2022-03643.pdf

9587 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DoD–2021–OS–0116]

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA), Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: 30-Day information collection notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by March 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angela Duncan, 571–372–7574, or whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: National Industrial Security System; DCSA Form 147; OMB Control Number 0705–0006.

Type of Request: Revision.

Number of Respondents: 11,671.

Responses per Respondent: 2.

Annual Responses: 23,342.

Average Burden per Response: 1.5 hours.

Annual Burden Hours: 35,013.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary for DCSA to oversee the National Industrial Security Program (NISP) pursuant to Executive Order 12829. The National Industrial Security System (NISS) is the primary collection instrument for DCSA oversight of the NISP and maintaining data associated with cleared facilities and their oversight. The NISS is the repository of records related to the maintenance of information pertaining to contractor facility security clearances (FCL) and contractor capabilities to protect classified information in its possession. The information is utilized to determine if a company and its key management personnel are eligible for issuance of a facility clearance in accordance with 32 CFR part 117 requirements. In addition, information is utilized to inform Government Contracting Activities of contractor’s ability to maintain facility clearance status and/or storage capability as well as to analyze vulnerabilities identified within security programs and ensure proper mitigation actions are taken to preclude unauthorized disclosure of classified information. As part of the FCL process, contractors must also complete and maintain a DCSA Form 147 in NISS. The form provides a single document to record the numerous characteristics of Open Storage Areas that are required to be reviewed for contractor facilities to be approved by DCSA for classified storage.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions.

Frequency: As required.

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet

Seehra.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Angela Duncan.

Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Duncan at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.

Dated: February 15, 2022.

Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2022–03735 Filed 2–18–22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program

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

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY)

2022 for the Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), Assistance Listing Number 84.165A. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1855–0011.

DATES:

Application Available: February 22, 2022.

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply:

March 24, 2022.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 25, 2022.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 7, 2022.

PreApplication—Webinar Information: No later than March 4, 2022, MSAP will begin holding webinars to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding these webinars will be provided on the MSAP website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/ school-choice-improvement-programs/ magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. Recordings of all webinars will be available on the MSAP website following the sessions.

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 December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979.

Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in SAM.gov a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to the implementation of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI).

More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/ docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gillian Cohen-Boyer, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202–5970. Telephone: (202) 401– 1259. Email: msap.team@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: MSAP, authorized under Title IV, part D of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf mailto:whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil mailto:whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil mailto:whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil mailto:whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil http://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979 http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/ http://www.regulations.gov http://www.regulations.gov http://www.regulations.gov mailto:msap.team@ed.gov https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/ https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/ https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/ https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/

9588 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices

1 We note the FY 2022 House Appropriations Report (H.R. Rep. No. 117–96 at 276 (2021)) directs the Department to include such a priority, citing a 2019 report by the Urban Institute, which indicated that two-thirds of total school segregation in metropolitan areas is due to segregation between, rather than within, school districts. Monarrez, Tómas, Kisida, Brian, and Chingos, Matthew. When is a school segregated? Making sense of segregation 65 years after Brown v. Board of Education. Urban Institute, September 27, 2019. Retrieved January 3, 2021 from www.urban.org/research/publication/ when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation- 65-years-after-brown-v-board-education.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), provides grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) and consortia of LEAs to create or revise magnet schools under required or voluntary desegregation plans.

As written in section 4401(b) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231, ‘‘the purpose of MSAP is to assist LEAs in the desegregation of schools by providing financial assistance to eligible LEAs for:

(1) The elimination, reduction, or prevention of minority group isolation (MGI) in elementary schools and secondary schools with substantial proportions of minority students, which shall include assisting in the efforts of the United States to achieve voluntary desegregation in public schools; (2) the development, implementation, and expansion of magnet school programs that will assist LEAs in achieving systemic reforms and providing all students the opportunity to meet challenging State academic standards;

(3) the development, design, and expansion of innovative educational methods and practices that promote diversity and increase choices in public elementary schools and public secondary schools and public educational programs; (4) courses of instruction within magnet schools that will substantially strengthen the knowledge of academic subjects and the attainment of tangible and marketable career, technological, and professional skills of students attending such schools; (5) improving the capacity of LEAs, including through professional development, to continue operating magnet schools at a high performance level after Federal funding for the magnet schools is terminated; and (6) ensuring that all students enrolled in the magnet school programs have equitable access to high quality education that will enable the students to succeed academically and continue with postsecondary education or employment.’’

Background: Since its inception nearly 40 years ago, MSAP has supported LEAs in establishing numerous successful magnet schools, defined under section 4402 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231a, as public elementary or secondary schools that offer ‘‘a special curriculum capable of attracting substantial numbers of students of different racial backgrounds.’’ In this competition, the Department seeks to focus applicants on effectively addressing the legislative purpose of the MSAP statute—assisting LEAs in the desegregation of schools through the use of magnet schools—by requiring applicants to demonstrate how they intend to align the elements of their proposed MSAP projects with their required (e.g., court-ordered) or voluntary desegregation plans, which must be submitted as a component of their applications under sections 4403 and 4404 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231b and 7231c. In accordance with 34 CFR

280.2 and 280.20, under Section III, Part 4 of this notice, applicants must provide context and a summary description for the goals of their desegregation plan and how Federal funding for magnet schools will assist in achieving the LEAs’ specific goals related to the reduction, prevention, or elimination of MGI. This information will assist the Department in confirming the LEA’s eligibility for an award and inform the Department’s review of the applicant’s project narrative against the selection criteria outlined in Section V, Part 1 of this notice.

Beyond proposing high-quality projects that provide unique educational opportunities capable of attracting substantial numbers of students of different backgrounds, we encourage applicants to employ a range of strategies to maximize the potential of bringing students together from different racial backgrounds. For example, under section 4407 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C.

7231f, MSAP permits LEAs to support student transportation to and from magnet schools, provided the transportation costs are sustainable beyond the grant period and the costs do not constitute a significant portion of the LEA’s grant funds. Under Competitive Preference Priority 5, we provide competitive preference for applicants that propose to establish, expand, or strengthen inter-district and regional magnet programs consistent with section 4407(a)(8) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231f.1 Responses to Competitive Preference Priority 5 could include, among a range of other activities, establishing and participating in a voluntary, inter-district transfer program for students from varied neighborhoods;

making strategic decisions regarding the selection of magnet school sites or revising school boundaries, attendance zones, or feeder patterns to take into account neighboring communities; and formal merging or coordinating among multiple educational jurisdictions in order to pool resources, provide transportation, and expand high-quality public school options for students from low-income backgrounds.

In order to increase the overall diversity of the school settings in which students learn, under Competitive Preference Priority 6, we provide competitive preference to LEAs that propose to connect their projects to broader school and district plans for increasing students’ access to high-quality instruction delivered by a diverse group of educators.

In Invitational Priority 1, we encourage applicants to prioritize the establishment of whole-school magnet programs in order to promote learning for students in ways that ensure all students within a school have the opportunity to successfully partake in the special curriculum and meet challenging academic content standards and decrease the likelihood of tracking within schools.

Additionally, the Department is interested in projects that propose to coordinate with relevant government entities—such as housing and transportation authorities, among others—given the impact that other public policy choices may have on the composition of a school’s student body.

For example, the Department seeks applications connecting MSAP projects to nearby public housing redevelopment projects, such as those funded through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Choice Neighborhoods Initiative and the HUD Rental Assistance Demonstration program. Accordingly, under Invitational Priority 2, and more generally through the selection criteria outlined in Section V of this notice, we encourage projects that propose to coordinate efforts with housing and transportation authorities, as well as other Federal, State, or local agencies, or community-based organizations.

Finally, to assist grantees in grounding their programs in the existing knowledge base as well as identifying practices that will improve LEA capacity to continue operating magnet schools at high performance levels beyond the funding period, this competition provides for applicants to address evidence in two ways. Under Competitive Preference Priority 2, applicants may demonstrate that they intend to implement activities that are evidence-based in their proposed MSAP project schools. Additionally, in response to the quality of the project evaluation selection criterion, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S http://www.urban.org/research/publication/when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation-65-years-after-brown-v-board-education http://www.urban.org/research/publication/when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation-65-years-after-brown-v-board-education http://www.urban.org/research/publication/when-school-segregated-making-sense-segregation-65-years-after-brown-v-board-education

9589 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices applicants should discuss how they will monitor the implementation and results of their MSAP project activities, as well as how they intend to identify practices to be sustained beyond the project period through the final evaluation reports described in Section VI, Part 4(c) of this notice, which should be designed to yield results at the level of promising evidence or higher.

Priorities: This competition includes six competitive preference priories and two invitational priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and 3 are from the MSAP regulations at 34 CFR 280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 4 are from section 4406 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231e. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), Competitive Preference Priority 5 is from allowable activities specified in section 4407 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C.

7231f. Competitive Preference Priority 6 is from the Final Priorities and Definitions—Secretary’s Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grants Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612) (Supplemental Priorities).

Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2022 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award one additional point to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 1;

up to three additional points to an application, depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 2; up to two additional points to an application, depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 3;

up to three additional points to an application, depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4; up to four additional points to an application depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 5;

and up to two additional points to an application depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 6.

Based on the quality of the applicant’s response in addressing any or all of these priorities, an application may be awarded up to a total of 15 additional points. Applicants may apply under any, all, or none of the competitive preference priorities. The maximum possible points for each competitive preference priority are indicated in parentheses following the name of the priority. These points are in addition to any points the application earns under the selection criteria in this notice.

These priorities are:

Competitive Preference Priority 1—

Need for Assistance (0 or 1 point).

The Secretary evaluates the applicant’s need for assistance by considering—

(1) The costs of fully implementing the magnet schools project as proposed;

(2) The resources available to the applicant to carry out the project if funds under the program were not provided;

(3) The extent to which the costs of the project exceed the applicant’s resources; and

(4) The difficulty of effectively carrying out the approved plan and the project for which assistance is sought, including consideration of how the design of the magnet school project— e.g., the type of program proposed, the location of the magnet school within the LEA—impacts the applicant’s ability to successfully carry out the approved plan.

Competitive Preference Priority 2— New or Revised Magnet Schools Projects and Strength of Evidence to Support Proposed Projects (up to 3 points).

The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to (1) carry out a new, evidence-based magnet school program; (2) significantly revise an existing magnet school program, using evidence-based methods and practices, as available; or (3) replicate an existing magnet school program that has a demonstrated record of success in increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of minority groups.

Competitive Preference Priority 3— Selection of Students (up to 2 points).

The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to select students to attend magnet schools by methods such as lottery, rather than through academic examination.

Competitive Preference Priority 4— Increasing Racial Integration and Socioeconomic Diversity (up to 3 points).

The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic diversity in designing and implementing magnet school programs.

Competitive Preference Priority 5— Inter-district and Regional Approaches (up to 4 points).

Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that grant funds will be used to enable the LEA, or consortium of such agencies, or other organizations partnered with such agency or consortium, to establish, expand, or strengthen inter-district and regional magnet programs.

Competitive Preference Priority 6— Supporting a Diverse Educator Workforce and Professional Growth to Strengthen Student Learning (up to 2 points).

Projects that are designed to increase the proportion of well-prepared, diverse, and effective educators serving students, with a focus on underserved students, through building or expanding high-poverty school districts’ capacity to hire, support, and retain an effective and diverse educator workforce, through one or both of the following:

(a) Adopting or expanding comprehensive, strategic career and compensation systems that provide competitive compensation and include opportunities for educators to serve as mentors and instructional coaches, or to take on additional leadership roles and responsibilities for which educators are compensated.

(b) Developing data systems, timelines, and action plans for promoting inclusive and bias-free human resources practices that promote and support development of educator diversity.

Invitational Priorities: For FY 2022 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these are invitational priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets these invitational priorities a competitive or absolute preference over other applications.

These priorities are:

Invitational Priority 1—Whole-School

Magnet Programs.

Projects that propose to implement

‘‘whole-school magnet’’ schools in which all students enrolled in the school participate in the magnet school program, rather than schools that implement magnet programs within schools which are offered to less than the entire school population.

Invitational Priority 2—Coordination Across Agencies and Organizations.

Projects that propose to coordinate efforts with relevant governmental agencies, such as housing or transportation authorities, or community organizations to promote student diversity and achievement in magnet schools. This may include projects coordinated with public housing redevelopment efforts, such as those funded through the HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative or the HUD Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

Definitions: The definition of ‘‘evidence-based’’ is from 20 U.S.C.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S

9590 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices

7801. The definitions of ‘‘desegregation’’ and ‘‘feeder school’’ are from 34 CFR

280.4. The definitions of ‘‘demonstrates

a rationale,’’ ‘‘experimental study,’’ ‘‘logic model,’’ ‘‘project component,’’ ‘‘promising evidence,’’ ‘‘quasi-experimental design study,’’ ‘‘relevant outcome,’’ and ‘‘What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks’’ are from 34 CFR 77.1(c). The definitions of ‘‘children or students with disabilities,’’ ‘‘disconnected youth,’’ ‘‘educator,’’ ‘‘English learner,’’ ‘‘military- or veteran-connected student,’’ and ‘‘underserved student’’ are from the Supplemental Priorities.

Children or students with disabilities means children with disabilities as defined in section 602(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1401(3)) and 34 CFR 300.8, or students with disabilities, as defined in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 705(37), 705(202)(B)).

Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in the project’s logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant outcomes.

Desegregation, in reference to a plan, means a plan for the reassignment of children or faculty to remedy the illegal separation of minority group children or faculty in the schools of an LEA or a plan for the reduction, elimination, or prevention of minority group isolation in one or more of the schools of an LEA.

Disconnected youth means an individual, between the ages 14 and 24, who may be from a low-income background, experiences homelessness, is in foster care, is involved in the justice system, or is not working or not enrolled in (or at risk of dropping out of) an educational institution.

Educator means an individual who is an early learning (as defined in the Supplemental Priorities) educator, teacher, principal or other school leader, specialized instructional support personnel (e.g., school psychologist, counselor, school social worker, early intervention service personnel), paraprofessional, or faculty.

English learner means an individual who is an English learner as defined in section 8101(20) of the ESEA, or an individual who is an English language learner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

Evidence-based means an activity, strategy, or intervention that—

(i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on—

(A) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study;

(B) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study;

or

(C) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias; or

(ii) (A) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes; and

(B) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

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 Handbooks):

(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.

Feeder school means a school from which students are drawn to attend a magnet school.

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 key project components and relevant outcomes.

Military- or veteran-connected student means a child participating in an early learning (as defined in the Supplemental Priorities) program, a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12, or a student enrolled in career and technical education or postsecondary education who has a parent or guardian who is a veteran of the uniformed services (as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101), in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Space Force, National Guard, Reserves, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or Public Health Service or is a veteran of the uniformed services with an honorable discharge (as defined by 38 U.S.C. 3311).

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).

Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ or ‘‘moderate evidence base’’ for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a ‘‘positive effect’’ or ‘‘potentially positive effect’’ on a relevant outcome with no reporting of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or ‘‘potentially negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that-–

(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group);

and

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

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects.

This type of study, depending on design and implementation (e.g., establishment

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E

9591 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices of baseline equivalence of the groups being compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks.

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.

Underserved student means a student (which includes students in K–12 programs) in one or more of the following subgroups:

(a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools with high concentrations of students living in poverty.

(b) A student of color.

(c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian Tribe.

(d) An English learner.

(e) A child or student with a disability.

(f) A disconnected youth.

(g) A technologically unconnected youth.

(h) A migrant student.

(i) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.

(j) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, or intersex (LGBTQI+) student.

(k) A student who is in foster care.

(l) A student without documentation of immigration status.

(m) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.

(n) A student impacted by the justice system, including a formerly incarcerated student.

(o) A student performing significantly below grade level.

(p) A military- or veteran-connected student.

What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbooks means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Standards Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, or in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (all incorporated by reference, see § 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 WWC Handbooks documentation.

Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbooks are available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ wwc/Handbooks.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231– 7231j.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with discrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 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 regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 280. (e) Supplemental Priorities.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds: The

Administration has requested $149,000,000 for the MSAP program for FY 2022, of which we would use an estimated $135,000,000 for awards under this competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process before the end of the current fiscal year, if Congress appropriates funds for this program.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2023 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards:

$1,000,000–$3,500,000 per budget year.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award to an LEA or a consortium of LEAS exceeding $15,000,000 for the project period. Under section 4408(b) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231h, grantees may not expend more than 50 percent of the year one grant funds and not more than 15 percent of year two and three grant funds on planning activities.

Professional development is not considered to be a planning activity.

Note: Yearly award amounts may vary.

Estimated Number of Awards: 30–40.

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or consortia of LEAs implementing a desegregation plan as specified in section III. 4 of this notice.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

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—Desegregation Plans: Per section 4404 of the ESEA and 34 CFR 280.20(e) and (f) of the regulations, to establish eligibility to receive MSAP assistance, applicants must also submit with their applications one of the following types of desegregation plans:

(i) A desegregation plan required by a court order; (ii) a desegregation plan required by a State agency or an official of competent jurisdiction; (iii) a desegregation plan required by the Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI); or (iv) a voluntary desegregation plan adopted by the applicant and submitted to the Department for approval as part of the application. Under the MSAP regulations, applicants are required to provide all of the information required in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g) in order to satisfy the civil rights eligibility requirements found in 34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) and (b).

Note: While voluntary desegregation plans must be approved by the school board of the submitting LEA or consortium of LEAs, these desegregation plans do not require Department approval prior to application submission. Review of applicants’ voluntary desegregation plans is a component of the application review process under section 4404 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C.7231c, and 34 CFR 280.2(b) to ensure that all grantees receiving funds have desegregation plans that are adequate under Title VI and, for each magnet school for which funding is sought, the magnet school will reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI within the project period, either in the magnet school or in a feeder school, as appropriate.

In addition to the particular data and other items for required and voluntary desegregation plans described in the application package, per 34 CFR 280.20(e)(f) and(g), an application must include—

• Projected enrollment by race and ethnicity for magnet and feeder schools;

• Signed civil rights assurances; and

• An assurance that the desegregation plan is being implemented or will be implemented if the application is funded.

Finally, under section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231d(b)(1)(A), applicants must describe ‘‘how a grant awarded under this part will be used to promote desegregation, including any available evidence on, or if such evidence is not available, a rationale, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks

9592 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices based on current research, for how the proposed magnet school programs will increase interaction among students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds.’’ To assist applicants in submitting succinct and comprehensive information to this end, the Application Package for this competition includes a Desegregation Plan Form OMB–1855–0011. Through this form, applicants will summarize their desegregation plan and describe:

The plan’s overarching goals; the definition of MGI being used by the LEA and the specific schools (either magnets or feeders) and racial/ethnic group(s) that have been identified as in need of reduction, prevention, or elimination of MGI; how these particular schools are currently part of the LEA’s school configuration and enrollment patterns;

and how the MSAP project and its proposed magnets are designed to effectively prevent, reduce, or eliminate MGI in elementary or secondary schools with substantial proportions of minority students.

Note: Section 4401(b)(1) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231, describes the desegregation purpose of MSAP as the elimination, reduction, or prevention of MGI in elementary and secondary schools with substantial proportions of minority students. In accordance with section 4404 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.

7231c) and 34 CFR 280.2, projects that are not designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI and to bring students from different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds together in accordance with an approved desegregation plan, are not eligible for MSAP funding. Additionally, for the purposes of the MSAP program, ‘‘feeder school’’ is defined in 34 CFR 280.4(b) as ‘‘a school from which students are drawn to attend the magnet school,’’ and refers to the schools that students attending magnet schools would otherwise have attended had the magnet school not been available.

Applicants are encouraged to elaborate on these summary descriptions and the content of their desegregation plans in the application’s project narrative described in Section V of this notice and with an accompanying logic model demonstrating the conceptual framework for and graphically depicting how the applicant intends to achieve the summarized desegregation plan goals outlined above.

Required Desegregation Plans

1. Desegregation plans required by a court order. An applicant that submits a desegregation plan required by a court order must submit complete and signed copies of all court documents demonstrating that the magnet schools are a part of the approved desegregation plan. Examples of the types of documents that would meet this requirement include a Federal or State court order that establishes specific magnet schools, amends a previous order or orders by establishing additional or different specific magnet schools, requires or approves the establishment of one or more unspecified magnet schools, or authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.

2. Desegregation plans required by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a desegregation plan ordered by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction must provide documentation that shows that the desegregation plan was ordered based upon a determination that State law was violated. In the absence of this documentation, the applicant should consider its desegregation plan to be a voluntary plan and submit the data and information necessary for voluntary plans.

3. Desegregation plans required by OCR under Title VI. An applicant that submits a desegregation plan required by OCR under Title VI must submit a complete copy of the desegregation plan demonstrating that magnet schools are part of the approved plan or that the plan authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.

4. Modifications to required desegregation plans. A previously approved desegregation plan that does not include the magnet school or program for which the applicant is now seeking assistance must be modified to include the magnet school component.

The modification to the desegregation plan must be approved by the court, agency, or official that originally approved the plan. An applicant that wishes to modify a previously approved OCR Title VI desegregation plan to include different or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed modification for review and approval to the OCR regional office that approved its original plan.

An applicant should indicate in its application if it is seeking to modify its previously approved desegregation plan.

However, all applicants must submit proof of approval of all modifications to their plans to the Department by June 22, 2022. Proof of plan modifications should be emailed to Gillian Cohen- Boyer at msap.team@ed.gov or mailed to her at: U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C134, Washington, DC 20202–5970.

Telephone: (202) 401–1259.

Voluntary Desegregation Plans A voluntary desegregation plan must be approved by the Department each time an application is considered for funding. Even if the Department has approved a voluntary desegregation plan in an LEA in the past, to be reviewed, the desegregation plan must be resubmitted with the application by the application deadline.

The Department will determine on a case-by-case basis whether a district’s voluntary plan meets the statutory purpose of reducing, eliminating, or preventing MGI in its magnet or feeder schools, considering the unique circumstances in each district and school. As part of this consideration, the Department will consider, consistent with 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(1), whether the project is designed to eliminate, reduce, or prevent MGI in elementary and/or secondary schools with substantial proportions of students from any minority group(s). We also note that Congress has recognized that ‘‘segregation exists between minority and nonminority students as well as among students of different minority groups.’’ Section 4401(a)(4)(C) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7231(a)(4)(C). This case-by-case review will include an examination of the factual basis for any proposed increases in enrollment of students from minority groups at district schools; for example, the Department will consider whether a plan to reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI at a magnet school or at a feeder school would significantly increase MGI at any other magnet or feeder school in the LEA at the grade levels served by the magnet school.

An applicant’s voluntary desegregation plan must describe how the LEA defines or identifies MGI;

demonstrate how the LEA will reduce, eliminate, or prevent MGI for each magnet school in the proposed project, and, if relevant, at identified feeder schools; and demonstrate that the proposed voluntary desegregation plan is adequate under Title VI.

Under 34 CFR 280.20(f) and (g), applicants with voluntary desegregation plans must submit complete and accurate enrollment forms and other information to demonstrate their eligibility (specific requirements are detailed in the application package).

Voluntary desegregation plan applicants must submit documentation of school board approval or documentation of other official adoption of the plan as required under 34 CFR

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM 22FEN1lo tte r on

D S

K

X Q

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S mailto:msap.team@ed.gov

9593 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices

280.20(f)(2) when submitting their application. LEAs that were previously under a required desegregation plan, but have achieved unitary status and so are voluntary desegregation plan applicants, typically would not need to include court orders. Rather, such applications should provide the documentation discussed in this section.

5. Single-Sex Programs: An applicant proposing to operate a single-sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school that offers single-sex classes or extracurricular activities will undergo a review of its proposed single-sex educational program to determine compliance with applicable nondiscrimination laws, including the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S.

Constitution (as interpreted in United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), and other cases) and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its regulations—including 34 CFR 106.34.

This review may require the applicant to provide additional fact-specific information about the single-sex program.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/ 2021–27979, which contain requirements and information on how to submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to the implementation of the UEI. More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at www2.ed.gov/ about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the MSAP, 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,’’ 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 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.

4. Funding Restrictions: Unallowable costs are specified in section 4407 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7231f). We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative 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 to 150 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, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

• Use…