2024-327S Application Package - 508 FINAL.docx
DOCX document 2 MB Posted
- Opportunity number
- ED-GRANTS-030124-001
- Issued by
-
Department of Education
About this file
This document provides an application package for a competitive federal grant opportunity through the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The grant program, Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities (CFDA #84.327), seeks up to four cooperative agreements of up to $375,000 per year for five years to establish projects integrating artificial intelligence to improve outcomes for students with disabilities. Eligible applicants include state educational agencies, local educational agencies, institutions of higher education, and non-profit organizations. Applications are due April 30, 2024 and must meet requirements for project design, evaluation plan, personnel qualifications, and dissemination strategies focused on an evidence-based educational technology tool incorporating AI. Funded projects will collaborate across sites to refine products, evaluate implementation, and scale the approach nationally by the end of the period of performance.
2024-327S Application Package - 508 FINAL
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2024-04316.pdf | ||
| 2022-26554.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
U.S. Department of Education
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION & REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
WASHINGTON, DC 20202
FISCAL YEAR 2024
APPLICATION FOR NEW GRANTS UNDER THE
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT (IDEA)
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, MEDIA, AND MATERIALS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
(ALN 84.327)
APPLICATIONS FOR NEW AWARDS;
STEPPING-UP TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION
(ALN 84.327S)
DATED MATERIAL: OPEN IMMEDIATELY
CLOSING DATE: APRIL 30, 2024
FORM APPROVED — OMB No. 1820-0028, EXP. DATE: 07/31/2025
B-1 A-2
Contents
| Applicant Letter | A1 |
| Notice Inviting Applications | A6 |
| Federal Register Notice | A7 |
| Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants | A45 |
| Priority Description and Selection Criteria | B1 |
| Stepping-up Technology Implementation | B2 |
| Selection Criteria and Format for the Applications for New Awards— Stepping-up Technology Implementation (CFDA 84.327S) Competition | B24 |
| General Information on Completing an Application | C1 |
| Application Transmittal Instructions and Requirements for Intergovernmental Review | D1 |
| Appendix | D5 |
| Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs | D6 |
| State Single Points of Contact (SPOCs) | D7 |
| Notice to All Applicants Ensuring Equitable Access and Application Forms and Instructions | E1 |
| Part I: Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) | E6 |
| Part II: Budget Information (ED Form 524) | E23 |
| Part III: Application Narrative | E28 |
| Part IV: Assurances and Certifications | E29 |
| ED General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) 427 Form | E30 |
| Certification Regarding Lobbying….. | E32 |
| Grant Application Receipt Acknowledgement | E36 |
| Grant and Contract Funding Information | E36 |
Paperwork Burden Statement According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1820-0028. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 45 hours and 40 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to:
U.S. Department of Education Washington, DC 20202-4651 If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to:
Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Ave. SW Washington, DC 20202
Applicant Letter
A-4 Dear Applicant:
This application packet contains information and the required forms for you to use in submitting a new application for funding under one program authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This packet covers one competition under the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program (Assistance Listing Number 84.327) program—Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program-- Stepping-up Technology Implementation (Assistance Listing Number 84.327S).
Please take the time to review all of the applicable requirements, definitions, selection criteria, and application instructions thoroughly. An application will not be evaluated for funding if the applicant does not comply with all of the procedural rules that govern the submission of the application or if the application does not contain the information required. (EDGAR §75.216 (b) and (c)).
Please note the following:
· Grants.gov Application Submission and SAM Registration.
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (www.Grants.gov). Please read carefully the Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants document included on page A-44, which includes helpful tips about submitting electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site. Grants.gov registration involves many steps including registration on SAM (www.sam.gov) which may take approximately one week to complete but could take as many as several weeks to complete. You may begin working on your application while completing the registration process, but you cannot submit an application until all of the Registration steps are complete. Please note that once your SAM registration is active, it will take 24-48 hours for the information to be available in Grants.gov. You cannot submit an application through Grants.gov until Grants.gov has received your SAM registration information. We strongly encourage you to familiarize yourself with SAM and Grants.gov, and strongly recommend that you register and submit early.
Applicants are required to upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in either Portable Document Format (PDF) or Microsoft Word. However, it is recommended that applicants upload files as read-only flattened PDFs.
Information on computer and operating system compatibility with Adobe and links to download the latest version of Adobe are available on Grants.gov. Please note that you must follow the Application Procedures as described in the Federal Register notice announcing this grant competition. Information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically can also be found in section D of this application package, Application Transmittal Instructions and Requirements for Intergovernmental Review. Additional instructions for sending applications electronically are provided on page D-2, Application Forms and Instructions for Grants.gov Applications.
· MAXIMUM AWARD AMOUNT.
The competition included in this package has maximum award amounts. Please refer to the specific information for the priority/competition to which you are submitting an application (i.e., Section D of this package) for detailed budget information for the total grant period requested. Please be advised that for the priority in this package, the maximum award amount covers all project costs including indirect costs.
· RECOMMENDED PAGE LIMITS AND LINE SPACING OF APPLICATION NARRATIVE.
The competition included in this package limits the Application Narrative to a recommended number of double-spaced pages. This recommended page limit and double-line spacing applies to all material presented in the application narrative. This recommended double-line spacing applies to all titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots, and logic models included in the application narrative. (Please refer to the specific recommendations on page limits for the priority/competition to which you are submitting an application, Section B of this package).
· FORMAT FOR OTHER SECTIONS OF THE APPLICATION.
Additional information regarding formatting applications has been included on page C-1 of the “General Information on Completing an Application” section of this package.
Appendix A: Reviewers will be instructed to review the content of Appendix A as they do the application narrative. Reviewers will not be required to review any other appendices.
Charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots and logic models that provide information directly relating to the application requirements for the narrative should be the only items included in Appendix A. Appendix A should not be used for supplementary information. Please note that charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots, and logic models can be single-spaced when placed in an Appendix A.
Abstract: For the application Abstract, applicants should use the template located at:
https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html
ABSOLUTE PRIORITY AND COMPETITIVE PREFERENCE PRIORITIES.
This competition includes one absolute priority and one competitive preference priority. The Department will use peer reviewers to review and score applications on the selection criteria.
Prior to the peer review, Department staff will determine if an application has met the qualifications of the absolute priority and is eligible for peer review. An application that has not met the absolute priority will not be considered for funding and may not be reviewed.
· PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS IN RESEARCH.
The discretionary grant Application Form SF-424 requires applicants to indicate whether they plan to conduct research involving human subjects at any time during the proposed project period. The Protection of Human Subjects in Research Attachment is an integral part of the SF-424 form. It includes information that applicants need to complete the protection of human subjects item and, as appropriate, to provide additional information to the Department regarding human subjects research projects. Additional information on completing the protection of human subjects item is also available and can be accessed on the internet at:
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/humansub.html
· RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS ACT (GPRA)
As required by the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has developed a strategic plan for measuring GPRA performance. The program included in this announcement is authorized under Part D - National Activities to Improve Education of Children with Disabilities of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Projects funded under this competition are required to submit data on GPRA performance measures as directed by OSEP. See Performance Measures included in the Priority Description section of this application package. Applicants are encouraged to consider this information when preparing their applications.
· COPIES OF THE APPLICATION.
Unless you qualify for an exception in accordance with the instructions found in the Notice inviting applications, you must submit your application electronically. Therefore, you do not need to submit paper copies of the application. If you are granted an exception, current Government-wide policy requires that an original and two paper copies need to be submitted. Please note: If an application is recommended for funding and a grant award is issued, we will contact the applicant to request an electronic copy of the application in MS Word or a PDF file. The Department is moving toward an electronic grant filing system and an electronic copy of all applications that are being funded will facilitate this effort.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
OSEP also provides information on developing performance measures and logic models at https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel to assist you in preparing a quality application. For information about other U.S. Department of Education grant and contract opportunities, we encourage you to use the Department's grant information web page which can be accessed on the internet at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/grants/grants.html.
We appreciate your efforts to improve the provision of services for individuals with disabilities.
Sincerely, /s/ David J. Cantrell, OSEP Deputy Director and Acting Research to Practice Division Director
A-2
Notice Inviting Applications
A-5 Federal Register Notice 4000-01-U
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program—Stepping-up Technology Implementation AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
Overview Information:
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program—Stepping-up Technology Implementation Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2024.
Assistance Listing Number (ALN): 84.327S.
Dates:
Applications Available: March 1, 2024.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 30, 2024.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 1, 2024.
Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description Purpose of Program:
The purposes of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to improve results for children with disabilities by (1) promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) supporting educational activities designed to be of educational value in the classroom for children with disabilities; (3) providing support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the classroom; and (4) providing accessible educational materials to children with disabilities in a timely manner.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Applicants should note that other laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) provide captioning, video description, and other accessible educational materials to students with disabilities when these materials are necessary to provide equally integrated and equally effective access to the benefits of the educational program or activity, or as part of a “free appropriate public education” as defined in 34 CFR 104.33.]
Priority:
This competition includes one absolute priority and one competitive preference priority. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority is from allowable activities specified in sections 674(b)(2) and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1474(b)(2) and 1481(d). The competitive preference priority is from the Secretary’s Administrative Priorities for Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2020 (85 FR 13640) (Administrative Priorities).
Absolute Priority:
For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)[footnoteRef:2] to Meet Individual Needs of Students with Disabilities Through Learning and Assessment. [2: The term “artificial intelligence” or “AI” has the meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3): a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments. Artificial intelligence systems use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive real and virtual environments; abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for information or action.]
Background:
| The evolution and recent developments in educational technology tools integrating AI have generated increased interest in the potential of AI to transform and support innovations in learning across educational settings for all learners, including learners with disabilities. As part of the Administration’s comprehensive strategy related to responsible innovation afforded by AI, the Department (2023) released a report that summarizes the opportunities and risks for AI in teaching and learning. Such opportunities for using AI in educational technologies include promising innovations to improve student-educator interactions, address individual learner needs and leverage learner strengths, refine feedback loops that improve learner outcomes, and support educators by reducing administrative task burden and improving practices. |
| Opportunities to leverage educational technology tools integrating AI to improve learning outcomes and advance equity have been noted for all learners (e.g., Chen et al., 2022; Huang et al., 2021; Zafari et al., 2022; U.S. Department of Education, 2023). Research indicates that these technologies hold promise in supporting individualized instruction and intervention and improving access in multiple areas, including communication, social, literacy, and mathematical skills (e.g., Barua et al., 2022; U.S. Department of Education, 2023). Therefore, it is critical that children with disabilities are provided appropriate levels of support in using existing and developing educational technologies integrating AI (e.g., Barua et al., 2022; Marino et al., 2023) to enhance learner outcomes. |
| As educational technology tools that integrate AI continue to be developed and made available, factors that support their successful implementation in educational settings need to be considered. For example, evidence-based intelligent tutoring systems have demonstrated positive outcomes for learners, but additional research is needed on how to effectively implement such systems in different settings (e.g., Phillips et al., 2020), including how best to support children with disabilities. |
| The role of the educator in implementing these technologies to complement ongoing instruction and intervention is critical in supporting children with disabilities (e.g., U.S. Department of Education, 2023). Several key factors that facilitate or limit successful implementation of educational technology tools in educational settings have been noted, including buy-in by and sustainability with users, alignment with existing priorities, development of materials to support fidelity of implementation, how the data are used, technology infrastructure, and data security (e.g., Evmenova et al., 2023; U.S. Department of Education, 2023). |
Priority:
| The purpose of this priority is to fund four cooperative agreements to establish and operate projects that achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes: |
| (a) Improved student outcomes using an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach[footnoteRef:3] that integrates AI; [3: For the purposes of this priority, projects must meet at least the definition of “promising evidence,” which 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: (a) a practice guide prepared by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding practice recommendation; (b) 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 (c) a single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that 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 includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome. See 34 CFR 77.1 for definitions of “project component,” “promising evidence,” “experimental study,” “moderate evidence,” “quasi-experimental design study,” “relevant outcome,” and “strong evidence.”] |
(b) Improved educator[footnoteRef:4] use and knowledge of an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI to deliver effective instruction to students with disabilities; [4: For the purpose of this priority, “educators” include teachers, early childhood providers, administrators, paraprofessionals, and other providers.]
| (c) Improved educator collaboration and professional learning opportunities focusing on improving outcomes for student with disabilities using an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI; |
| (d) Improved educator and family engagement regarding the use of an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI to support student learning; and |
| (e) Sustained use of the evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI by aligning its use with existing instructional priorities and initiatives. |
To be considered for funding under this priority, in the application, applicants must describe the--
| (a) Evidence-based technology-based tool or approach that is ready to use at the time of the application submission. If the AI component is not yet completed, describe how this will be integrated within the first year and how it will enhance the current developed technology-based tool or approach; |
| (b) Outcomes of students with disabilities that will be improved by implementing the technology-based tool or approach using AI; |
| (c) Approach to increase educators’ use and knowledge of the technology-based tool or approach using AI to improve the outcomes of students with disabilities in an instructional setting;[footnoteRef:5] and [5: For the purposes of this priority, an instructional setting can be an environment that is regulated by the public school or an “early childhood education program,” as defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, within the local educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110–315, title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3398).] |
(d) Fully accessible products and resources that will help educators and families to effectively use and implement the technology-based tool or approach using AI (See for example, NIST AI Risk Management Framework-- https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.100-1.pdf--for information on managing risks across the AI lifecycle).
Note: Grantees may, but are not required to, use up to the first 12 months of the performance period and up to $200,000 of funds awarded in the first budget period for project development activities, including technology enhancement, prior to implementing the tool or approach in instructional settings. If an applicant proposes to use the first year for project development activities, then the applicant must provide sufficient justification, including the goals, objectives, and intended outcomes at the end of year one.
| In addition to these programmatic requirements and application requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must also meet the following application and administrative requirements: |
| (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance,” how the proposed project will address the need for a technology-based tool or approach that integrates AI. To meet this requirement applicants must-- |
| (1) Verify that the developed technology-based tool or approach and core components of the intervention are based on at least promising evidence; |
| (2) Describe how AI will be used with the identified technology-based tool or approach and describe the potential to improve student outcomes; |
| (3) Describe the current impact and reach of the technology-based tool or approach that is currently developed and include the population of users and, |
if the applicant has received any Federal funding within the last three years related to this technology-based tool or approach, describe how the funding impacted the reach and current use;
| (4) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach using AI will improve educators’ pedagogy and their capacity to deliver effective instruction for students with disabilities in PK-12 instructional settings; |
| (5) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach using AI will improve parent/family engagement/partnership to support student learning; |
| (6) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or approach using AI to enhance the outcomes for students with disabilities; |
| (7) Identify how the proposed technology-based tool or approach using AI aligns with current policies, procedures, and practices used by educators to enhance the outcomes for students with disabilities; and |
| (8) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including challenges to using the identified technology-based tool or approach using AI. |
| (b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of project services,” how the proposed project will-- |
| (1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will-- |
| (i) Identify the target population, including students with disabilities and their educators, that the applicant will service, the need that population has for the technology-based tool or approach, and the intended recipients for ongoing professional learning and coaching support; and |
| (ii) Ensure that the products and resources meet the needs of the intended recipients of this grant; |
| (2) Utilize a design process for the implementation approach that promotes sustainability of the technology-based tool or approach using AI beyond the life of the project; |
| (3) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide measurable intended project outcomes; |
| (4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the applicant must-- |
| (i) Describe how the proposed project will align with current research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or approach; |
| (ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current and evidence-based research and practices, including research and practices relating to accessibility and usability, to guide the development and delivery of its products and resources; and |
| (iii) Document that the technology-based tool or approach to be used by the proposed project is developed, has been tested and shown to have promising evidence, and addresses, at a minimum, the following principles of universal design for learning: |
| (A) Multiple means of representation so that information can be delivered in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and websites, customizing display for visual or physical modalities); |
| (B) Multiple means of expression that allow knowledge to be exhibited through options (e.g., writing, online concept mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate); and |
| (C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and motivation for learning (e.g., individual or group learning experiences or activities, learner choice); and |
| (5) Develop and implement products and resources that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must-- |
| (i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting sites from a variety of instructional settings that include the targeted population including students with disabilities, which must include the following: |
| (A) Two product and resource development sites.[footnoteRef:6] Applicants must describe at least two proposed product and resource development sites, where the project would conduct iterative development of the products and resources intended to support the implementation of the technology-based tool or approach and produce, by the end of year two, preliminary feasibility and useability data. Applicants must include a letter in Appendix A from at least one site that indicates agreement to serve as a product and resource development site, at a minimum, in year one of the project. [6: A “site” is a public school building or an “early childhood education program,” as defined under the Higher Education Act, within the local educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110–315, title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3398). ] |
| (B) Three pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which ongoing refinement of the developed products and resources, and the continued collection of feasibility and usability data, will occur. Applicants must describe how they would work with a minimum of three pilot sites no later than year three of the project, where the project would continue to refine the developed products and resources; collect feasibility and usability data; and demonstrate that the educational technology-based tool or approach using AI is producing the intended outcome(s) for students with disabilities. |
| (C) Five dissemination sites. Applicants must describe how they would work with a minimum of five dissemination sites, where the project would complete its activities, by year four of the project period, to (1) refine the products for use by educators and students, and (2) evaluate the performance of the technology-based tool or approach using AI on educators’ pedagogy and students’ outcomes. Dissemination sites would receive less implementation support from the project than development and pilot sites. |
Note: A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e., development, pilot, dissemination);
(ii) Describe how the project will incorporate components from implementation science[footnoteRef:7] to select sites for continued use of the technology-based tool or approach using AI and support and sustain such continued use at the selected site; [7: The following website provides more information about implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.]
| (iii) Provide a plan to systematically disseminate information about the technology-based tool or approach using AI to varied audiences throughout the project period. To address this requirement the applicant must describe-- |
| (A) The variety of dissemination strategies the project will use throughout the five years of the project to promote awareness and use of its technology-based tool or approach using AI; |
| (B) How the project will tailor dissemination strategies across all years of technology refinements and to ensure that, by the end of year two, the technology-based tool or approach can be accessed by, is reaching, and is used by intended recipients; |
| (C) Dissemination efforts that will go beyond conference presentations and articles and reach intended audiences to support implementation and scale up and increase the use of the technology-based tool or approach using AI by intended users; |
| (D) How the project’s dissemination plan is connected to the proposed outcomes of the project; and |
| (E) How the project will ensure that all digital products and all external communications are routinely evaluated for and, if necessary, remediated to meet or exceed government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility; and |
| (iv) Provide assurances that all products or tools developed with project funds will be open educational resources.[footnoteRef:8] [8: For additional information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20 and this resource https://oese.ed.gov/files/2022/06/Open-Licensing-Requirement-Quick-Guide.pdf.] |
| (c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the project evaluation,” include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. In designing the evaluation plan, the applicant must-- |
| (1) Provide a logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) or conceptual framework that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods, performance measures, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project; |
| (2) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project’s logic model or conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed project’s activities. The plan must describe how the formative evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring the quality of products and resources; |
| (3) Describe a plan or method for assessing-- |
| (i) The development and pilot sites’ educator training use and needs and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site technology training personnel; |
| (ii) The readiness of pilot sites to pilot or try-out the technology-based tool or approach using AI, including, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, technology or instructional alignment, available resources, and ability to build capacity; |
| (iii) Whether the technology-based tool or approach using AI has achieved its intended outcomes; and |
| (iv) The ongoing professional learning needs of educators to implement with fidelity; |
| (4) Describe a plan to collect formative and summative data from the professional learning to refine and evaluate the products and resources; |
| (5) Describe a plan or method for assessing whether dissemination efforts are increasing the knowledge and use by the intended users of the technology-based tool or approach using AI and the developed products and resources; |
| (6) Describe a plan to collect summative data to report on the quality, relevance, usefulness, and efficacy of the technology-based tool or approach using AI and its products and resources; and |
| (7) Provide an assurance that, by the end of the project period, the project will provide-- |
| (i) Information supported by the project evaluation on the products and resources, including accessibility features, that will enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the technology-based tool or approach using AI; |
| (ii) Information in the project’s final performance report, including implementation data, on how intended users (e.g., educators, families, and students) utilized the technology-based tool or approach using AI; how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented with fidelity; and the effectiveness of the technology-based tool or approach using AI in improving outcomes for students with disabilities; |
| (iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach using AI changed educators’ practices; and |
| (iv) A plan for continuing to disseminate or scale up the technology-based tool or approach using AI and accompanying products beyond the sites directly involved in the project. |
| (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,” how the-- |
| (1) Proposed project will encourage applications for employment and project activity opportunities from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate; |
| (2) Proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project’s intended outcomes and how the proposed project team will include qualified experts on topics such as technology, education theory, practice, research methods, and scale-up or commercialization to support sustainability and dissemination; |
| (3) Applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and |
| (4) Proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits. |
| (e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the management plan,” how-- |
| (1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project’s intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe-- |
| (i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and |
| (ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks; |
| (2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project’s intended outcomes; |
| (3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and resources provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and |
| (4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation. |
| (f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must include-- |
| (1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative; |
| (2) In Appendix A, the logic model or conceptual framework by which the proposed project will develop project plans and activities and achieve its intended outcomes. The logic model or conceptual framework must include a description of any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework and depict, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project; and |
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks: https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf; http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework; https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/discretionary/2023-non-regulatory-guidance-evidence.pdf; and http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015057.
| (3) In the budget, attendance at the following: |
| (i) A one-day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period. |
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee’s project director or other authorized representative.
| (ii) A three-day project directors’ conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period. |
| (iii) One annual trip, to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP. |
Cohort Collaboration and Support OSEP project officers will provide coordination support among the projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
| (a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to collaborate on implementation and project issues; and |
| (b) Provide annual information to OSEP using a template that captures descriptive data on project site selection and the processes for implementation and use of the technology-based tool or approach. |
| Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue funding accordingly. |
Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2024, this priority is a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional three points to an application that meets the competitive preference priority. Applicants should indicate in the abstract if the competitive preference priority is addressed and must address the competitive preference priority in the narrative section.
| This priority is: |
| Applications from New Potential Grantees (0 or 3 points). |
| (a) Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that the applicant has not had an active discretionary grant under the 84.327S program from which it seeks funds, including through membership in a group application submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-75.129, in the five years before the deadline date for submission of applications under the program. |
| (b) For the purpose of this priority, a grant or contract is active until the end of the grant’s or contract’s project or funding period, including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee’s or contractor’s authority to obligate funds. |
References:
Barua, P. D., Vicnesh, J., Gururajan, R., Oh, S. L., Palmer, E., Azizan, M. M., Kadri, N. A., & Acharya, U. R. (2022). Artificial intelligence enabled personalised assistive tools to enhance education of children with neurodevelopmental disorders--A review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(3), 1192-1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031192.
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education: Contributors, collaborations, research topics, challenges, and future directions. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28–47. http://www.jstor.org/stable/48647028.
Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K. S., Schladant, M., Hall, T. E., Buzhardt, J., Erickson, K. A., Ai, J., Sudduth, C., & Jackson, T. (2023). Stepping-up technology implementation--How does it happen? Journal of Special Education Technology, 38(1), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434221074357.
Huang, J., Salah, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). A review on artificial intelligence in education. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 10(3), 206-217. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0077.
Marino, M. T., Vasquez, E., Dieker, L., Basham, J., & Blackorby, J. (2023). The future of artificial intelligence in special education technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 38(3), 404-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434231165977.
Phillips, A., Pane, J. F., Reumann-Moore, R., & Shenbanjo, O. (2020). Implementing an adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an instructional supplement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1409-1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09745-w.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence and future of teaching and learning: Insights and recommendations. https://tech.ed.gov/ai-future-of-teaching-and-learning.
Zafari, M., Bazargani, J. S., Sadeghi-Niaraki, A. & Choi, S. M. (2022). Artificial intelligence applications in K-12 education: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 10, 61905-61921. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3179356.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking:
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the absolute priority in this notice.
Program Authority:
20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with nondiscrimination 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, 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 Administrative 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 (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information Type of Award:
Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds:
The Administration has requested $41,433,000 for the ETechM2 Program for FY 2024, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,500,000 for 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 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 2025 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards:
$350,000 to $375,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards:
$375,000 per year.
Maximum Award:
We will not make an award exceeding $375,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards:
4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period:
Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants:
SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching:
This competition does not require cost sharing or matching.
3. Other: General Requirements:
(a) a. Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) b. Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).
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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.
2. 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.
3. Funding Restrictions:
We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. 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 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, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, image descriptions provided for accessibility, or the appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria:
The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed below:
a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses;
(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, or effective strategies; and
(iv) The potential replicability of the proposed project or strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation in a variety of settings.
(b) Quality of project services (30 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice;
(ii) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services;
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for maximizing the effectiveness of project services;
(iv) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or beneficiaries of those services; and
(v) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .