2019-00711.pdf

1085 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices

15. Anticipated Return on Federal Investment. ROFI will be calculated by annualizing the total project benefits and Federal costs utilizing the current discount rate, and applying the formula:

(Benefits ¥ Federal Costs)/(Federal Costs).

16. Statement on replicability and how this approach may be applied to other prospective projects.

17. Statement on risk allocation and how this approach will effectively allocate delivery and performance risk to non-Federal entities and minimize Federal direct and contingent liabilities associated with the project.

18. Socioeconomic information to address concerns of equity which include: Population Benefited, Number of existing jobs in benefited area, Median Family Income, Unemployment Rate, and trends on population growth.

Although not required as part of the submittal the Corps is interested in gathering input on how equity issues can be addressed as part of the P3 program development. This could include means, methods, analysis, or other modifiers that could allow for an equitable distribution of projects.

Dated: January 29, 2019.

John W. Coho, USACE Infrastructure Team, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

[FR Doc. 2019–00709 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Docket No.: ED–2018–ICCD–0118]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request;

Student Assistance General Provisions—Annual Fire Safety Report

AGENCY: Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED– 2018–ICCD–0118. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery.

If the regulations.gov site is not available to the public for any reason, ED will temporarily accept comments at ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Please include the docket ID number and the title of the information collection request when requesting documents or submitting comments. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, Washington, DC 20202–0023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Beth Grebeldinger, 202–377–4018.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public’s reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department’s information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;

(4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Student Assistance General Provisions—Annual Fire Safety Report.

OMB Control Number: 1845–0097.

Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Private Sector.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 4,310.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 4,313.

Abstract: The Department of Education regulations at 34 CFR 668.49 require institutions to collect statistics on fires occurring in on-campus student housing facilities, including the number and cause of each fire, the number of injuries related to each fire that required treatment at a medical facility, the number of deaths related to each fire, and the value of property damage caused by each fire. Institutions must also publish an annual fire safety report containing the institution’s policies regarding fire safety and the fire statistics information. Further institutions are required to maintain a fire log that records the date, time, nature, and general location of each fire in on-campus student housing facilities.

This request is to extend the current approval of reporting requirements contained in the regulations. The collection requirements in the regulations are necessary to meet institutional information reporting to students and staff as well as for reporting to Congress through the Secretary.

Dated: January 28, 2019.

Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Program, Information Management Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 2019–00580 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards;

Education Innovation and Research (EIR) Program—Expansion Grants

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2019 for the EIR program—Expansion Grants, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.411A (Expansion Grants).

DATES:

Applications Available: February 4, 2019.

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply:

February 21, 2019.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1 http://www.regulations.gov http://www.regulations.gov http://www.regulations.gov mailto:ICDocketMgr@ed.gov

1086 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 2, 2019.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 3, 2019.

Pre-Application Information: The Department will post additional competition information for prospective applicants on the EIR program website:

https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/ innovation/education-innovation-and-research-eir/.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018- 02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Irene Montanti, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E323, Washington, DC 20202– 5900. Telephone: (202) 453–7122.

Email: eir@ed.gov.

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1–800–877– 8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description Purpose of Program: The EIR program, established under section 4611 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA), provides funding to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve student achievement and attainment for high-need students; and rigorously evaluate such innovations. The EIR program is designed to generate and validate solutions to persistent education challenges and to support the expansion of those solutions to serve substantially larger numbers of students.

The central design element of the EIR program is its multi-tier structure that links the amount of funding an applicant may receive to the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the proposed project, with the expectation that projects that build this evidence will advance through EIR’s grant tiers: ‘‘Early-phase,’’ ‘‘Mid-phase,’’ and ‘‘Expansion.’’ Applicants proposing innovative practices that are supported by limited evidence can receive relatively small grants to support the development, implementation, and initial evaluation of the practices;

applicants proposing practices supported by evidence from rigorous evaluations, such as an experimental study (as defined in this notice), can receive larger grant awards to support expansion across the country. This structure provides incentives for applicants to: (1) Explore new ways of addressing persistent challenges that other educators can build on and learn from; (2) build evidence of effectiveness of their practices; and (3) replicate and scale successful practices in new schools, districts, and States while addressing the barriers to scale, such as cost structures and implementation fidelity.

All EIR projects are expected to generate information regarding their effectiveness in order to inform EIR grantees’ efforts to learn about and improve upon their efforts, and to help similar, non-EIR efforts across the country benefit from EIR grantees’ knowledge. By requiring that all grantees conduct independent evaluations of their EIR projects, EIR ensures that its funded projects make a significant contribution to improving the quality and quantity of information available to practitioners and policymakers about which practices improve student achievement and attainment, for which types of students, and in what contexts.

The Department awards three types of grants under this program: ‘‘Early-phase’’ grants, ‘‘Mid-phase’’ grants, and ‘‘Expansion’’ grants. These grants differ in terms of the level of prior evidence of effectiveness required for consideration for funding, the expectations regarding the kind of evidence and information funded projects should produce, the level of scale funded projects should reach, and, consequently, the amount of funding available to support each type of project.

The Department expects that Expansion grants will provide funding for implementation and rigorous evaluation of a program that has been found to produce sizable, significant impacts under a Mid-phase grant or other effort meeting similar criteria, for the purposes of: (a) Determining whether such impacts can be successfully reproduced and sustained over time; and (b) identifying the conditions in which the program is most effective.

Expansion grants are supported by evidence that demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on strong evidence (as defined in this notice) from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study for at least one population and setting, and grantees are encouraged to implement at the national level (as defined in this notice).

This notice invites applications for Expansion grants only. The notices inviting applications for Early-phase and Mid-phase grants are published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

Background: While this notice is for the Expansion tier only, the premise of the EIR program is that new and innovative programs and practices can help to solve the persistent problems in education that prevent students, particularly high-need students, from succeeding. These innovations need to be evaluated, and if sufficient evidence of effectiveness can be demonstrated, the intent is for these innovations to be replicated and tested in new populations and settings. EIR is not intended to provide support for any practices which are already commonly implemented by educators, unless significant adaptations of such practices warrant testing to determine if they can accelerate achievement, or greatly increase the efficiency and likelihood that they can be widely implemented in a variety of new populations and settings effectively.

As an EIR project is implemented, grantees are encouraged to learn more about how the practices improve student achievement and attainment;

and to develop increasingly rigorous evidence of effectiveness and new strategies to efficiently and cost-effectively scale to new school districts, regions, and States. In connection with selection criterion B.2., we encourage applicants to develop a logic model (as defined in this notice), theory of action, or another conceptual framework that includes the goals, objectives, outcomes and key project components (as defined in this notice) of the project.

Disseminating evaluation findings is a critical element of every project, even if a rigorous evaluation does not demonstrate positive results. Such results can influence the next stage of education practice and promote follow-up studies that build upon the results.

The EIR program considers all high-quality evaluations to be a valuable contribution to the field of education research and encourages the documentation and sharing of lessons learned.

For those innovations that have positive results and have the potential for continued development and implementation, the Department is interested in learning more about continued efforts regarding cost-effectiveness and feasibility when scaled to additional populations and/or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1 https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/education-innovation-and-research-eir/ https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/education-innovation-and-research-eir/ https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/innovation/education-innovation-and-research-eir/ http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf mailto:eir@ed.gov

1087 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices settings. EIR projects at the Mid-phase and Expansion levels are encouraged to test new strategies for recruiting and supporting new project adoption, seek efficiencies where project implementation has been too costly or cumbersome to operate at scale, and test new ways of overcoming any other barriers in practice or policy that might inhibit project growth. Early-phase grantees that are not yet ready to scale are still encouraged to think about how their innovations might translate to other populations or settings in the long term, and to select their partners and implementation sites accordingly.

Finally, all EIR applicants and grantees should consider how they need to develop their organizational capacity, project financing, or business plans to sustain their projects and continue implementation and adaptation after Federal funding ends. EIR encourages all grantees to engage in sustainability planning as part of a funded project.

The Department intends to provide grantees with technical assistance in their dissemination, scaling, and sustainability efforts.

Expansion grants are expected to scale practices that have prior evidence of effectiveness, in order to improve outcomes for high-need students. They are also expected to generate important information about an intervention’s effectiveness (e.g., in what context(s) does the intervention work best? Where does it not work as well? What components of the practice are most critical to its success?). Expansion grants are uniquely positioned to help answer critical questions about the process of scaling a practice to the national level. Expansion grantees are encouraged to consider how the cost structure of a practice can change as the intervention scales. Additionally, grantees may want to consider multiple ways to facilitate implementation fidelity without making scaling too onerous or rigid a process.

Evaluations of Expansion grants are expected to be conducted in a variety of contexts and for a variety of students in order to determine the context(s) and population(s) for which the EIR-supported practice is most effective and how to effectively adapt the practice for these contexts and populations. An Expansion grantee is encouraged to design an EIR-supported evaluation that examines the cost-effectiveness of its practices, identifies potential obstacles and success factors to scaling that would be relevant to other organizations, and has the potential to meet the strong evidence threshold. We expect that Expansion grantees will work toward sustaining their projects and continuing to scale successful practices after the EIR grant period ends;

EIR grantees can use their evaluations to assess how their EIR-funded practices could be successfully reproduced and sustained. The Department intends to provide grantees and their independent evaluators with evaluation technical assistance. This evaluation technical assistance could include grantees and their independent evaluators providing to the Department or its contractor updated comprehensive evaluation plans in a format as requested by the technical assistance provider and using such tools as the Department may request. Grantees will be encouraged to update this evaluation plan at least annually to reflect any changes to the evaluation, with updates consistent with the scope and objectives of the approved application.

The FY 2019 Expansion competition includes three absolute priorities. All Expansion applicants must address Absolute Priority 1. Expansion applicants are also required to address one of the other two absolute priorities.

The absolute priorities align with the purpose of the program and the Administration’s priorities.

Absolute Priority 1—Strong Evidence, establishes the evidence requirement for this tier of grants. All Expansion applicants must submit prior evidence of effectiveness that meets the strong evidence standard.

Absolute Priority 2—Field-Initiated Innovations—General, allows applicants to propose projects that align with the intent of the EIR program statute: To create and take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve student achievement and attainment.

Absolute Priority 3—Field-Initiated Innovations—Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), is intended to highlight the Administration’s efforts to ensure our Nation’s economic competitiveness by improving and expanding STEM learning and engagement, including computer science.

In Absolute Priority 3, the Department recognizes the importance of funding Pre-Kindergarten (Pre-K) through grade 12 STEM education that addresses the enrollment and achievement gap for underrepresented students in a manner consistent with nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S.

Constitution and Federal civil rights laws. The Department also encourages expanding access to STEM education in rural areas, especially through partnerships with rural school districts to utilize virtual and remote access to makerspace technologies, such as 3–D printers, to expand opportunities for students in rural areas where such tools are often cost prohibitive.

Through these priorities, the Department intends to advance innovation, build evidence, and address the learning and achievement of high-need students beginning in Pre-K through grade 12.

Priorities: This notice includes three absolute priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Absolute Priority 1 is from 34 CFR 75.226(d)(1).

In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Absolute Priority 2 is from section 4611(a)(1)(A) of the ESEA.

Absolute Priority 3 is from section 4611(a)(1)(A) of the ESEA and the Secretary’s Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Supplemental Priorities).

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2019 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 Absolute Priority 1—Strong Evidence, and one additional absolute priority.

These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1—Strong Evidence.

Under this priority, we provide funding to projects supported by evidence that meets the conditions in the definition of strong evidence.

Note: An applicant must identify up to four study citations to be reviewed against the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbook (as defined in this notice) for the purposes of meeting strong evidence. The studies may have been conducted by the applicant or by a third party. An applicant should clearly identify these citations in the Evidence form. The Department may not review a study citation that an applicant fails to clearly identify for review. In addition to including up to four study citations, applicants should describe in the form information such as the following: (1) The positive student outcomes they intend to replicate under their Expansion grant and how the characteristics of students and the positive student outcomes in the study citations correspond with the characteristics of the high-need students to be served under the Expansion grant; (2) the correspondence of practice(s) the applicant plans to implement with the practice(s) cited in the studies; and (3) the intended student outcomes that the proposed practice(s) attempts to impact.

An applicant must ensure that all evidence is available to the Department from publicly available sources and provide links or other guidance indicating where it is available. If the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1

1088 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices

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 may submit a query to the study author(s) to gather information for use in determining a study rating.

Authors would be asked to respond to queries within 10 business days. Should the author query remain incomplete within 14 days of the initial contact to the study author(s), the study may be deemed ineligible under the grant competition. After the grant competition closes, the WWC will, for purposes of its own curation of studies, continue to include responses to author queries and will make updates to study reviews as necessary. However, no additional information will be taken into account after the competition closes and the initial timeline established for response to an author query passes.

Absolute Priority 2—Field-Initiated Innovations—General.

Under the priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve student achievement and attainment for high-need students.

Absolute Priority 3—Field-Initiated Innovations—Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math (STEM) Education, With a Particular Focus on Computer Science.

Under the priority, we provide funding to projects that are designed to:

(1) Create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to improve student achievement and attainment for high-need students, and;

(2) Improve student achievement or other educational outcomes in one or more of the following areas: Science, technology, engineering, math, or computer science (as defined in this notice).

Definitions: The definitions of ‘‘baseline,’’ ‘‘experimental study,’’ ‘‘logic model,’’ ‘‘national level,’’ ‘‘nonprofit,’’ ‘‘performance measure,’’ ‘‘performance target,’’ ‘‘project component,’’ ‘‘regional level,’’ ‘‘relevant outcome,’’ ‘‘strong evidence,’’ and ‘‘What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook)’’ are from 34 CFR

77.1. The definition of ‘‘computer

science’’ is from the Supplemental Priorities. The definitions of ‘‘local educational agency’’ and ‘‘State educational agency’’ are from section 8101 of the ESEA.

Baseline means the starting point from which performance is measured and targets are set.

Computer science means the study of computers and algorithmic processes and includes the study of computing principles and theories, computational thinking, computer hardware, software design, coding, analytics, and computer applications.

Computer science often includes computer programming or coding as a tool to create software, including applications, games, websites, and tools to manage or manipulate data; or development and management of computer hardware and the other electronics related to sharing, securing, and using digital information.

In addition to coding, the expanding field of computer science emphasizes computational thinking and interdisciplinary problem-solving to equip students with the skills and abilities necessary to apply computation in our digital world.

Computer science does not include using a computer for everyday activities, such as browsing the internet; use of tools like word processing, spreadsheets, or presentation software;

or using computers in the study and exploration of unrelated subjects.

Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group that does not. Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbook:

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group).

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of outcomes.

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case (e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the treatment.

Local educational agency (LEA) means:

(a) In General. A public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools or secondary schools.

(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.

(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does not have a student population that is smaller than the student population of the local educational agency receiving assistance under the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational agency (as defined in this notice) other than the Bureau of Indian Education.

(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies.

(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the State educational agency in a State in which the State educational agency is the sole educational agency for all public schools.

Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1

1089 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices key project components and relevant outcomes.

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, individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of each gender).

Nonprofit, as applied to an agency, organization, or institution, means that it is owned and operated by one or more corporations or associations whose net earnings do not benefit, and cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity.

Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or metric used to gauge program or project performance.

Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant would seek to meet during the course of a project or as a result of a project.

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy included in a project.

Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).

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 other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program.

State educational agency (SEA) means the agency primarily responsible for the State supervision of public elementary schools and secondary schools.

Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a ‘‘positive effect’’ on a relevant outcome based on a ‘‘medium to large’’ extent of evidence, with no reporting of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or ‘‘potentially negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome;

or

(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, as appropriate, and that—

(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook; and

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs (iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy this requirement.

What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook) means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (incorporated by reference, see 34 CFR 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the Handbook documentation.

Program Authority: Section 4611 of the

ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7261.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General

Administrative Regulations 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 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: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds:

$125,000,000.

These estimated available funds are the total available for all three types of grants under the EIR program (Early-phase, Mid-phase, and Expansion grants). Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Estimated Average Size of Awards:

Up to $15,000,000.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $15,000,000 for a project period of 60 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 1–4.

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months. We anticipate that initial awards under this competition will be made for a three-year (36 month) period.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and each grantee’s substantial progress towards accomplishing the goals and objectives of the project as described in its approved application, we may make continuation awards to grantees for the remainder of the project period.

Applicants are to propose a budget that covers the entire project period of up to 60 months.

Note: Under section 4611(c) of the ESEA, the Department must use at least 25 percent of EIR funds for a fiscal year to make awards to applicants serving rural areas, contingent on receipt of a sufficient number of applications of sufficient quality. For purposes of this competition, we will consider an applicant as rural if the applicant meets the qualifications for rural applicants

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1

1090 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices as described in the eligible applicants section and the applicant certifies that it meets those qualifications through the application.

In implementing this statutory provision and program requirement, the Department may fund high-quality applications from rural and STEM education applicants out of rank order in one or more of the EIR competitions.

In addition, for FY 2019 the EIR program intends to award at least $60 million in funds for STEM education projects, contingent on receipt of a sufficient number of applications of sufficient quality.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants:

(a) An LEA;

(b) An SEA;

(c) The Bureau of Indian Education

(BIE);

(d) A consortium of SEAs or LEAs;

(e) A nonprofit organization; and

(f) An SEA, an LEA, a consortium described in (d), or the Bureau of Indian Education, in partnership with—

(1) A nonprofit organization;

(2) A business;

(3) An educational service agency; or

(4) An IHE.

To qualify as a rural applicant under the EIR program, an applicant must meet both of the following requirements:

(a) The applicant is—

(1) An LEA with an urban-centric district locale code of 32, 33, 41, 42, or 43, as determined by the Secretary;

(2) A consortium of such LEAs;

(3) An educational service agency or a nonprofit organization in partnership with such an LEA; or

(4) A grantee described in clause (1) or (2) in partnership with an SEA; and

(b) A majority of the schools to be served by the program are designated with a locale code of 32, 33, 41, 42, or 43, or a combination of such codes, as determined by the Secretary.

Applicants are encouraged to retrieve locale codes from the National Center for Education Statistics School District search tool (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ districtsearch/), where districts can be looked up individually to retrieve locale codes, and Public School search tool (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/), where individual schools can be looked up to retrieve locale codes. More information on rural applicant eligibility is in the application package.

Note: LEA, SEA, BIE, and nonprofits are eligible to apply and submit and receive an EIR grant. A private IHE that can document its nonprofit status, as provided for under 34 CFR 75.51(b), which includes recognition by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as having 501(c)(3) status, is eligible to apply for and receive an EIR grant as a lead applicant, applying as a nonprofit organization. In addition, any IHE is eligible to be a partner in an application where an LEA, SEA, BIE, consortium of SEAs or LEAs, or a nonprofit organization is the lead applicant that submits the application. A nonprofit organization, such as a development foundation, which is affiliated with a public IHE, can apply for a grant. A public IHE that has 501(c)(3) status would also qualify as a nonprofit organization and could be a lead applicant for an EIR grant. A public IHE without 501(c)(3) status, or that could not provide any other documentation described in 34 CFR 75.51(b), however, would not qualify as a nonprofit organization, and therefore could not apply for and receive an EIR grant.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Under section 4611(d) of the ESEA, each grant recipient must provide, from Federal, State, local, or private sources, an amount equal to 10 percent of funds provided under the grant, which may be provided in cash or through in-kind contributions, to carry out activities supported by the grant. Grantees must include a budget showing their matching contributions to the budget amount of EIR grant funds and must provide evidence of their matching contributions for the first year of the grant in their grant applications. Section 4611(d) of the ESEA also authorizes the Secretary to waive this matching requirement on a case-by-case basis, upon a showing of exceptional circumstances, such as:

(a) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program to serve a rural area;

(b) The difficulty of raising matching funds in areas with a concentration of LEAs or schools with a high percentage of students aged 5 through 17—

(1) Who are in poverty, as counted in the most recent census data approved by the Secretary;

(2) Who are eligible for a free or reduced price lunch under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.);

(3) Whose families receive assistance under the State program funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); or

(4) Who are eligible to receive medical assistance under the Medicaid program;

and

(c) The difficulty of raising funds on Tribal land.

Applicants that wish to apply for a waiver must include a request in their application that describes why the matching requirement would cause serious hardship or an inability to carry out project activities. Further information about applying for waivers can be found in the application package.

However, given the importance of matching funds to the long-term success of the project, the Secretary expects eligible entities to identify appropriate matching funds.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities described in its application.

4. Other: a. Funding Categories: An applicant will be considered for an award only for the type of EIR grant (i.e., Early-phase, Mid-phase, and Expansion grant) for which it applies. An applicant may not submit an application for the same proposed project under more than one type of grant.

Note: Each application will be reviewed under the competition it was submitted under in the Grants.gov system, and only applications that are successfully submitted by the established deadline will be peer-reviewed. Applicants should be careful that they download the intended EIR application package and that they submit their applications under the intended EIR competition.

b. Evaluation: The grantee must conduct an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of its project.

c. High-need students: The grantee must serve high-need students.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Application Submission Instructions: For information on how to submit an application please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003), and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018- 02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the Expansion grant competition, 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).

Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

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,’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM 01FEN1 http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/ https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/ https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/

1091 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Notices 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. 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.

4. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

5. Recommended 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. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative for an Expansion grant application to no more than 50 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.

• 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 recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support.

However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.

6. Notice of Intent to Apply: 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) which absolute priorities the applicant intends to address. Applicants may access this form online at www.surveymonkey.com/ r/GD3BGJ6. Applicants that do not complete this form may still submit an application.

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for the Expansion grant competition are from 34 CFR 75.210.

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 10 points).

The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project. In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The national significance of the proposed project.

(2) 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.

B. Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, 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.

(2) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of that framework.

C. Strategy to Scale (up to 20 points).

The Secretary considers the applicant’s strategy to scale the proposed project. In determining the applicant’s capacity to scale the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) 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.

(2) 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.

D. Adequacy of Resources and Quality of the Management Plan (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources and the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources and 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 applicant’s capacity (e.g., in terms of qualified personnel, financial resources, or management capacity) to bring the proposed project 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.

(3) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes, activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or organization at the end of Federal…