MSP Pre-App Webinar Slides 11172021 FINAL.pdf

FY 2021

MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM

PRE-APPLICATION WEBINAR

▪BEATRIZ CEJA–WILLIAMS, OPE SENIOR DIRECTOR

▪DR. ROBIN DABNEY, PROGRAM LEAD

▪KISSY CHAPMAN-THAW, PROGRAM CO-LEAD

▪NOVEMBER 17, 2021

AGENDA

✓WELCOME

✓PROGRAM PURPOSE

✓FY 2021 COMPETITION AT A GLANCE

✓ELIGIBILITY

✓ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES

✓SELECTION CRITERIA

✓GPRA MEASURES

✓THE LOGIC MODEL

✓PLANNING YOUR GRANT APPLICATION

✓LOGISTICAL ADVICE

✓PROGRAM CONTACTS

MSP PROGRAM PURPOSE

THE MSP IS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE THE STUDY OF MODELING AND SIMULATION AT

INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION BY PROMOTING THE ENHANCEMENT OR

DEVELOPMENT OF MODELING AND SIMULATION DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE

PROGRAMS. ADDITIONALLY, THROUGH THIS PROGRAM, THE DEPARTMENT WILL

CREATE A TASK FORCE THAT WILL INCLUDE THE SUCCESSFUL GRANTEES AND OTHER

CONTENT EXPERTS TO RAISE AWARENESS AND HELP FURTHER DEFINE THE STUDY OF

MODELING AND SIMULATION.

FY 2021 COMPETITION AT A GLANCE

• APPLICATION AVAILABLE: NOVEMBER 5, 2021

• APPLICATION DEADLINE: DECEMBER 6, 2021

• ESTIMATED AVAILABLE FUNDS: $6,930,000

• MAXIMUM AWARD: $1,155,000

• PROJECT PERIOD: 36 MONTHS

• ESTIMATED NUMBER OF AWARDS: 8

• 2 ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES

• RESTRICTED INDIRECT COST RATE OF 8%

• DO NOT EXCEED MAXIMUM AWARD AMOUNT

ELIGIBILITY

• PUBLIC OR PRIVATE NONPROFIT INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER

EDUCATION, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 101 (A) OF THE HEA

ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES

THERE ARE TWO (2) ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES FOR THE FY 2021 COMPETITION.

APPLICANTS MUST ADDRESS EITHER ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1 (ENHANCEMENT

GRANTS) OR ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2 (ESTABLISHMENT GRANTS). APPLICANTS MUST

ADDRESS ALL SUB-COMPONENTS OF THE PRIORITY UNDER WHICH THEY ARE

APPLYING.

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1 - ENHANCING MODELING AND SIMULATION AT INSTITUTIONS

OF HIGHER EDUCATION

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2 - ESTABLISHING MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAMS

MEETING THE ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES

IN ORDER TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES, YOU MUST:

• SELECT TO RESPOND TO EITHER ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1 (AP 1) OR

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2 (AP 2) . YOU MAY NOT RESPOND TO BOTH

PRIORITIES.

• ADDRESS EVERY COMPONENT OF THE PRIORITY TO WHICH YOU ELECT TO

RESPOND. FOR AP 1, YOU MUST INCLUDE THE 6 REQUIREMENTS UNDER A-

F ON PAGE 61189. FOR AP 2, YOU MUST INCLUDE THE 5 REQUIREMENTS

UNDER A-E ON PAGE 61189.

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1

ENHANCEMENT GRANTS

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1 - ENHANCING MODELING AND SIMULATION AT INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER

EDUCATION

(A) A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT OR PROVOST OF THE ELIGIBLE INSTITUTION THAT DEMONSTRATES THE

INSTITUTION’S COMMITMENT TO THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM AT THE INSTITUTION OF

HIGHER EDUCATION;

(B) AN IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGNATED FACULTY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE INSTITUTION’S

MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM;

(C) A DETAILED PLAN FOR HOW THE GRANT FUNDS WILL BE USED TO ENHANCE A MODELING AND SIMULATION

PROGRAM THAT ENSURES ACCESSIBILITY FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES;

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 1 – ENHANCEMENT

GRANTS (CONT.)

(D) A LISTING OF LINE-ITEM COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TASK FORCE ACTIVITIES, WHICH MUST INCLUDE TRAVEL FOR AT

LEAST TWO TO THREE ANNUAL MEETINGS TO BE HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A WHITE PAPER

OUTLINING LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE ENHANCED MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM;

(E) A COMMITMENT OF A 25 PERCENT COST MATCH FOR THIS PROGRAM. EACH ELIGIBLE INSTITUTION RECEIVING A

GRANT UNDER THIS PRIORITY MUST PROVIDE, FROM NON-FEDERAL SOURCES, IN CASH OR IN-KIND, AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 25

PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT OF THE GRANT TO CARRY OUT THE ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED BY THE GRANT; AND

(F) EVIDENCE THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS AN ESTABLISHED MODELING AND SIMULATION DEGREE PROGRAM, INCLUDING A MAJOR, MINOR, OR CAREER-TRACK PROGRAM; OR HAS AN ESTABLISHED MODELING AND SIMULATION CERTIFICATE

OR CONCENTRATION PROGRAM.

AP 1 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

AS INDICATED IN THE NIA, GRANTS AWARDED UNDER THIS PRIORITY MAY USE GRANT FUNDS FOR

THE FOLLOWING:

• (A) EXPANDING THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY NATURE OF THE INSTITUTION’S MODELING AND

SIMULATION PROGRAMS;

• (B) RECRUITING STUDENTS INTO THE FIELD OF MODELING AND SIMULATION THROUGH THE

PROVISION OF FELLOWSHIPS OR ASSISTANTSHIPS;

• (C) CREATING NEW COURSES TO COMPLEMENT EXISTING COURSES AND REFLECT EMERGING

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MODELING AND SIMULATION FIELD;

• (D) CONDUCTING RESEARCH TO SUPPORT NEW METHODOLOGIES AND TECHNIQUES IN

MODELING AND SIMULATION; AND

• (E) PURCHASING EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAMS.

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2

ESTABLISHMENT GRANTS

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2 - ESTABLISHING MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAMS

(A) A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT OR PROVOST OF THE ELIGIBLE INSTITUTION THAT DEMONSTRATES THE

INSTITUTION’S COMMITMENT TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM AT THE INSTITUTION OF

HIGHER EDUCATION;

(B) A DETAILED PLAN FOR HOW THE GRANT FUNDS WILL BE USED TO ESTABLISH A MODELING AND SIMULATION

PROGRAM THAT ENSURES ACCESSIBILITY FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES;

(C) A DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM ESTABLISHED UNDER THIS PRIORITY WILL

COMPLEMENT EXISTING PROGRAMS AND FIT INTO THE INSTITUTION’S CURRENT PROGRAM AND COURSE OFFERINGS;

ABSOLUTE PRIORITY 2 -

ESTABLISHMENT GRANTS (CONT.)

(D) A LISTING OF LINE-ITEM COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TASK FORCE ACTIVITIES, WHICH MUST INCLUDE

TRAVEL FOR AT LEAST TWO TO THREE ANNUAL MEETINGS TO BE HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, AND COSTS

ASSOCIATED WITH A WHITE PAPER OUTLINING LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE ESTABLISHED MODELING AND

SIMULATION PROGRAM; AND

(E) A COMMITMENT OF A 25 PERCENT COST MATCH FOR THIS PROGRAM. EACH ELIGIBLE

INSTITUTION RECEIVING A GRANT UNDER THIS SUBSECTION MUST PROVIDE, FROM NON-FEDERAL SOURCES, IN

CASH OR IN-KIND, AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 25 PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT OF THE GRANT TO CARRY OUT THE

ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED BY THE GRANT.

AP 2 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

AS INDICATED IN THE NIA, GRANTS AWARDED UNDER THIS PRIORITY MAY USE GRANT

FUNDS FOR THE FOLLOWING:

• (A) ESTABLISHING, OR WORKING TOWARD THE ESTABLISHMENT OF, A MODELING AND

SIMULATION PROGRAM, INCLUDING A MAJOR, MINOR, CAREER-TRACK, CERTIFICATE, OR

CONCENTRATION PROGRAM AT THE ELIGIBLE INSTITUTION;

• (B) PROVIDING ADEQUATE STAFFING TO ENSURE THE SUCCESSFUL ESTABLISHMENT OF THE

MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAM, WHICH MAY INCLUDE THE ASSIGNMENT OF FULL-TIME

DEDICATED OR SUPPORTIVE FACULTY; AND

• (C) PURCHASING EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR MODELING AND SIMULATION PROGRAMS.

SELECTION

CRITERIA

Selection Criteria Maximum Points

Significance 25

Quality of the Project Design 50

Quality of the Project Personnel 5

Adequacy of Resources 5

Quality of the Management Plan 5

Quality of the Project Evaluation 10

Total Possible Score Per Application

A. SIGNIFICANCE (MAXIMUM 25 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 EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS LIKELY TO

YIELD FINDINGS THAT MAY BE UTILIZED BY OTHER APPROPRIATE

AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS. (UP TO 5 POINTS)

(II) THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT INVOLVES THE

DEVELOPMENT OR DEMONSTRATION OF PROMISING NEW

STRATEGIES THAT BUILD ON, OR ARE ALTERNATIVES TO, EXISTING

STRATEGIES. (UP TO 10 POINTS)

(III) THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE RESULTS OF THE PROPOSED

PROJECT ARE TO BE DISSEMINATED IN WAYS THAT WILL ENABLE

OTHERS TO USE THE INFORMATION OR STRATEGIES. (UP TO 10

POINTS)

QUESTIONS TO

CONSIDER -

SIGNIFICANCE

HOW WILL THE PROJECT HELP THE GRANTEE BUILD

UPON EXISTING SUCCESSFUL STRATEGIES OR

PROCESSES OR TEST INNOVATIONS IN THE FIELD?

HOW WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT BEYOND

THE GRANTEE OR THE COMMUNITY IT SERVES?

WHAT MECHANISM WILL THE PROJECT DESIGN TO

LEVERAGE SUCCESSES AND LESSONS LEARNED TO

SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS OR TARGET

POPULATIONS?

A. QUALITY OF THE PROJECT DESIGN (MAXIMUM 50 POINTS)

1. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED

PROJECT DEMONSTRATES A RATIONALE. (UP TO 10 POINTS)

2. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED

PROJECT IS APPROPRIATE TO, AND WILL SUCCESSFULLY

ADDRESS, THE NEEDS OF THE TARGET POPULATION OR

OTHER IDENTIFIED NEEDS. (UP TO 10 POINTS)

3. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL

ESTABLISH LINKAGES WITH OTHER APPROPRIATE AGENCIES

AND ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDING SERVICES TO THE TARGET

POPULATION . (UP TO 10 POINTS)

QUALITY OF THE PROJECT DESIGN (MAXIMUM 50 POINTS) CONT.

4. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT

REPRESENTS AN EXCEPTIONAL APPROACH TO THE

PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED FOR THE COMPETITION. (UP TO

10 POINTS)

5. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT

DEMONSTRATES A RATIONALE (AS DEFINED IN THIS

NOTICE). (UP TO 10 POINTS).

CONSIDER-

PROJECT

DESIGN

• WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THE PROPOSAL IS ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS?

• HOW DO THE ISSUES, NEEDS, AND PROPOSED ACTIVITIES RELATE TO

THE PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM AND THE TARGETED POPULATION?

• HOW WILL THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE NEEDS?

• HOW WILL THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE PRIORITIES?

• HOW WOULD THE PROJECT BE PRESENTED USING A LOGIC MODEL?

C. QUALITY OF PROJECT PERSONNEL (MAXIMUM 5 POINTS)

(1) THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE QUALITY OF THE PERSONNEL

WHO WILL CARRY OUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

(2) IN DETERMINING THE QUALITY OF PROJECT PERSONNEL, THE

SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE APPLICANT

ENCOURAGES APPLICATIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT FROM PERSONS

WHO ARE MEMBERS OF GROUPS THAT HAVE TRADITIONALLY BEEN

UNDERREPRESENTED BASED ON RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN,

GENDER, AGE, OR DISABILITY. (UP TO 2 POINTS)

(3) IN ADDITION, THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE

QUALIFICATIONS, INCLUDING RELEVANT TRAINING AND

EXPERIENCE, OF THE PROJECT DIRECTOR OR PRINCIPAL

INVESTIGATOR. (UP TO 3 POINTS)

QUESTIONS

TO CONSIDER

– PROJECT

PERSONNEL

• DOES THE PROPOSED PROJECT DIRECTOR HAVE EXPERIENCE OR

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTISE WORKING WITH THE TARGET

POPULATION?

• HOW WILL THE PROJECT ENSURE EQUITY AND INCLUSION IN

HIRING?

• DOES THE PROJECT DIRECTOR HAVE EXPERIENCE OR TRAINING

MANAGING SIMILAR PROJECTS AND COLLABORATING WITH

MULTIPLE PARTNERS?

• DO THE PROPOSED KEY PERSONNEL HAVE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

OR TRAINING WORKING WITH THE TARGET POPULATION OR

PROVIDING SERVICES IN SIMILAR PROGRAMS OR PROJECTS?

D. ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES (MAXIMUM 5 POINTS)

(1) THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE ADEQUACY OF THE

RESOURCES FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

(2) IN DETERMINING THE ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES FOR THE

PROPOSED PROJECT, THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE

ADEQUACY OF SUPPORT, INCLUDING FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT,

SUPPLIES, AND OTHER RESOURCES, FROM THE APPLICANT

ORGANIZATION OR THE LEAD APPLICANT ORGANIZATION.

CONSIDER –

ADEQUACY OF

RESOURCES

1) ARE THE LEAD AGENCY’S RESOURCES AND

SUPPORT MECHANISMS SUFFICIENT TO ENSURE

PROJECT SUCCESS?

2) DO YOU HAVE FULL SUPPORT FROM PROJECT

PARTNERS TO MAKE THE PROPOSED PROJECT A

SUCCESS?

D. QUALITY OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN (UP TO 5 POINTS)

(1) THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS THE QUALITY OF THE

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

(2) IN DETERMINING THE QUALITY OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

THE PROPOSED PROJECT, THE SECRETARY CONSIDERS 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.

CONSIDER –

MANAGEMENT

PLAN

• HOW WILL THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE MANAGED AND WHO WILL

MANAGE THE VARIOUS COMPONENTS?

• HOW WILL YOU ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT IS ON SCHEDULE AND

WITHIN BUDGET TO MEET THE IDENTIFIED GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

OF THE PROJECT?

• HAVE SUFFICIENT STAFF AND TIME BEEN COMMITTED TO ENSURE

THAT THE IDENTIFIED GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE MET?

E. QUALITY OF THE PROJECT EVALUATION (MAXIMUM 10

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 OUTCOMES OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. (UP TO 5 POINTS)

(II) THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE METHODS OF EVALUATION WILL PROVIDE

PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK AND PERMIT PERIODIC ASSESSMENT OF

PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING INTENDED OUTCOMES. (UP TO 5

POINTS)

QUESTIONS

TO CONSIDER

– PROJECT

EVALUATION

• WHAT METRICS WILL BE USED TO MEASURE PROGRESS AND ARE

THEY CLEARLY ALIGNED TO THE GOALS OF THE PROJECT?

• ARE LONG- AND SHORT-TERM OBJECTIVES CLEAR AND

MEASURABLE?

• HOW WILL THE EVALUATION BE USED TO INFORM CONTINUOUS

IMPROVEMENT?

GPRA PERFORMANCE MEASURES

THE GPRA PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR THIS PROGRAM ARE:

1. NUMBER OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN THE ESTABLISHED MODELING AND SIMULATION

PROGRAMS, INCLUDING MAJOR, MINOR, CAREER-TRACK, CERTIFICATE, AND

CONCENTRATION PROGRAMS.

2. NUMBER OF NEW MODELING AND SIMULATION COURSES DEVELOPED UNDER THE MSP

THAT REFLECT EMERGING DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MODELING AND SIMULATION FIELD.

ADDRESSING THE PROJECT DESIGN:

DEMONSTRATES A RATIONALE &

THE LOGIC MODEL

COMPONENTS OF A PROGRAM LOGIC

MODEL

RESOURCES: MATERIALS TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM

ACTIVITIES: STEPS FOR PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

OUTPUTS: PRODUCTS OF THE PROGRAM

IMPACTS ON OUTCOMES: CHANGES IN PROGRAM

PARTICIPANTS’ KNOWLEDGE, BELIEFS, OR BEHAVIOR

SAMPLE

LOGIC MODEL

NOTE: THE FEDERAL REGISTER IS THE OFFICIAL

APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDE. THIS WEBINAR

PROVIDES TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ONLY.

REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL LABORATORY (REL)

RESOURCES ON LOGIC MODELS

• LOGIC MODELS: A TOOL FOR EFFECTIVE PROGRAM PLANNING, COLLABORATION, AND MONITORING

HTTPS://IES.ED.GOV/NCEE/EDLABS/PROJECTS/PROJECT.ASP?PROJECTID=409

• LOGIC MODELS: A TOOL FOR DESIGNING AND MONITORING PROGRAM EVALUATIONS

HTTPS://IES.ED.GOV/NCEE/EDLABS/PROJECTS/PROJECT.ASP?PROJECTID=404

• LOGIC MODELS FOR PROGRAM DESIGN, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION: WORKSHOP

TOOLKIT

HTTPS://IES.ED.GOV/NCEE/EDLABS/PROJECTS/PROJECT.ASP?PROJECTID=401

• EDUCATION LOGIC MODEL APPLICATION FOR CREATING LOGIC MODELS:

HTTPS://IES.ED.GOV/NCEE/EDLABS/REGIONS/PACIFIC/ELM.ASP

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=409 https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?ProjectID=404 https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?ProjectID=401 https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp

Q&A

PLANNING

YOUR GRANT

APPLICATION

• IDENTIFY GOALS FOR YOUR PROPOSED PROJECT AND

THEIR FOCUS ON THE PROJECT RECIPIENTS.

• ANALYZE EVERY PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO ENSURE

THAT IT IS ATTAINABLE, MEANINGFUL, AND

MEASURABLE.

• CHOOSE METRICS AND EVALUATION METHODS THAT

WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH ROBUST FEEDBACK TO

MAKE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE

PROJECT.

PLANNING

YOUR GRANT

APPLICATION

• BE REALISTIC AND STRAIGHTFORWARD ABOUT

EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR PROJECT DESIGN.

• DESIGN ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES THAT ARE

MANAGEABLE AND DIRECTLY ADDRESS YOUR

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES AND ISSUES.

• FORECAST AND CREATE AN IMPLEMENTATION AND

MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT IS REALISTIC.

LOGISTICAL ADVICE

• MAKE SURE YOU ARE PROPERLY REGISTERED IN THE GRANTS.GOV SYSTEM:

HTTPS://WWW.GRANTS.GOV/, YOUR AOR PROFILE IS CURRENT, AND YOU ARE APPLYING TO THE

CORRECT GRANT OPPORTUNITY NUMBER, WHICH IS ED-GRANTS-110521-001.

• ENSURE THAT YOUR IHE’S DUNS NUMBER IS UP-TO-DATE AND ACTIVE IN SAM

HTTPS://WWW.SAM.GOV/SAM/.

• BE AWARE THAT THE DUNS NUMBER WILL BE TRANSITIONING TO A UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFIER

(UEI) IN APRIL 2022 (SEE HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION: HTTPS://WWW.GSA.GOV/ABOUT-

US/ORGANIZATION/FEDERAL-ACQUISITION-SERVICE/OFFICE-OF-SYSTEMS-

MANAGEMENT/INTEGRATED-AWARD-ENVIRONMENT-IAE/IAE-INFORMATION-KIT/UNIQUE-ENTITY-

IDENTIFIER-UPDATE).

• SUBMIT YOUR GRANT APPLICATION EARLY!

https://www.grants.gov/ https://www.sam.gov/SAM/ https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/organization/federal-acquisition-service/office-of-systems-management/integrated-award-environment-iae/iae-information-kit/unique-entity-identifier-update

PROGRAM CONTACTS

• DR. ROBIN DABNEY| ROBIN.DABNEY@ED.GOV 202-453-7908

• KISSY CHAPMAN-THAW | KISSY.CHAPMAN-THAW@ED.GOV, 202-453-7627

• PROGRAM WEBPAGE: HTTPS://WWW2.ED.GOV/PROGRAMS/MSP/INDEX.HTML

• PROGRAM EMAIL: MODELINGANDSIMULATION@ED.GOV

mailto:robin.Dabney@ed.gov mailto:kissy.chapman-thaw@ed.gov https://www2.ed.gov/programs/msp/index.html mailto:modelingandsimulation@ed.gov

THANK YOU!