of the grant program.

(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project demonstrates meaningful community engagement and input to ensure that the project is appropriate to , and will successfully address , the needs of the target population or other identified needs and will be used to inform continuous improvement strategies.

(iii) The extent to which there is a quality of the logic model or other conceptual framework underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of that frameworkproject, including how inputs are related to outcomes.

(iv) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of research and development in the field, including, as appropriate, a substantial addition to an ongoing line of inquiryproject's logic model or other conceptual framework was developed based on engagement of a broad range of community members and partners.

(v) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of training in the field.

(vi) The extent to which the proposed project is based upon a specific research design, and the quality and appropriateness of that design, including the scientific rigor of the studies involved.

(vii) The extent to which the proposed research design includes a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a high-quality plan for research activities, and the use of appropriate theoretical and methodological tools, including those of a variety of disciplines, if appropriate.

(viii

project proposes specific, measurable targets, connected to strategies, activities, resources, outputs, and outcomes, and uses reliable administrative data to measure progress and inform continuous improvement.

(vi) The extent to which the design of the proposed project includes a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a high-quality plan for project implementation, and the use of appropriate methodological tools to

ensure

enable successful achievement of project objectives.

(

ix

vii) The quality of the proposed demonstration design, such as qualitative and quantitative design, and procedures for documenting project activities and results for underserved populations.

(

x

viii) The extent to which the design for implementing and evaluating the proposed project will result in information to guide possible replication of project activities or strategies, including valid and reliable information about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the project.

(

xi

ix) The extent to which the proposed development efforts include adequate quality controls, continuous improvement efforts, and, as appropriate, repeated testing of products.

(

xii

x) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates that it is designed to build capacity and yield sustainable results that will extend beyond the project period

of Federal financial assistance

.

(

xiii

xi) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects

up-to-date knowledge

the most recent and relevant knowledge and practices from research and effective practice.

(

xiv

xii) The extent to which the proposed project represents an exceptional approach

for

to meeting

statutory

program purposes and requirements and serving the target population.

(

xv

xiii) The extent to which the proposed project represents an exceptional approach to

the

any absolute priority or absolute priorities

established for

used in the competition.

(

xvi

xiv) The extent to which the proposed project will integrate

with

or build on

similar or related efforts

ideas, strategies, and efforts from similar external projects to improve relevant outcomes

(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))

, using existing funding streams from other programs or policies supported by community, State, and Federal resources.

(

xvii

xv) The extent to which the proposed project

will establish linkages with other

is informed by similar past projects implemented by the applicant with demonstrated results.

(xvi) The extent to which the proposed project will include coordination with other Federal investments, as well as appropriate agencies and organizations providing similar services to the target population.

(

xviii

xvii) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support rigorous academic standards and increased social, emotional, and educational development for students, including members of underserved populations.

(

xix

xviii) The extent to which the proposed project

encourages parental involvement.(xx

includes explicit plans for authentic, meaningful, and ongoing community member and partner engagement, including their involvement in planning, implementing, and revising project activities for underserved populations.

(xix) The extent to which the proposed project

encourages

includes plans for consumer involvement.

(

xxi

xx) The extent to which performance feedback and

continuous improvement

formative data are integral to the design of the proposed project

.

(xxii) The quality of the methodology to be employed in the proposed project.

(xxiii

and will be used to inform continuous improvement.

(xxi) The extent to which fellowship recipients or other project participants are to be selected on the basis of academic excellence.

(

xxiv

xxii) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates that it has the resources to operate the project beyond the

length of the grant

project period, including a

multi-year

multiyear financial and operating model and accompanying plan; the demonstrated commitment of any partners;

evidence

demonstration of broad support from

stakeholders (e.g.,

community members and partners (such as State educational agencies, teachers' unions, families, business and industry, community members, and State vocational rehabilitation agencies) that are critical to the project's long-term success; or

more than one

a plan for capacity-building by leveraging one or more of these types of

evidence

resources.

(

xxv

xxiii) The

potential and planning for the incorporation of

extent to which there is a plan to incorporate the project purposes, activities, or benefits into the ongoing work of the applicant beyond the end of the

grant

project period.

(

xxvi

xxiv) The extent to which the proposed project will increase efficiency in the use of time, staff, money, or other resources in order to improve results and increase productivity.

(

xxvii

xxv) The extent to which the proposed project will integrate with, or build on, similar or related efforts in order to improve relevant outcomes

(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))

, using nonpublic funds or resources.

(

xxviii

xxvi) The extent to which the proposed project

is supported by promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).(xxix

demonstrates a rationale that is aligned with the purposes of the grant program.

(xxvii) The extent to which the proposed project represents implementation of the evidence cited in support of the proposed project with fidelity.

(xxviii) The extent to which the

proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))

applicant plans to allocate a significant portion of its requested funding to the evidence-based project components.

(xxix) The strength of the commitment from key decision-makers at proposed implementation sites.

(xxx) The extent to which the proposed project represents a faithful adaptation of the evidence cited in support of the proposed projectis supported by promising evidence.

(d) Quality of project services.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal equitable and adequate access and treatment participation for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(

experience barriers based on one or more of the following: economic disadvantage; gender; race; ethnicity; color; national origin; disability; age; language; migration; living in a rural location; experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity; involvement with the justice system; pregnancy, parenting, or caregiver status; and sexual orientation. This determination includes the steps developed and described in the form Equity For Students, Teachers, And Other Program Beneficiaries (OMB Control No. 1894-0005) (section 427 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1228a)).

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project were determined with input from the community to be served to ensure that they are appropriate and responsive to the needs of the intended recipients or beneficiaries, including underserved populations, of those services.

(ii) The extent to which entities that are to be served by the proposed technical assistance project demonstrate support for the projectproject is supported by the target population that it is intended to serve.

(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practiceand an evidence-based project component.

(iv) The likely impact benefit to the intended recipients, as indicated by the logic model or other conceptual framework, of the services to be provided by the proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.

(v) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to build recipient and project capacity in ways that lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

(vi) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are likely to provide long-term solutions to alleviate the personnel shortages that have been identified or are the focus of the proposed project.

(vii) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed project will lead to meaningful improvements in the achievement of students as measured against rigorous academic and relevant standards.

(viii) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed project will lead to meaningful improvements in early childhood and family outcomes.

(ix) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed project will lead to meaningful improvements in the skills and competencies necessary to gain employment in high-quality jobs, careers, and industries or build capacity for independent living.

(

ix

x) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners

for maximizing

, including those from underserved populations, to maximize the effectiveness of project services.

(

x

xi) The extent to which the

technical assistance

services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources.

(

xi

xii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project are focused on

those with greatest needs.

(xii) The quality of plans for providing an opportunity for participation in the proposed project of students enrolled in private schoolsrecipients, community members, or project participants that are most underserved as demonstrated by the data relevant to the project.

(e) Quality of the project personnel.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons demonstrates that it has project personnel or a plan for hiring of personnel who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disabilityhistorically encountered barriers, or who have professional or personal experiences with barriers, based on one or more of the following: economic disadvantage; gender; race; ethnicity; color; national origin; disability; age; language; migration; living in a rural location; experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity; involvement with the justice system; pregnancy, parenting, or caregiver status; and sexual orientation.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the project director or principal investigator, when hired, has the qualifications required for the project, including relevant training formal training or work experience in fields related to the objectives of the project and experience , of the project director or principal investigatorin designing, managing, or implementing similar projects for the target population to be served by the project.

(ii) The extent to which the key personnel in the project, when hired, have the qualifications required for the proposed project, including relevant formal training and experience, of key project personnelor work experience in fields related to the objectives of the project, and represent or have lived experiences of the target population.

(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

(iv) The extent to which the proposed project team maximizes diverse perspectives, for example by reflecting the lived experiences of project participants, or relevant experience working with the target population.

(v) The extent to which the proposed planning, implementing, and evaluating project team are familiar with the assets, needs, and other contextual considerations of the proposed implementation sites.

(f) Adequacy of resources.

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of support for the project, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.

(ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.

(iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project .

(iv) The extent to which

and the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

(

v

iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the number of persons to be served

and to

, the depth and intensity of services, and the anticipated results and benefits.

(v) The extent to which the costs of the proposed project would permit other entities to replicate the project.

(vi) The potential for level of initial matching funds or other commitment from partners, indicating the likelihood for potential continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support.

(vii) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes, activities, or benefits of the proposed project to be institutionalized into the ongoing program practices and programs of the applicant, agency, or organization at the end of and continue after Federal funding ends.

(g) Quality of the management plan.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The adequacy feasibility of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project project objectives and goals on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

(ii) The adequacy of procedures plans for ensuring feedback and the use of quantitative and qualitative data, including meaningful community member and partner input, to inform continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project.

(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality and accessible products and services from the proposed project for the target population.

(iv) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

(v) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives, including those from underserved populations, are brought to bear in the design, implementation, operation, evaluation, and improvement of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, educators, community-based organizations, civil rights organizations, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

(h) Quality of the project evaluation or other evidence-building.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted or other evidence-building of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation or other evidence-building, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building are thorough, feasible, relevant, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building are appropriate to the context within which the project operates and the target population of the proposed project.

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategiesor other evidence-building are designed to measure the fidelity of implementation of the project.

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quality data that are quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

(v) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building will provide timely guidance for quality assurance and continuous improvement.

(vi) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building will provide performance feedback and permit provide formative, diagnostic, or interim data that is a periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

(vii) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about effective strategies suitable for replication or testing and potential implementation in other settings.

(viii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness effectiveness of the project on relevant outcomes that would meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards without reservations, as described in the What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).

(

Handbooks.

(ix) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness effectiveness of the project on relevant outcomes that would meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards with or without reservations, as described in the What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).

(

Handbooks.

(x) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) about the project's effectivenessinclude an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (such as regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group) to assess the effectiveness of the project on relevant outcomes.

(xi) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the employs an appropriate analytic strategy to build evidence about the relationship between key project components, mediators, and outcomes , as well as a measurable threshold for acceptable implementation.

(xii) The qualifications, including

and inform decisions on which project components to continue, revise, or discontinue.

(xii) The quality of the evaluation plan for measuring fidelity of implementation, including thresholds for acceptable implementation, to inform how implementation is associated with outcomes.

(xiii) The extent to which the evaluation plan includes a dissemination strategy that is likely to promote others' learning from the project.

(xiv) The extent to which the evaluator has the qualifications, including the relevant training, experience, and independence,

of the evaluator.(xiii

required to conduct an evaluation of the proposed project, including experience conducting evaluations of similar methodology as proposed and with evaluations for the proposed population and setting.

(xv) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes sufficient resources to conduct the project evaluation effectively.

(

xiv

xvi) The extent to which the

methods of

evaluation will

provide valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes

access and link high-quality administrative data from authoritative sources to improve evaluation quality and comprehensiveness.

(i) Strategy to scale.

(1) The Secretary considers the applicant's strategy to effectively scale the proposed project for recipients, community members, and partners, including to underserved populations.

(2) In determining the applicant's capacity strategy to effectively scale the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:

(i) The quality of the strategies to reach scale by expanding the project to new populations or settings.

(ii) The applicant's capacity (

e.g., in terms of

such as qualified personnel, financial resources, or management capacity), together with any project partners, to bring the proposed project effectively to scale on a national or regional level

(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) working directly, or through partners,

during the grant period.

(

ii

iii) The applicant's capacity (

e.g., in terms of

such as qualified personnel, financial resources, or management capacity), together with any project partners, to further develop and bring

to scale

the proposed

process, product, strategy, or practice, or to work with others to ensure that the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice can be further developed and brought to scale,

project effectively to scale on a national level during the grant period, based on the findings of the proposed project.

(

iii

iv) The

feasibility

quality of

successful replication of

the

proposed project, if favorable results are obtained, in a variety of settings and with a variety of populations.

(iv) The mechanisms the applicant will use to broadly disseminate information and resources on its project so as to support further development, adaptation, or replication by other entities to implement project components in additional settings or with other populations.

(v) 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 applicationbroader implementation of the project that is aligned with the proposed level of scale.

(vi) The extent to which the applicant identifies a specific strategy or strategies that address a particular barrier or barriers that prevented the applicant, in the past, from reaching the level of scale that is proposed in the application.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1875-0102)

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)

[62 FR 10401, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 78 FR 49353, Aug. 13, 2013; 80 FR 2608, Jan. 20, 2015; 82 FR 35448, July 31, 2017; 83 FR 18421, Apr. 27, 2018

there is a market of potential entities that will commit resources toward implementation.

(vii) The quality of the strategies to scale that take into account and are responsive to previous barriers to expansion.

(viii) The quality of the plan to deliver project services more efficiently at scale and maintain effectiveness.

(ix) The quality of the plan to develop revenue sources that will make the project self-sustaining.

(x) The extent to which the project will create reusable data and evaluation tools and techniques that facilitate expansion and support continuous improvement.

[89 FR 70322, Aug. 29, 2024]