FINALOSEP Informational Webinar 326mFINAL - Read-Only.pdf

Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with

Disabilities

Model Demonstration Projects to Develop Coaching Systems

CFDA 84.326M

Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education

• Slides are for guidance only and information has been summarized due to logistics of the webinar.

• Please read the entire Notice Inviting Applications (NIA).

• Please review the recorded webinar titled “Applying for

Office of Special Education Programs Discretionary Grants” for additional information related to submitting an application:

https://osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/informational-webinars-osep-funding-opportunities

Note Regarding Webinar

• Purpose of the TA&D Program

• What is a Model?

• Key Definitions & Evidence of Effectiveness Form

• Appendices

• Application Requirements

• Competitive Preference & Invitational Priority

• Other Information

• General Requirements

• Subgrantees vs. Contracts

• Selection Criteria

Today’s Topics

• The purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities by providing technical assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research.

Purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program

• The models will implement coaching systems in early intervention, early learning, elementary school, middle school, or high school settings.

needed to foster the development, implementation, and evaluation of coaches and a coaching system to support personnel who work with children with disabilities.

The purpose of this priority is to fund three cooperative agreements to establish and operate evidence-based model demonstration projects.

• The models will demonstrate methods for identifying coaching strategies and the necessary intensity and frequency of those strategies to meet the needs of personnel being coached.

• The models will capture information about challenges to

will use coaching data to provide information about how

intervention fidelity data to child outcome data).

What is a Model?

“… a model is a set of existing evidence‐based practices, including interventions and implementation strategies (i.e., core model components), that research suggests will improve outcomes for children, families, personnel, administrators, or systems, when implemented with fidelity.

[1

….Model demonstrations involve investigating the degree to which a given model can be implemented and sustained in real‐world settings, by staff employed in those settings, while achieving outcomes similar to those attained under research conditions.”

What is a Model Demonstration?

• “For purposes of this priority, “evidence‐based” means the proposed project component is supported by promising evidence, which is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a “relevant outcome” (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1), based on a relevant finding from one of the sources identified under “promising evidence” in 34 CFR 77.1.”

Defining Terms – “Evidence-based”

• Evidence of Effectiveness Form (Pg G-28 of the application package)

– Providing evidence for both your intervention and your professional development/coaching

Evidence of Effectiveness Form

Defining Terms – “Personnel” “As defined by section 651(b) of IDEA, the term “personnel” means special education teachers, regular education teachers, principals, administrators, related services personnel, paraprofessionals, and early intervention personnel serving infants, toddlers, preschoolers, or children with disabilities, except where a particular category of personnel, such as related services personnel, is identified.”

Applicants must propose models that meet the following requirements: The model’s core intervention components must include‐‐

(1) Coaching services that are supported by evidence;

(2) Ongoing measures of coaching supports and the impact of those supports, specifically fidelity measures and child outcomes;

(2) Professional development to support coaches’ appropriate and timely use of data to inform the need for differentiating coaching strategies, intensity, and frequency dependent on content and personnel needs;

(3) Procedures to refine the model based on the ongoing measures of fidelity of coaching services, fidelity of the implementation of evidence-based practices, and child outcomes;

(4) Procedures for coaches to share data at the site, central office or program, and State levels so that the data can be used to make decisions regarding, remove barriers to, and support, implementation and sustainability of the coaching system; and

(5) Measures of the model’s social validity, i.e., measures of personnel and administrator satisfaction with the model components, processes, and outcomes.

Applicants must propose models that meet the following requirements: The model’s core intervention components must include-

The model’s core implementation components must include--

(1) Criteria and strategies for selecting and recruiting sites and coaches at those sites, including approaches to introducing the model to, and promoting the model among, site participants.

Applicants are encouraged to choose sites from a variety of settings (e.g., urban, rural, suburban, type of school such as elementary, charter, or early learning) and populations (e.g., concentration of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch);

(2) A lag site implementation design, which allows for model development and refinement at the first site in year one of the project period, with sites two and three implementing a revised model based on data from the first site beginning in subsequent project years;

The model’s core implementation components must include--

(3) A professional development component that includes a strategy to work with administrators and coaches, to enable site-based personnel to implement the coaching model with fidelity; and

(4) Measures of the results of the professional development required by paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

The core strategies for sustaining the model must

(1) Documentation that permits current and future site-based staff to replicate or appropriately tailor and sustain the model at any site;6

(2) Guidelines and procedures to--

(i) Help administrators support a coaching system;

(ii) Provide professional development to coaches;

(iii) Collect data on fidelity of coaching services and impact of coaching on intervention fidelity;

(iv) Match coaching strategies and intensity of the strategies based on content and personnel need;

(v) Determine the amount and frequency of coaching needed to improve intervention fidelity; and

(vi) Collect data regarding the connection among coaching strategies used, the frequency and amount of coaching, and the fidelity of the implementation of the model coaching system and child outcomes and communicate regularly about the data at the local, regional (as appropriate), and State levels;

(3) Strategies for the grantee to disseminate or promote the use of the model, such as developing easily accessible online training materials, coordinating with TA providers who might serve as future trainers, or providing technical support (e.g., webinars, training sessions, or workshops) for users who may want to learn about and implement the model and its components; and

(4) Strategies for the grantee to assist State agencies (e.g., State educational agencies (SEAs) and State lead agencies (SLAs) and local early learning or early intervention agencies and local educational agencies (LEAs)) within the State to scale up a model and its components.

Application Requirements

An applicant must include in its application

– Detailed review of the literature

– Logic model

– Description of activities, measures, and timeline

– Description of evaluation activities and measures

• Formative evaluation

• Summative evaluation

– Budget that includes travel to Washington, DC as outlined in the notice

• Look at the requirements for data collection, analysis, and improvement of the model.

• Do you have the knowledge and skills in your proposed project personnel to complete this?

External Evaluator?

• Existing and proposed measures of fidelity of coaching services, fidelity of the implementation of evidence-based practices, and child outcomes, as well as social validity measures. The measures should be described as completely as possible, referenced as appropriate, and included, when available, in Appendix A.

• Demographics, including, at a minimum, the settings of, and children participating in, all of the implementation sites that have been identified…

Application Requirements Cont.

• Describe potential sites and provide the information required by the notice.

• We are aware that you may not have all the letters of support related to these sites.

• We are also aware that sites may change, with approval from your Project Officer, if you are funded.

Project Sites

General Requirements

(a) Must make positive effort to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities in project activities (section 606

IDEA)

(b) Must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26 in planning, implementing, and evaluating the projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

Projects proposed by applicants that have not had an active grant award under the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children model demonstration grants (84.326M) at any point in the preceding five fiscal years (i.e., FY 2015-FY 2019).

Note: If an applicant has previously received a grant under the 84.326M program, the performance period for that grant must have ended on or before September 30, 2014 in order to receive points under this priority.

Competitive Preference Priority 1 (0 or 5 points)

For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an invitational priority.

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not give an application that meets this invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications. This priority is:

Projects that include a virtual delivery method within their coaching system.

Invitational Priority

Eligible Applicants:

• SEAs

• LEAs, including charter schools that are considered LEAs under

State law

• IHEs

• other public agencies

• private nonprofit organizations

• outlying areas

• freely associated States

• Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations

• for‐profit organizations

Other Information

Award Information:

Estimated Range of Awards: $375,000 to $400,000 per year Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $400,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated number of awards: 3 Project period: Up to 48 months

Format and Page Limit Recommendations:

• A page is 8.5 x 11 (on one side only) with 1” margins.

• Double space 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. Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New or Arial is recommended.

• We recommend that you limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages.

Other Narrative Attachments (Upload and attach to Optional Project Narrative File).

Upload the attachments as PDF or Microsoft Word documents (a read only, flattened PDF format is recommended) in the order they should appear in the application.

Suggested order...

o Reference List o Appendix A (See Dear Applicant letter for description) o Appendix B (Syllabi) o Resumes/Vitaes o Letters o Supplementary Information o Other Appendices

Appendices

A grantee under this competition may not award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with 2 CFR part 200.

Subgrantees:

• October 1st is likely

• If you are chosen for funding this is a conversation with your Project Officer, but you may be provided a start date.

Possible Start Date

Selection Criteria

1. Significance (15 points)

2. Quality of the Project Design (35 points)

3. Adequacy of Resources and Quality of the (25 points) Management Plan

4. Quality of the Project Evaluation (25 points)

100 points

FY 2020, CFDA 84.326M

Significance

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

(i) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, or effective strategies;

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the needs of the target population;

(iii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in teaching and student achievement; and

(iv) The likely utility of the products (such as information, materials, processes, or techniques) that will result from the proposed project, including the potential for their being used effectively in a variety of other settings.

(0‐15 points)

Quality of the Project Design

In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable;

(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project includes a thorough, high‐quality review of the relevant literature, a high‐quality plan for project implementation, and the use of appropriate methodological tools to ensure successful achievement of project objectives;

(iii) The quality of the proposed demonstration design and procedures for documenting project activities and results;

(0‐35 points)

Quality of the Project Design

In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

(v) The extent to which performance feedback and continuous improvement are integral to the design of the proposed project.

(0‐35 points)

Adequacy of Resources and Quality of the Management Plan

In determining the adequacy of resources and the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

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

(0‐25 points)

Plan (cont.)

In determining the adequacy of resources and the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate;

Plan (cont.)

In determining the adequacy of resources and the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

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

(vi) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high‐quality products and services from the proposed project.

(0‐25 POINTS)

Quality of the Project Evaluation 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 outcomes of the proposed project;

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes;

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies;

Quality of the Project Evaluation In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(iv) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about effective strategies suitable for replication or testing in other settings; and

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

https://osepideasthatwork.org/osep-model-demonstration-program

INFORMATION ABOUT THE MODEL DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

THANK YOU! Jennifer.Coffey@ed.gov 202‐245‐6673 Grants.gov Support Desk Email at: support@grants.gov 1‐800‐518‐4726 Grants.gov training:

https://grants‐ portal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Gr ants