E5-764. Office of Innovation and Improvement Program (OII); Overview Information; Ready To Teach Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2005

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Numbers: 84.286A and 84.286B

Dates: Applications Available: February 25, 2005.

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: March 24, 2005.

Date of Pre-Application Meeting: March 11, 2005 (webcast).

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 20, 2005.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 20, 2005.

Eligible Applicants: For General Programming Grants (84.286A)—A nonprofit telecommunications entity or partnership of telecommunications entities.

For Digital Educational Programming Grants (84.286B)—A local public telecommunications entity, as defined in section 397(12) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, that is able to demonstrate a capacity for the development and distribution of educational and instructional television programming of high quality. Under section 397(12) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, the term public telecommunications entity means any enterprise which—

(A) Is a public broadcast station or a noncommercial telecommunications entity; and

(B) Disseminates public telecommunications services to the public.

Estimated Available Funds: $14,290,752.

Estimated Range of Awards: $1,500,000-$5,000,000.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $2,500,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6.

Note:

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months for 84.286A and up to 36 months for 84.286B.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The Ready to Teach program awards two types of competitive grants: (a) Grants to carry out a national telecommunications-based program to improve teaching in core curriculum areas (General Programming Grants); and (b) digital educational programming grants to develop, produce, and distribute innovative educational and instructional video programming (Digital Educational Programming Grants). The Ready to Teach program is designed to assist elementary school and secondary school teachers in preparing all students to achieve challenging State academic content and student academic achievement standards in core curriculum areas.

Statutory Requirements: As set forth in the program statute, to be eligible to receive a General Programming Grant (84.286A), an applicant must—

(1) Demonstrate, in its application, that it will use the public broadcasting infrastructure, the Internet, and school digital networks, where available, to deliver video and data in an integrated service to train teachers in the use of materials and learning technologies for achieving challenging State academic content and student academic achievement standards;

(2) Make an assurance in its application that its project will be conducted in cooperation with appropriate State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and State or local nonprofit public telecommunications entities; and

(3) Make an assurance in its application that a significant portion of the benefits available for elementary schools and secondary schools from its project will be available to schools of local educational agencies that have a high percentage of children eligible under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB).

In addition, as required by the program statute, in order to be eligible to receive a Digital Educational Programming Grant (84.286B), an applicant must propose activities to facilitate the development of educational programming that shall—

(1) Include student assessment tools to provide feedback on student academic achievement;

(2) Include built-in teacher utilization and support components to ensure that teachers understand and can easily use the content of the programming with group instruction or for individual student use;

(3) Be created for, or adaptable to, challenging State academic content standards and student academic achievement standards; and

(4) Be capable of distribution through digital broadcasting and school digital networks.

Priority: This priority is from the notice of final priority for Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods, published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 3586).

Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2005 this priority is a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award up to an additional 25 points to an application, depending on the extent to which the application meets this priority.

Note:

In awarding additional points to applications that address this competitive preference priority, we will consider only those applications that have top-ranked scores on the basis of the Selection Criteria in section V. of this notice.

The priority is: The Secretary establishes a priority for projects proposing an evaluation plan that is based on rigorous scientifically based research methods to assess the effectiveness of a particular intervention. The Secretary intends that this priority will allow program participants and the Department to determine whether the project produces meaningful effects on student achievement or teacher performance.

Evaluation methods using an experimental design are best for determining project effectiveness. Thus, when feasible, the project must use an experimental design under which participants—e.g., students, teachers, classrooms, or schools—are randomly assigned to participate in the project activities being evaluated or to a control group that does not participate in the project activities being evaluated.

If random assignment is not feasible, the project may use a quasi-experimental design with carefully matched comparison conditions. This alternative design attempts to approximate a randomly assigned control group by matching participants—e.g., students, teachers, classrooms, or schools—with non-participants having similar pre-program characteristics.

In cases where random assignment is not possible and participation in the intervention is determined by a specified cutting point on a quantified continuum of scores, regression discontinuity designs may be employed.

For projects that are focused on special populations in which sufficient numbers of participants are not available to support random assignment or matched comparison group designs, single-subject designs such as multiple baseline or treatment-reversal or interrupted time series that are capable of demonstrating causal relationships can be employed.

Proposed evaluation strategies that use neither experimental designs with random assignment nor quasi-experimental designs using a matched comparison group nor regression discontinuity designs will not be considered responsive to the priority when sufficient numbers of participants are available to support these designs. Evaluation strategies that involve too small a number of participants to support group designs must be capable of demonstrating the causal effects of an intervention or program on those participants.

The proposed evaluation plan must describe how the project evaluator will collect—before the project intervention commences and after it ends—valid and reliable data that measure the impact of participation in the program or in the comparison group.

If the priority is used as a competitive preference priority, points awarded under this priority will be determined by the quality of the proposed evaluation method. In determining the quality of the evaluation method, we will consider the extent to which the applicant presents a feasible, credible plan that includes the following:

(1) The type of design to be used (that is, random assignment or matched comparison). If matched comparison, include in the plan a discussion of why random assignment is not feasible.

(2) Outcomes to be measured.

(3) A discussion of how the applicant plans to assign students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to the project and control group or match them for comparison with other students, teachers, classrooms, or schools.

(4) A proposed evaluator, preferably independent, with the necessary background and technical expertise to carry out the proposed evaluation. An independent evaluator does not have any authority over the project and is not involved in its implementation.

In general, depending on the implemented program or project, under a competitive preference priority, random assignment evaluation methods will receive more points than matched comparison evaluation methods.

Definitions

As used in this notice—

Scientifically based research (section 9101(37) of the ESEA as amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7801(37)):

(A) Means research that involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs; and

(B) Includes research that—

(i) Employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment;

(ii) Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn;

(iii) Relies on measurements or observational methods that provide reliable and valid data across evaluators and observers, across multiple measurements and observations, and across studies by the same or different investigators;

(iv) Is evaluated using experimental or quasi-experimental designs in which individuals entities, programs, or activities are assigned to different conditions and with appropriate controls to evaluate the effects of the condition of interest, with a preference for random-assignment experiments, or other designs to the extent that those designs contain within-condition or across-condition controls;

(v) Ensures that experimental studies are presented in sufficient detail and clarity to allow for replication or, at a minimum, offer the opportunity to build systematically on their findings; and

(vi) Has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.

Random assignment or experimental design means random assignment of students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to participate in a project being evaluated (treatment group) or not participate in the project (control group). The effect of the project is the difference in outcomes between the treatment and control groups.

Quasi experimental designs include several designs that attempt to approximate a random assignment design.

Carefully matched comparison groups design means a quasi-experimental design in which project participants are matched with non-participants based on key characteristics that are thought to be related to the outcome.

Regression discontinuity design means a quasi-experimental design that closely approximates an experimental design. In a regression discontinuity design, participants are assigned to a treatment or control group based on a numerical rating or score of a variable unrelated to the treatment such as the rating of an application for funding. Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, or schools above a certain score (“cut score”) are assigned to the treatment group and those below the score are assigned to the control group. In the case of the scores of applicants' proposals for funding, the “cut score” is established at the point where the program funds available are exhausted.

Single subject design means a design that relies on the comparison of treatment effects on a single subject or group of single subjects. There is little confidence that findings based on this design would be the same for other members of the population.

Treatment reversal design means a single subject design in which a pre-treatment or baseline outcome measurement is compared with a post-treatment measure. Treatment would then be stopped for a period of time, a second baseline measure of the outcome would be taken, followed by a second application of the treatment or a different treatment. For example, this design might be used to evaluate a behavior modification program for disabled students with behavior disorders.

Multiple baseline design means a single subject design to address concerns about the effects of normal development, timing of the treatment, and amount of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs by using a varying time schedule for introduction of the treatment and/or treatments of different lengths or intensity.

Interrupted time series design means a quasi-experimental design in which the outcome of interest is measured multiple times before and after the treatment for program participants only.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7257—7257d.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The notice of final priority for Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods, published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 3586).

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: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds: $14,290,752.

Estimated Range of Awards: $1,500,000-$5,000,000.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $2,500,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6.

Note:

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months for 84.286A and up to 36 months for 84.286B.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants:

For General Programming Grants (84.286A)—A nonprofit telecommunications entity or partnership of nonprofit telecommunications entities.

For Digital Educational Programming Grants (84.286B)—A local public telecommunications entity, as defined in section 397(12) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, that is able to demonstrate a capacity for the development and distribution of educational and instructional television programming of high quality. Under section 397(12) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, the term public telecommunications entity means any enterprise which—

(A) Is a public broadcast station or a noncommercial telecommunications entity; and

(B) Disseminates public telecommunications services to the public.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: An applicant submitting an application under the competition for General Programming Grants (84.286A) is not required to provide matching funds. However, to be eligible to receive a Digital Educational Programming Grant (84.286B), an applicant must contribute non-Federal matching funds in an amount equal to not less than 100 percent of the amount of the grant. Such matching funds may include funds provided for the transition to digital broadcasting, as well as in-kind contributions.

An entity that receives a General Programming Grant or a Digital Educational Programming Grant, may not use more than 5 percent of the amount received under the grant for administrative purposes.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Address to Request Application Package: You may obtain an application package via Internet or from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via Internet use the following address: http://www.ed.gov/​pubs/​edpubs.html. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write or call the following: Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-7827. FAX: [phone]. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll free): 1-877-576-7734.

You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: http://www.ed.gov/​pubs/​edpubs.html or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: [e-mail].

If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.286A or 84.286B, as appropriate.

Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the program contact person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (see VII. Agency Contacts).

2. 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 program.

Notice of Intent to Apply: Applicants that plan to apply for funding under this program are encouraged to indicate an intent to apply via e-mail notification sent to [e-mail] no later than March 24, 2005. Applicants that fail to supply this e-mail notification may still apply for funding under this program. Page Limit for Program Narrative: The program narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria using 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 program narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

Although no page limit is required, applicants are encouraged to confine the program narrative to no more than 50 pages.

3. Submission Dates and Times:

Applications Available: February 25, 2005.

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: March 24, 2005.

Date of Pre-Application Meeting: March 11, 2005, at 3 p.m., Washington, DC time. The Department intends to hold a live webcast to permit potential applicants to pose questions about this grant competition and other technology grant competitions being held by OII. Following the live presentation, the webcast will be archived and remain online until the application deadline date. Interested applicants should link to the following site to participate in or access the Web cast: http://www.kidzonline.org/​tepwebcast. You may submit your intent to participate in the Web cast to [e-mail].

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 20, 2005.

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 by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to section IV.6. Other Submission Requirements in this notice.

We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 20, 2005.

4. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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 the regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

6. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under this 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 Ready To Teach program-CFDA Numbers 84.286A and 84.286B must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

You may access the electronic grant application for Ready To Teach at: http://www.grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search.

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 time and date stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted with a date/time received by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will not consider your application if it was received by the Grants.gov system later than 4:30 p.m. on the application deadline date. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was submitted after 4:30 p.m. 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 application 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 program to ensure that your application is submitted timely to the Grants.gov system.
• To use Grants.gov, you, as the applicant, must have a D-U-N-S Number and register in the Central Contractor Registry (CCR). You should allow a minimum of five business days to complete the CCR registration.
• 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 typically included on the Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424), Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications. Any narrative sections of your application should be attached as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable Document) format.
• Your electronic application must comply with any page limit requirements described in this notice.
• After you electronically submit your application, you will receive an automatic acknowledgement from Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. The Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you a second confirmation by e-mail that will include a PR/Award number (an ED-specified identifying number unique to your application).
• We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

• You do not have access to the Internet; or
• You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system; and
• No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application. If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

Address and mail or fax your statement to: Sharon Harris Morgan, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W250, Washington, DC 20202-5980. FAX: [phone].

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 applicable following address:

By mail through the U.S. Postal Service: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Numbers 84.286A or 84.286B), 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260; or

By mail through a commercial carrier: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center—Stop 4260, Attention: (CFDA Numbers 84.286A or 84.286B), 7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506.

Regardless of which address you use, 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, or

(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, or

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

If your application is postmarked after the application deadline date, we will not consider your application.

Note:

The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.

If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Numbers 84.286A or 84.286B), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8 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 4 of the Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424) the CFDA number—and suffix letter, if any—of the competition under which you are submitting your application.

(2) The Application Control Center will mail a grant application receipt acknowledgment to you. If you do not receive the grant application receipt acknowledgment within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at [phone].

V. Application Review Information

Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210. The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses with the criterion. The maximum number of points an application may earn based on the competitive preference priorities and the selection criteria is 125 points. The criteria are as follows:

(a) Need for project (15 Points). The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

1. The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals.

2. The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

(b) Quality of the project design (20 Points). The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

1. The extent to which the proposed project is part of a comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support rigorous academic standards for students.

2. The extent to which goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.

3. 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 information about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the project.

(c) Quality of project services (20 Points). The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project. 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 access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

1. The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.

2. 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 lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

(d) Quality of project personnel (5 Points). The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

1. The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

2. The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

(e) Adequacy of resources (5 Points). The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

2. The potential for continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support.

(f) Quality of the management plan (15 Points). The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

2. The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project.

(g) Quality of the project evaluation (20 Points). The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factor:

1. The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

Note:

A strong evaluation plan should be included in the application narrative and should be used, as appropriate, to shape the development of the project from the beginning of the grant period. The plan should include benchmarks to monitor progress toward specific project objectives and also outcome measures to assess the impact on teaching and learning or other important outcomes for project participants. More specifically, the plan should identify the individual and/or organization that has agreed to serve as evaluator for the project and describe the qualifications of that evaluator. The plan should describe the evaluation design, indicating: (1) What types of data will be collected; (2) when various types of data will be collected; (3) what methods will be used; (4) what instruments will be developed and when; (5) how the data will be analyzed; (6) when reports of results and outcomes will be available; and (7) how the applicant will use the information collected through the evaluation to monitor progress of the funded project and to provide accountability information both about success at the initial site and effective strategies for replication in other settings. Applicants are encouraged to devote 25-30% of the grant funds to project evaluations under each competition.

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN). We may also notify you informally.

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. Grant Administration: Applicants approved for funding under this competition may be required to attend a two- or three-day Grants Administration meeting in Washington, DC during the first year of the grant. In addition, applicants should budget for one Project Directors meeting to be held in Washington, DC in each subsequent year of the grant. The cost of attending these meetings may be paid from Ready To Teach program grant funds or other resources.

4. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual performance report that meets the reporting requirements in section 5483 of the ESEA, as amended by the NCLB (if you receive a General Programming Grant) and provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118. For specific requirements on grantee reporting, please go to http://www.ed.gov/​fund/​grant/​apply/​appforms/​appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: The Department is currently developing measures that will be designed to yield information on the effectiveness of grant-supported activities. If funded, applicants will be expected to participate in collecting and reporting data for these measures. We will notify grantees of the performance measures once they are developed.

VII. Agency Contacts

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon Harris Morgan or Carmelita Coleman, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-5980. Telephone: [phone] (Sharon Harris Morgan) or [phone] (Carmelita Coleman), or by e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail].

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact persons listed in this section.

VIII. Other Information

Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/​news/​fedregister.

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at [phone].

Note:

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 on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/​nara/​index.html.

Dated: February 17, 2005.

Michael J. Petrilli,

Acting Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.