GYO RFA -S-58100-00006145~1.pdf

RFA S-58100-00006145 – Grow Your Own

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 1 of 21

STATE OF OREGON

COVER PAGE

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

GROW YOUR OWN

Request for Grant Applications (“RFA”)

OregonBuys Bid S-58100-00006145

Date of Issue: March 14, 2023

Closing Date: May 5, 2023

Single Point of Contact (SPC): Julia Alpernas

Address: 255 Capitol Street NE, 3rd Floor City, State, Zip: Salem, OR 97310 Phone: 503-508-1609 E-mail: julia.alpernas@ode.oregon.gov

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, this RFA may be made available in alternate formats such as Braille, large print, audiotape, oral presentation, or computer disk. To request an alternate format, call the Oregon Department of Education at (503) 947-5600.

mailto:julia.alpernas@ode.oregon.gov

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 2 of 21

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 GRANT AMOUNT AND DURATION

1.3 ELIGIBILITY

1.4 SCHEDULE

1.5 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY

2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS

2.3 OVERVIEW

2.4 SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES

SECTION 3: PROCESS AND REQUIREMENTS

3.1 GRANT PROCESS

3.2 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

4.1 RESPONSIVENESS DETERMINATION

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

4.3 RANKING OF APPLICANTS

4.4 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION

SECTION 5: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION

5.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS

5.2 SUCCESSFUL APPLICANT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.3 GRANT NEGOTIATION

SECTION 6: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

6.1 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS

6.2 OWNERSHIP/ PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS

6.3 CANCELLATION OF RFA; REJECTION OF APPLICATIONS; NO DAMAGES

6.4 COST OF SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION

SECTION 7: LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A: SAMPLE GRANT

ATTACHMENT A-1: SAMPLE GRANT WITH START-UP

ATTACHMENT B: APPLICATION (Returnable) ATTACHMENT C: PARTNERSHIPS (Returnable) ATTACHMENT D: BUDGET TEMPLATE (Returnable)

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 3 of 21

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 PURPOSE

The State of Oregon, acting by and through the Department of Education, (“Agency”), is issuing this Request for Grant Applications (“RFA”) with the Educator Advancement Council (“EAC”) to invest funds in Grow Your Own (“GYO”) Educator partnerships across Oregon.

The EAC funds multiple initiatives toward the goal of having a diverse, high quality, culturally responsive Educator workforce across the State (reference ORS 342.940 and ORS 327.254).

Local or regional GYO partnerships are one strategy through which Educator candidates, in particular racially, ethnically, or linguistically diverse Educator candidates, are encouraged and supported to become Educators in their communities and advance in their careers. . The purpose of this RFA is to continue to support and establish GYO partnerships across the State.

Additional details are included in the Scope of Activities section.

1.2 GRANT AMOUNT AND DURATION

1.2.1 GYO Grant

Agency anticipates the award of multiple Grant Agreements (each a “Grant”) from this RFA. The initial term of each Grant is anticipated to be 2 years (July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2025) with options to renew.

Funding for future periods will depend on legislative investment, and are anticipated to be similar from year to year.

Except for any applicable start-up funding, Grants will be limited to a not to exceed amount of $700,000 for the first two years of the Grant.

1.2.2 Start-up funds

If additional funds are available, and at Agency’s discretion, Applicants may be selected for an additional one-time amount for start-up costs. This additional funding may be provided to Applicants who are not currently GYO Grantees and are launching a new GYO and is limited to not more than $75,000 each for the period of January 1, 2023 to June 30, 2023. A new GYO Grant award will be limited to a not to exceed amount of $775,000.

A “new GYO” is a GYO operated by an Applicant or partnership that has not previously received a GYO grant.

The amount of each Grant will vary based on Applicant requests and Agency’s desire to fund multiple programs across Oregon, as well as the total Applicant pool. As such, Applicants are encouraged to submit budgets that are flexible and scalable. Agency, in its sole discretion, may offer more or less funding than requested.

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 4 of 21

1.3 ELIGIBILITY

To be eligible for a Grant under this RFA, Applicants must meet the following criteria:

• Be a public or not-for-profit entity based in Oregon and serving Oregon communities; and

• Be part of a partnership with at least one other eligible entity for the purpose of supporting a GYO. Applicants must identify and provide documentation of at least one Partner. Partners must be limited to school districts, education service districts, Early Learning and Care providers or programs, Tribal Governments, post-secondary institutions, community organizations and other education entities focused on improving teaching and learning conditions in Oregon.

For-profit entities are not eligible for funding under this RFA. Applicants may only submit one application in response to this RFA, though Applicant may be named as a Partner in any number of other applications.

1.4 SCHEDULE

The table below represents a tentative schedule of events. All times are listed in Pacific Time. All dates listed are subject to change.

Event Date Time

Pre-Application conference March 30 , 2023 3:00 PM

Questions/ requests for clarification due April 21, 2023 5:00 PM

Answers to questions/ requests for clarification issued (approximate) April 24, 2023

Closing (Applications due) May 5, 2023 3:00 PM

Issuance of notice of award (approximate) May31, 2023

1.5 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

The SPC for this RFA is identified on the Cover Page, along with the SPC’s contact information.

Applicants must direct all communications related to any provision of the RFA, whether about the technical requirements of the RFA, Grant requirements, the RFA process, or any other provision only to the SPC.

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY

Agency is issuing this RFA pursuant to its authority under ORS 327.254 and 342.940.

2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this RFA, capitalized words will refer to the following definitions:

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 5 of 21

• “Addendum” or “Addenda”: an addition to, deletion from, a material change in, or general interest explanation of this RFA.

• “Applicant”: an entity who submits an Application in response to this RFA.

• “Application”: a written response to this RFA.

• “Closing”: the date and time specified in this RFA as the deadline for submitting

Applications.

• “Early Educator”: an individual who provides care, teaching, and leadership in

Early Learning and Care settings.

• “Early Learning and Care”: programs and services serving children birth to kindergarten transition age (e.g. 0-5).

• “Educator”: an individual who is an Early Educator or P-12 Educator.

• “Education Service District” or “ESD”: a regional education unit which works to provide school districts in its service area with educational programs and services including but not limited to: instructional support and assessment, business operations, transportation, data processing, payroll, fingerprinting, network support, preschool programs, paraeducator training, and special education.

• “Evaluation Committee”: the group of people who will evaluate and score Applications submitted in response to this RFA.

• “Grow Your Own” or “GYO”: a strategy or combination of strategies through which Educator candidates, in particular racially, ethnically, or linguistically diverse Educator candidates, are encouraged and supported to become Educators in their communities and advance in their careers, often to address Educator shortages and increase diversity in the workforce. GYOs are supported by local or regional partnerships between two or more organizations (such as Tribes, school districts, institutions of higher education, Educational Service Districts, Community-Based Organizations, Early Learning and Care providers, etc.).

• “Induction”: a professional development program that incorporates Mentorship and is designed to offer “support, guidance, and orientation” for beginning Educators during the transition into their first position. These programs often help by supporting ongoing dialogue and collaboration among Educators, which accelerates the new Educators’ effectiveness and increases student achievement (Promoting Teacher Effectiveness Glossary, 2015).

• “In-Service Educator”: an Educator currently employed and practicing in Early Learning and Care or P-12 settings.

• “Mentorship”: a formal relationship between a novice Educator or Educator candidate and a more experienced Educator through which Educators can develop skills and knowledge of best practices for implementation of evidence-based instruction or care, such as use of data for lesson planning, and critical and reflective thinking.

• “Microcredentials”: competency-based recognition that allows an Educator to demonstrate mastery in a particular area (for example, see https://microcredentials.digitalpromise.org/).

• “Nontraditional Postsecondary Student”: an adult pursuing a postsecondary degree after being disconnected from P-12 or higher education for a period of time; these individuals are often pursuing education while working full time or are https://microcredentials.digitalpromise.org/

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 6 of 21 engaged in other family or community commitments that require greater flexibility and financial support in attaining a postsecondary degree.

• “Oregon Registry Online”: statewide database that stores all submitted training and education records of Early Educators, and verifies records for system use. The Office of Child Care relies on ORO to track child care licensing trainings (https://oregonearlylearning.com/providers-educators/professional-development/ORO).

• “P-12”: refers to academic grade levels from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade.

• “P-12 Educator”: an individual who provides care, teaching, and leadership in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 settings. Inclusive of individuals who are licensed by the Oregon Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (“TSPC”), as well as individuals who do not hold a TSPC license.

• “Partner”: an entity described in Section 1.3 who is named in an Application who will be a member of the local or regional partnership that supports the development and implementation of the GYO.

• “Pre-Service Educator”: Candidates for an Educator career who are completing academic coursework, licensure testing requirements, and supervised teaching or clinical experience to prepare for careers in the classroom, school, or Early Learning and Care setting.

• “State”: the state of Oregon.

• “Tribal Government”: refers to the governments of the nine federally recognized tribes in Oregon: Burns Paiute of Harney County; Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians; Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde;

Confederated Tribes of Siletz; Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation;

Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs; Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians;

Coquille Indian Tribe; and Klamath Tribes.

2.3 OVERVIEW

2.3.1 EDUCATOR ADVANCEMENT COUNCIL (“EAC”)

The EAC is an innovative partnership aimed at helping Oregon achieve a high-quality, well supported, and culturally-responsive Educator workforce.

Building upon the Governor’s Council on Educator Advancement recommendations (https://www.oregon.gov/eac/Documents/Educator-Advancement- Report_CEdO_Nov_2016.pdf), the Oregon Legislature created the EAC through the passage of Senate Bill 182 (2017), codified in part as ORS 342.940. Through the coordination of priorities, the EAC funds efforts to support the recruitment, development, and retention of Educators Statewide.

2.3.2 BACKGROUND

There is persistent evidence that today’s education system does not meet the needs of a sizable portion of Oregon’s students, especially students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color; students who live in poverty; students who have special needs; and students who speak a language other than English.

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 7 of 21

To address this, the 2019 Student Success Act significantly increased the State’s investments in programs to address historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities and ensure that students experience high quality and culturally responsive learning. In recognition that Educators must reflect the diversity, assets, and experiences of the students and communities they serve and must have the skills, dispositions, and knowledge to meet those students’ needs, Oregon law funds programs to diversify and support the Educator workforce. The EAC developed a plan for the distribution of Statewide Education Initiatives Account funds to increase:

• Educator retention;

• Educator diversity;

• Mentoring and coaching of Educators;

• Participation in Educator preparation programs; and

• Educator scholarships.

The plan identified multiple initiatives in support of the recruitment, preparation, and career development of Educators. Local or regional GYO partnerships provide an approach through which Educator candidates, and in particular racially, ethnically, or linguistically diverse Educator candidates, are encouraged and supported to become Educators in their communities.

2.3.3 GOALS

It is the EAC’s goal to have a high-quality, well supported, and culturally-responsive Educator workforce. In support of this goal and the recommendations of the Governor’s Council on Educator Advancement, the EAC will continue to invest in and support the development of local or regional GYO partnerships between eligible Partners described in Section 1.3 of this RFA that are in support of the goals of the GYO initiative, which are to:

• Promote interest in the profession, coordinate culturally responsive Educator preparation, development, and advancement efforts, as well as share data needed to achieve a diverse, high quality pool of professionals;

• Build affordable, regional career pathways into education, including access for Nontraditional Postsecondary Students, to achieve a workforce that is culturally responsive and reflective of student demographics; and

• Support novice Educators through high quality Induction and Mentorship programs focused on culturally responsive curricula, instruction practices, and learning environments that support every student to be successful.

GYO partnerships funded by Grants resulting from this RFA are expected to implement Oregon’s Equity Lens (https://www.oregon.gov/highered/about/Documents/Commission/COMMISSION/2017/ 08-August-9-10/4.0d%20Equity%20Lens-reformat.pdf) in the development and implementation of project plans in order to address historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities for students, in particular students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color; students who live in poverty; students who have special needs;

students who speak a language other than English; and students in some rural geographical locations.

https://www.oregon.gov/highered/about/Documents/Commission/COMMISSION/2017/08-August-9-10/4.0d%20Equity%20Lens-reformat.pdf https://www.oregon.gov/highered/about/Documents/Commission/COMMISSION/2017/08-August-9-10/4.0d%20Equity%20Lens-reformat.pdf

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 8 of 21

2.4 SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to this work. Successful Applicants must carry out the activities described in their respective Agency-approved Application and project plan, as reflected in the executed Grant.

GYO partnerships must implement evidence-based strategies to support the preparation, development, or career advancement of one or more of the following types of Educators and Educator candidates:

• Early Educators: Partnerships that support the preparation, development, or career advancement of any individual pursuing a career as an Early Educator. This may include current community college, 4-year, or graduate-level students, as well as career changers and community members. This may also include current Early Educators looking to advance in their career.

• P-12 Classified Staff: Partnerships that support the preparation, development, or career advancement of classified employees of a district, school, or ESD, such as paraprofessionals, instructional assistants, substitutes, athletic coaches, etc.

• P-12 Licensed Educators (Teachers, Leaders, and School Personnel):

Partnerships that support the preparation, development, and career advancement of any individual pursing or maintaining a TSPC license for a P-12 career (teachers, school-building and central office administrators, as well as other school personnel). This may include current community college, 4-year, or masters-level students, as well as school and community-based volunteers, coaches, and career changers. This may also include current P-12 Educators looking to advance in their career.

• Secondary Students: Partnerships that support students in grades 9 through 12 in exploration of, preparation for, and transitions into careers as Educators.

In addition, Agency desires to fund GYO partnerships that are effective at recruiting, developing, and advancing Educators in the following high-need areas:

• Bilingual/ Multilingual Educators: Educators who speak more than one language and are heritage speakers of a language other than English.

• Rural Educators: Educators employed in rural-remote school districts across the

State, as defined by the National Center for Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/definitions.asp).

• Special Education Educators: Educators whose experience and training prepares them to design and deliver instruction that meets the unique needs of students who have individual education plans.

• Student Success Plan Educators: Educators whose lived experiences and training prepares them to provide high quality, racially and culturally sustaining instruction and care for students as described in the African American/ Black Student Success Plan, American Indian/ Alaska Native Student Success Plan, Latino/a/x/ Plan, https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/definitions.asp

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 9 of 21

Indigenous Student Success Plan, or others (https://www.oregon.gov/ode/StudentSuccess/Pages/default.aspx).

2.4.1 Example Strategies

Agency does not have a specific GYO model in mind and encourages Applicants to design evidence-based strategies that are responsive to local or regional needs. Select evidence-based strategies include but are not limited to:

• Planning or pilot projects:

o Partnership planning and development, such as convening local or regional partners to co-construct collaborative structures for GYOs including needs assessments, program service alignment, data sharing agreements, and building partners’ capacity for equitable practices;

o Piloting new strategies or partnerships that address local or regional needs and can be scaled if successful;

o Research-practice partnerships for studying local or regional needs and identifying high-leverage strategies and practices for meeting the goals of the GYO.

• Educator recruitment and preparation:

o Articulated career pathways with culturally responsive, integrated supports and multiple points of entry, particularly for Nontraditional Postsecondary Students https://www.oregon.gov/ode/StudentSuccess/Pages/default.aspx

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 10 of 21

(i.e. pathway navigation and career planning, academic Mentorship, assistance with meeting basic needs, and other wraparound services);

o Academic scholarships for education programs or courses, including for pre-requisite courses and testing requirements;

o High school career and technical education programs, or dual enrollment/ credit;

o Linked transitions from high school to community college or four-year undergraduate, graduate, and licensure program(s);

o Placement in paid, practicum, or clinical experiences focused on culturally responsive practices, and paid release time from current employment to allow for participation in these experiences;

o Nontraditional or alternative Educator preparation, such as residency, internship, registered apprenticeship, or other applied learning opportunities available at low or no-cost to participants.

• Educator development and career advancement:

o Opportunities for culturally responsive Mentorship as well as training for mentors;

o Opportunities for nontraditional career advancement (i.e. Microcredentials to support academic enrichment or facilitation in order to support flexible learning environments and Educator planning time);

o Opportunities for step advancement on the Oregon Registry Online;

o Coordination of services for career development or advancement of Early

Educators, including in-home or individual providers;

o Support with the transition from Pre-Service Educator to In-Service Educator (e.g., loan forgiveness, employer financial incentives, job placement guarantee, etc.);

o Induction and Mentorship programs for In-Service Educators in first and second years focused on culturally responsive curriculum, teaching practices, and learning environments;

o Professional learning and coaching opportunities for practicing Educators, supervisors, or school-based, central office, or executive leadership; and o Differentiated support for emergency or substitute Educators (e.g., TSPC emergency license or Early Educator teacher waiver).

2.4.2 Continuous Improvement

To improve and show progress towards meeting the goals of this RFA, Agency may require that Successful Applicants participate in the following:

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 11 of 21

• Agency research and evaluation activities, including but not limited to providing quarterly and annual progress reports and data;

• Agency-led learning network, including but not limited to periodic meetings of grantees to share learning and best practices, as well as develop Statewide capacity for GYO initiatives; and

• Agency technical assistance activities, including but not limited to receiving training or coaching from Agency-recommended provider(s).

SECTION 3: PROCESS AND REQUIREMENTS

3.1 GRANT PROCESS

3.1.1 Public Notice

The RFA, including all Addenda and attachments, is published in OregonBuys at www.oregonbuys.gov. RFA documents will not be mailed to prospective Applicants.

Agency will advertise all Addenda in OregonBuys. Prospective Applicants are solely responsible for checking OregonBuys to determine whether any Addenda have been issued.

Addenda are incorporated into the RFA by this reference.

3.1.2 Questions/ Requests for Clarification

All inquiries, whether relating to the RFA process, administration, deadline, or method of award, or to the intent or technical aspects of the RFA must:

• Be emailed to the SPC;

• Reference the RFA number;

• Identify Applicant’s name and contact information;

• Refer to the specific area of the RFA being questioned (e.g., page, section, paragraph number, etc.); and

• Be received by the due date and time for questions/ requests for clarification identified in the Schedule.

3.1.3 Pre-Application Conference

A pre-Application conference will be held at the date and time listed in the Schedule.

Prospective Applicants’ participation in this conference is highly encouraged but not mandatory.

The purpose of the pre-Application conference is to:

• Provide an additional description of the project;

• Explain the RFA process; and

• Answer any questions Applicants may have related to the project or the process.

Statements made at the pre-Application conference are not binding upon Agency. Applicants may be asked to submit questions in writing.

http://www.oregonbuys.gov/

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 12 of 21

3.1.3.1 Attendance at Pre-Application Conference

The link to join the live webinar will be posted through an amendment to this RFA in OregonBuys within 24 hours of the date and time listed in the Schedule. The webinar may be recorded and made available through an amendment to this RFA in OregonBuys.

3.1.1 Application Due Date

Applications and all required submittal items must be received by the SPC on or before Closing. Applications received after Closing will not be accepted. All Application modifications or withdrawals must be completed prior to Closing.

Applications received after Closing are considered LATE and will NOT be accepted for evaluation. Late Applications will be returned to the respective Applicant or destroyed.

3.1.2 Application Submission

Applicant is solely responsible for ensuring its Application is received by the SPC in accordance with the RFA requirements before Closing. Agency is not responsible for any delays in mail or by common carriers or by transmission errors or delays or mistaken delivery. Consider contacting the SPC by phone to confirm receipt. Be sure to allow time for resubmission before Closing. Applications submitted by any means not authorized will be rejected. The following submission option is permitted for this RFA:

Secure File Transfer. An electronic version of the complete Application must be submitted to the SPC using the secure file transfer system available on Agency’s district website:

https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/.

Follow the instructions provided on the secure file transfer website. Multiple files must be compressed (zipped) into a single folder for submission. Only complete Applications submitted by Closing will be scored. Contact Agency’s helpdesk at 503-947-5715 if you need assistance with the secure file transfer process. Agency recommends immediately contacting the SPC by phone to confirm receipt.

3.1.3 Modification or Withdrawal of Applications

Any Applicant who wishes to modify or withdraw an Application already received by Agency must do so prior to Closing. Applicant must submit its modification or request to withdraw to the SPC using one of the manners listed in the Application Submission section.

Modifications must denote the specific change(s) to the Application submission. All requests must reference the RFA number.

3.1.4 Application Rejection

Agency may reject an Application for reasons that include the following:

https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 13 of 21

• Applicant fails to substantially comply with all prescribed RFA procedures and requirements;

• Applicant makes any contact regarding this RFA with State representatives such as State employees or officials other than the SPC or those the SPC authorizes, or initiates inappropriate contact with the SPC;

• Applicant attempts to inappropriately influence a member of the Evaluation Committee; or

• Application is conditioned on Agency’s acceptance of any other terms and conditions or rights to negotiate any alternative terms and conditions that are not reasonably related to those expressly authorized for negotiation in the RFA or Addenda.

3.2 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

Application must address each of the items listed in the Application and all other requirements set forth in this RFA. Applicant must describe how activities will be completed. An Application that merely offers to fulfill the project will be considered non-responsive to this RFA and will not be considered further.

3.2.1 Application

Applicant must complete and submit the application form provided in Attachment B.

Applicant should use definitive verbs in their narrative to describe what Applicant “will” do rather than aspirational verbs such as “hopes”, “expects”, “intends”, “plans”, or similar verbs that do not express a firm commitment to undertake a specific action.

All Applications are public record and are subject to public inspection after Agency issues the notice of award.

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

4.1 RESPONSIVENESS DETERMINATION

Applications received prior to Closing will be reviewed for responsiveness to all RFA requirements. If the Application is unclear, the SPC may request clarification from Applicant.

However, clarifications may not be used to rehabilitate a non-responsive Application. If the SPC finds the Application non-responsive, the Application may be rejected, however, Agency may waive minor mistakes in its sole discretion.

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

Responsive Applications meeting the requirements outlined in the Application Requirements section will be evaluated by an Evaluation Committee. Evaluators will assign points for each evaluation criterion listed below in this section.

SPC may request further clarification to assist the Evaluation Committee in gaining additional understanding of Applications. A response to a clarification request must be to clarify or explain portions of the already submitted Application and may not contain new information not included in the original Application.

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 14 of 21

Points Possible Scoring Rubric

20 Points 1. PARTNERSHIP

To what extent does Applicant demonstrate that the partnership can successfully support and sustain the goals of this initiative? Does the Application identify a clear vision/ purpose for partnership that is shared by all partners, clearly aligned to the goals of this RFA, and informed by local or regional needs? Does the Application describe how the partnership builds capacity among Partners to support effective implementation of Applicant’s project plan? Does the Application describe how the partnership builds shared knowledge and understanding among Partners of structural and institutional conditions that produce systemic inequities in education? Does the Application describe structures that are or will be used for shared decision-making, regular communication, and data sharing across Partners?

To what extent does Applicant’s and Partners’ organizational descriptions align with the goals of the GYO initiative? Does Applicant’s purpose, services, and history, as well as Partners’ completed partnership forms, demonstrate alignment with and commitment to the partnership for the purposes of fulfilling the Applicant’s project plan as part of this GYO Grant?

• High (16-20): Applicant clearly states who they are partnering with for their stated Project and provides evidence of a clear vision/ purpose for partnership that is shared by all partners, clearly aligned to the goals of this RFA, and informed by local or regional needs. The Applicant clearly describes what structures are in place to build capacity for effective implementation and shared knowledge and understanding among Partners of structural and institutional conditions that produce systemic inequities in education. The Applicant clearly describes structures that are or will be used for shared decision-making, regular communication, and data sharing across Partners.

Each partner organization’s unique strengths and contributions are clearly stated and clearly aligned to meeting the local or regional workforce needs identified in the Application, fulfilling the RFA, and meeting the stated goals of the GYO initiative. Each partner’s purpose, goals, and history, as well as Partners’ completed partnership forms, clearly describe how Applicant and all Partner organizations are aligned and demonstrate commitment to the GYO goals.

• Medium (9-15): Applicant adequately states who they are partnering with for their stated Project and provides some evidence of a vision/ purpose for partnership, but may not be shared by all partners, clearly aligned to the goals of this RFA, or informed by local or regional needs. The Applicant adequately describes what structures are in place to build capacity for effective implementation and shared knowledge and understanding among Partners of structural and institutional conditions that produce systemic inequities in education, but some key information may be missing. The Applicant adequately describes structures that are or will be used for shared decision-making, regular communication, and data sharing across Partners, but some key information may be missing.

Each partner organization’s unique strengths and contributions are adequately stated, but some key information may be missing or may not be aligned to meeting the local or regional workforce needs identified in the Application, fulfilling the RFA and meeting the stated goals of the GYO initiative. Each partner’s purpose, goals, and history, as well as Partners’ completed partnership forms, adequately describe how Applicant and some Partner organizations are aligned and committed to the GYO goals.

• Low (0-8): Application contains little to no description or justification of Project partners.

The Applicant provides little to no evidence that the partnership has a shared vision/ purpose that is aligned to the goals of this RFA, or informed by local or regional needs. The Applicant provides little to no description of structures in place to build capacity for effective implementation and shared knowledge and understanding among Partners of

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 15 of 21 structural and institutional conditions that produce systemic inequities in education. The Applicant provides little to no description of structures that are or will be used for shared decision-making, regular communication, and data sharing across Partners.

Applicant’s purpose, goals, and history, as well as Partners’ completed partnership forms, contain little to no description of how Applicant and Partner organizations are aligned and committed to the GYO goals.

15 Points

2. WORKFORCE AREAS OF FOCUS

To what extent does Application use multiple forms of evidence to identify local or regional educator workforce areas of focus? Does the Application identify a high-need area described in Section 2.4 of this RFA (Bilingual/ Multilingual Educators, Rural Educators, Special Education Educators, or Student Success Plan Educators)?

Does the Application describe how the partnership leverages or brings together efforts across the region to improve the conditions for sustaining a diverse, well-supported, and culturally responsive Educator workforce in the identified workforce area(s)?

• High (12-15): The Application clearly describes at least one workforce area of focus in the locality or region, and describes at least three different sources of evidence used to determine this need, including evidence specific to the region or locality. At least one of the workforce areas is identified as a high-need area in Section 2.4 of this RFA (Bilingual/ Multilingual Educators, Rural Educators, Special Education Educators, or Student Success Plan Educators). The Application clearly and specifically describes the partnership’s approach to ensure sustainable and meaningful impacts on disproportionality, disparity, and predictability in outcomes for Educators from the identified area. The Application clearly identifies specific structures and efforts across the region to improve the conditions for sustaining a diverse, well-supported, and culturally responsive Educator workforce in this area.

• Medium (6-11): The Application adequately describes at least one workforce area of focus in the locality or region, and describes less than three different sources of evidence used to determine this need. Evidence may not be specific to the region or locality, or some key information may be missing. The workforce areas identified may or may not be identified as a high-need area in Section 2.4 of this RFA (Bilingual/ Multilingual Educators, Rural Educators, Special Education Educators, or Student Success Plan Educators). The Application adequately describes the partnership’s approach to ensure sustainable and meaningful impacts on disproportionality, disparity, and predictability in outcomes for Educators from the identified area. The Application identifies some structures and efforts across the region to improve the conditions for sustaining a diverse, well-supported, and culturally responsive Educator workforce in this area, though some key information may be missing.

• Low (0-5): Application does not provide evidence of the local or regional workforce area of focus. The Application describes workforce area(s) of focus that are not one of the areas identified as a high-need area in Section 2.4 of this RFA (Bilingual/ Multilingual Educators, Rural Educators, Special Education Educators, or Student Success Plan Educators). It is not clear how the Applicant will meaningfully impact disproportionality, disparity, and predictability in outcomes for Educators from the identified area.

20 Points 3. EQUITY PROBLEM OF PRACTICE To what extent does the Applicant’s equity problem(s) of practice address the structural or institutional condition(s) or practices that impact recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region? Does the Application’s equity problem(s) of practice identify structural or institutional condition(s) that impacts recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region? Is the equity problem(s) of practice grounded in evidence derived from multiple

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 16 of 21 perspectives and specific to the locality or region? Is the equity problem(s) of practice within the partnership’s locus of control, actionable, and connect to a broader strategy of improvement related to historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities for students?

• High (16-20): Application clearly describes the equity problem(s) of practice, and clearly identifies at least one related structural or institutional condition that impacts recruitment, preparation, or retention of specific Educators in their region. The problem of practice is defined at the practice or systems level, and clearly describes how the conditions impact recruitment, preparation, and retention of educators, particularly racially, ethnically, and/or linguistically diverse educators. The problem of practice addresses practices or conditions that are within the partnership’s locus of control, actionable, and connect to a broader strategy of improvement related to historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities for students. Three sources of local or regional evidence of the conditions are clearly identified and described.

• Medium (9-15): Application adequately describes the equity problem(s) of practice and adequately identifies at least one structural or institutional condition(s) that may impact recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region, though some key information may be missing.

The problem of practice is defined at the practice or systems level, and adequately describes how the conditions impact recruitment, preparation, and retention of educators, though some key information may be missing.

The problem of practice addresses practices or conditions that may be within the partnership’s locus of control, actionable, and connect to a broader strategy of improvement related to historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities for students, though some key information may be missing. At least one source of evidence of the conditions is adequately identified and described.

• Low (0-8): Application lacks clarity and contains little to no description or evidence of the equity problem(s) of practice or structural or institutional condition(s) that may impact recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region. The problem of practice is not within the partnership’s locus of control, or is not connected to a broader strategy of improvement related to historic, systemic, and persistent education inequities for students.

35 Points 4. PROJECT PLAN To what extent is Applicant’s proposed project plan informed by local or regional needs and conditions, and how does it address the goals of the GYO initiative? Does the Application demonstrate how the partnership is supporting the full pathway into educator careers (e.g. recruitment, preparation, certification, hiring, induction, retention, career advancement)? Does the Application provide evidence that the proposed strategies can effectively address the identified structural or institutional condition(s) impacting recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region? Does the Application describe a set of goals and strategies that can meaningfully impact disproportionality, disparity, and predictability in outcomes for Educators from the identified category, and improve the conditions for sustaining a diverse, well-supported and culturally responsive Educator workforce?

Does the Application describe coordinated, clearly defined roles and responsibilities for each Partner that will enable the partnership to implement the Project Plan and meet the goals of the GYO initiative? Does the Application identify a measurement approach and progress indicators for each strategy that are aligned to the desired outcomes?

To what extent do Applicant’s Activities Table clearly describe how their activities, timelines, partnership involvement, and outcomes will meaningfully work to

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 17 of 21 successfully accomplish their chosen Plan strategies? Are the timelines provided achievable and within the scope of the proposed Project? Are the outcomes provided specific and measurable?

• High (24-35): Application clearly describes how the partnership is supporting the full pathway into educator careers. Application provides a clear description of the proposed strategies and their goals, and strategies are research-based and specifically designed to address the causes of the identified structural or institutional condition(s) impacting recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region, as described in the equity problem of practice. Application clearly describes how the proposed strategies address regional or local workforce needs identified in the Application, using evidence that is specific to the locality or region.

Application clearly describes each partner’s role and responsibilities in the strategy. Application clearly and specifically describes tools and methods for measuring progress that are aligned to the desired outcomes of the project and the goals of the GYO initiative. Application clearly describes specific data to be shared across Partners for measuring progress indicators and that can be disaggregated by demographic groups that are relevant to the strategy.

Applicant’s Activities Tables clearly describes the activities, timelines, partnership involvement, and outcomes under each strategy that will meaningfully work to successfully accomplish their chosen Plan strategies.

Timelines provided are achievable and within the scope of the proposed Project. Outcomes provided are specific and measurable, and progress measures are aligned to identified outcomes.

• Medium (11-23): Application adequately describes how the partnership is supporting the full pathway into educator careers, though some key information may be missing. Application provides an adequate description of the proposed strategies and their goals. Strategies are research-based, and may address the causes of the identified structural or institutional condition(s) impacting recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region, as described in the equity problem of practice though some key information may be missing. Application adequately describes how the proposed strategies address regional or local workforce needs, using some evidence that is specific to the locality or region. Application adequately describes each partner’s role and responsibilities in the strategy, though some key information may be missing. Application describes some tools or methods for measuring progress. Application adequately describes some data to be shared across Partners for measuring progress indicators that are relevant to the strategy.

Activity Tables provide adequate activities, timelines, partnership involvement, and outcomes towards meaningful impact on most selected Plan strategies. Some actions described for a specific approach may be lacking or missing. Outcomes or progress indicators within activity tables may not be specific and measurable and/or may not align with the proposed strategies.

• Low (0-10): Application lacks clarity and contains little to no description of strategies to be implemented under the project plan. Strategies are not aligned to or do not address causes of the identified structural or institutional condition(s) impacting recruitment, preparation, or retention of Educators in their region. Roles and responsibilities for Applicant and Partners in the partnership and project plan are not adequately described nor aligned to successfully accomplishing their chosen Project Plan strategies. Application contains little to no description of tools and

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 18 of 21 methods for measuring progress. It is not clear how the Applicant will evaluate their progress and use this data to inform their Project, or methods are not aligned to the desired outcomes of the project and the goals of the GYO initiative.

Activities, timelines, and outcomes in the Activity Tables do not support or align with their proposed strategies. Applicant failed to include activities, timelines, partnership involvement, outcomes, or progress indicators.

No Points 5. OPTIONAL – NEW GYO Applicants who complete this section will be considered for start-up funding to support the planning and preparation of launching a new GYO, as described in Section 1.2.2 of the RFA.

10 Points 6. BUDGET TABLE AND NARRATIVE To what extent is the Applicant’s budget appropriate for the scope of the proposed strategies and activities? Does the budget narrative and table provide clear descriptions of how the budget was determined? How well does the Applicant’s Budget maintain and sustain the work over their proposed timeline?

• High (6-10): The budget table and narrative are well aligned and tailored to provide appropriate support for the Project activities and outcomes in the Application. Budget narrative and worksheet clearly describes budget line items, their purposes, and how line items were determined. The budget clearly follows the Budget Guidelines. The budget timeline corresponds well to the grant activities of the Application. The narrative has sufficient detail to show that expenses are reasonable. Description of specific strategies for braiding different funding streams and support, including related resources and opportunities, are evident and clear.

• Medium (3-5): The budget table and narrative substantially, but not completely, align with the Application design, activities, and outcomes. The budget narrative and worksheet clearly describe some, but not all, budget line items, their purposes, and how line items were determined. The budget clearly follows the Budget Guidelines. The narrative has sufficient information to infer that the expenses are reasonable. Description of specific strategies for braiding different funding streams and support are evident but not clear.

• Low (0-2): The alignment between budget table and narrative, Project design, activities, and outcomes are unclear. The budget table and narrative describe few, if any, budget line items, their purposes, and how line items were determined, or the budget does not follow the Budget Guidelines.

There is insufficient detail in the narrative to demonstrate that the expenses are reasonable.

Total Points Possible:

100 Points

• Partnership: 20 points

• Local or Regional Workforce Areas of Focus: 15 points

• Equity Problem of Practice: 20 points

• Project Plan: 35 points

• OPTIONAL – New GYO: 0 Points

• Budget Table and Narrative: 10 points

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 19 of 21

4.3 RANKING OF APPLICANTS

The SPC will total the points for each Application. SPC will determine rank order for each respective Application, with the highest point total receiving the highest rank, and successive rank order determined by the next highest point total.

4.4 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION

Agency may conduct additional rounds of competition if in the best interest of the State.

Additional rounds of competition may consist of, but will not be limited to:

• Establishing a competitive range

• Presentations/ demonstrations/ additional submittal items

• Interviews If Agency elects to conduct additional round(s), Agency will provide written notice to all Applicants describing the next step. At any time, Agency may dispense with the selected additional round and: (1) issue an award to the highest ranking Applicant(s);

(2) elect to conduct an additional round of competition; or (3) cancel the RFA.

SECTION 5: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION

5.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS

5.1.1 Award Consideration

Agency, if it awards a Grant, will award a Grant to the highest ranking Applicant(s) based upon the scoring methodology and process described in the Evaluation section. Agency may continue to award Grants following the rank order.

Agency may award less than the full scope described in this RFA.

AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO NOT SELECT ANY OR ALL APPLICANTS UNDER

THIS RFA IF AGENCY DETERMINES IN ITS SOLE DISCRETION THAT A SELECTION

SHOULD NOT BE MADE.

5.1.2 Notice of Award

Agency will notify all Applicants in writing that Agency is awarding a Grant to the selected Applicant(s) subject to successful negotiation of any negotiable provisions.

5.2 SUCCESSFUL APPLICANT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2.1 Business Registry

If selected for award, Applicant must be duly authorized by the State of Oregon to transact business in the State of Oregon before executing the Grant. The selected Applicant must submit a current Oregon Secretary of State Business Registry number or an explanation if not applicable.

ODE RFA, updated 20210119 Page 20 of 21

All corporations and other business entities (domestic and foreign) must have a Registered Agent in Oregon. For more information, see Oregon Business Guide, How to Start a Business in Oregon and Laws and Rules: http://www.filinginoregon.com/index.htm.

5.2.2 Insurance

Prior to execution of a Grant, the apparent successful Applicant must secure and demonstrate to Agency proof of insurance coverage meeting the requirements identified in the RFA or as otherwise negotiated.

Failure to demonstrate coverage may result in Agency terminating negotiations and commencing…