U.S. Department of Labor on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education

Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED)

Assistance Listing Number: 84.423A

FY 2026 Grant Competition

April 16, 2026

Contents Program Information

Eligibility

Eligible Applicants

Costs

Submission Requirements and Deadlines

Program Description

Priorities

Selection Criteria

Performance Measures

Application Submission Information

Application Review Information

Definitions

Award Requirements

Application Checklist

Evidence Form

Appendix

Program Information The Employment and Training Administration at the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is soliciting applications in support of the administration of the Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) program on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education (ED).

The SEED program provides funding to increase the number of highly effective educators by supporting the implementation of evidence-based practices that prepare, develop, or enhance the skills of educators to improve student outcomes. These grants will allow eligible entities to develop, expand, and evaluate practices that can serve as models to be sustained and disseminated.

Applicants can receive competitive preference points to projects or proposals that will be carried out by State educational agency grantees. This priority aligns to the Administration’s efforts to ensure federal education dollars empower states to best meet their teachers’ and students’ needs.

Applicants can also receive competitive preference points for projects or

1 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. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 87 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering, and maintaining the data needed, and completing and proposals that are designed to responsibly advance artificial intelligence and/or prioritize and expand Registered Apprenticeships.

Assistance Listing Number: 84.423A.

Program Authority: Section 2242 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 6672).

OMB Control Number: 1894–0006.1

For Further Information: Orman Feres.

Telephone: (202) 453-6921. Email:

Orman.Feres@ED.gov or SEED@ED.gov.

Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds: $90,000,000.

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

Estimated Range of Awards: $1 million to $6 million per project year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,500,000 per performance period.

Estimated Number of Awards: 25-30.

reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain benefit and voluntary. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1894-0006. Note: Please do not return completed applications to this address.

https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/6672 mailto:Orman.Feres@ED.gov mailto:SEED@ED.gov mailto:ICDocketMgr@ed.gov

Project Period: Up to 36 months.

Application Deadline: June 1, 2026

Note: This application notice and instructions is the official document governing the grant competition. ED is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Eligibility

Eligible Applicants To receive funds under this program, an applicant must be:

(a) An institution of higher education (IHE) that provides course materials or resources that are evidence-based in increasing academic achievement, graduation rates, or rates of postsecondary education matriculation;

(b) A national nonprofit entity with a demonstrated record of raising student academic achievement, graduation rates, and rates of higher education attendance, matriculation, or completion, or of effectiveness in providing preparation and professional development activities and programs for teachers, principals, or other school leaders;

(c) The Bureau of Indian Education; or

(d) A partnership consisting of--

(i) One or more entities described in paragraph (a) or (b); and

(ii) A for-profit entity.

Note: If you are a nonprofit organization, under 34 CFR 75.51, you may demonstrate your nonprofit status by any of the following means: (1) proof that the Internal Revenue Service currently recognizes the applicant as an organization to which contributions are tax deductible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code; (2) a statement from a State taxing body or the State attorney general certifying that the organization is a nonprofit organization operating within the State and that no part of its net earnings may lawfully benefit any private shareholder or individual; (3) a certified copy of the applicant’s certificate of incorporation or similar document if it clearly establishes the nonprofit status of the applicant; or (4) any item described above if that item applies to a State or national parent organization, together with a statement by the State or parent organization that the applicant is a local nonprofit affiliate.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.51

Costs Cost Sharing or Matching

Under section 2242 of the ESEA, each grant recipient must provide, from non-Federal sources, at least 25 percent of the total cost for each year of the project activities. These funds may be provided in cash or in-kind contributions. Applicants must include a budget showing their matching contributions on an annual basis relative to the annual budget amount of SEED grant funds and must provide evidence of their matching contributions for the first year of the grant in their grant applications.

Note: The combination of Federal and non-Federal funds should equal the total cost of the project. Therefore, grantees are generally required to support no less than 25 percent of the total cost of the project with non-Federal funds. Applicants are strongly encouraged to take this requirement into account when requesting Federal funds and limit their request appropriately and should verify that their project budget reflect the costs allocations appropriately. (Cost share formula: total program cost (the amount of the Federal grant + the amount of the non-Federal match) x .75 = Federal award amount).

Supplement-Not-Supplant

This program involves supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. Under section 2301 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6691), funds made available under title II of the ESEA must be used to supplement, and not supplant, non-Federal funds that would otherwise be used for activities authorized under this title.

Indirect Cost Rate Information

This program uses a restricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see this webpage.

Administrative Cost Limitation

This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses.

All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance.

Subgrantees

Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this competition may award subgrants to directly carry out project activities described in its application to the following types of entities: local educational agencies (LEA), IHE, State and local governments, including State educational agencies (SEA), and other public or private entities suitable to carry out https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/6691 http://www.ed.gov/about/ed-offices/ofo#Indirect-Cost-Division https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-E https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.708 the activities proposed in the application. The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application or under procedures established by the grantee.

Renewal

Under section 2242(b)(2) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6672), ED may renew a grant awarded under this section for one additional 24 month period, beyond the 36 month project period.

Note: During the course of the third year of the project period for grants awarded under this competition, we will provide details on the potential renewal process. In making decisions to award a two-year renewal award, we will review performance data submitted in regularly required reporting, and may request narrative information to be assessed using selection criteria under 34 CFR 75.210.

Submission Requirements and Deadlines

Applications Available April 16, 2026 Application Deadline June 1, 2026 Deadline for Intergovernmental Review July 31, 2026

Applicants are required to follow the 2025 Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2025 (90 FR 42234) and available at ED 2025 Common Instructions.

Program Description

Priorities This notice includes four absolute priorities and three competitive preference priorities.

Absolute Priorities 1 and 2 are from section 2242 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6672) and 34 CFR

75.226. Absolute Priority 3 is from the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions on Supporting Meaningful Learning Opportunities (Meaningful Learning Opportunities Supplemental Priority), published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2026 (91 FR 6625). Absolute Priority 4 is from the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions on Promoting Evidence-Based Literacy, Education Choice, and Returning Education to the States (2025 Supplemental Priorities), published in the Federal Register on September 9, 2025 (90 FR 43514). Competitive Preference Priority 1 is from the 2025 Supplemental Priorities. Competitive Preference Priority 2 is from the Secretary's Supplemental Priority and Definitions on Advancing Artificial Intelligence in Education (Advancing Artificial Intelligence Priority), published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2026 (91 FR 18774).

https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/6672 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR33307b241f927e7/section-75.210 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/08/29/2025-16571/common-instructions-and-information-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/6672 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.226 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.226 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/12/2026-02854/final-priority-and-definitions-secretarys-supplemental-priority-and-definitions-on-meaningful https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/12/2026-02854/final-priority-and-definitions-secretarys-supplemental-priority-and-definitions-on-meaningful https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/09/09/2025-17310/final-priorities-and-definitions-secretarys-supplemental-priorities-and-definitions-on https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/04/13/2026-07087/final-priority-and-definitions-secretarys-supplemental-priority-and-definitions-on-advancing

Competitive Preference Priority 3 is from the Secretary's Supplemental Priority and Definitions on Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness (Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness Supplemental Priority) NFP published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2026

(91 FR 18780).

Absolute Priority: ED considers only applications that meet either of Absolute Priority 1 or 2, and either of Absolute Priorities 3 or 4. As explained in Evidence Form section of the Application Checklist, applicants must provide evidence citation(s) to meet either Absolute Priority 1 or 2, in addition to providing evidence citation(s) for Absolute Priority 3 or 4.

Competitive Preference Priorities: An application may receive a maximum of 10 additional points under Competitive Preference Priority 1, a maximum of 5 additional points under Competitive Preference Priority 2, and a maximum of 5 additional points under Competitive Preference Priority 3 for a maximum of 20 additional points under the competitive preference priorities. ED will not review or award points for a competitive preference priority if an applicant fails to clearly identify it as a competitive preference priority.

Priority Type Priority Title Required Priority Language Points Absolute Priority 1

Supporting Effective Teachers

Yes, Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2

This priority is for projects that will implement activities that are supported by moderate evidence. Applicants under this priority may propose one or more of the following activities:

(a) Providing teachers from nontraditional preparation and certification routes or pathways to serve in traditionally underserved LEAs;

(b) Providing evidence-based professional development activities that address literacy, numeracy, remedial, or other needs of LEAs and the students the agencies serve; or

(c) Providing teachers with evidence-based professional enhancement activities, which may include activities that lead to an advanced credential.

Not applicable

Absolute Priority 2

Supporting Effective Principals or Other School Leaders

Yes, Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2

This priority is for projects that will implement activities that are supported by promising evidence. Applicants under this priority may propose one or more of the following activities:

Not Applicable https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/04/13/2026-07084/final-priority-and-definitions-secretarys-supplemental-priority-and-definitions-on-career-pathways

Priority Type Priority Title Required Priority Language Points

(a) Providing principals or other school leaders from nontraditional preparation and certification routes or pathways to serve in traditionally underserved LEAs;

(b) Providing principals or other school leaders with evidence-based professional development activities that address literacy, numeracy, remedial, or other needs of LEAs and the students the agencies serve; or

(c) Providing principals or other school leaders with evidence-based professional enhancement activities, which may include activities that lead to an advanced credential.

Absolute Priority 3

Promoting Evidence- Based Literacy

Yes, Absolute Priority 3 or Absolute Priority 4

Projects or proposals to do one or more of the following:

(a) Advance, increase, or expand evidence-based literacy instruction (as defined in this notice), or

(b) Focus on evidence-based literacy instruction (as defined in this notice).

Not Applicable

Absolute Priority 4

Meaningful Learning Opportunities for Students

Yes, Absolute Priority 3 or Absolute Priority 4

Projects or proposals that are designed to strengthen core instruction through improving mathematics instruction to promote student achievement through one or more of the following priority areas:

(a) Assisting states in developing comprehensive statewide plans to raise mathematics achievement that align with mathematics instruction based on strong, moderate, or promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1);

(b) Selecting, adopting, and/or implementing high-quality instructional materials in mathematics; or

Not applicable https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-77.1

(c) Offering high-quality professional development based on strong, moderate, or promising evidence (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) in mathematics for educators, which may include teachers, paraprofessionals, and other licensed educators or support for principals and other school leaders on managing the implementation of high-quality mathematics instruction.

Competitive Preference Priority 1

Returning Education to the States

No

Projects or proposals that will be carried out by entities identified, designated, or endorsed by a Governor or chief State education official for purposes of implementing the project or proposal.

0 or 10 points

Competitive Preference Priority 2

Advancing Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education

No Projects or proposals to expand the understanding of artificial intelligence through providing professional development for educators on the integration of the fundamentals of AI into their respective subject areas.

Note: This may include AI literacy. Please see DOL’s Artificial Intelligence Literacy Framework for additional background and a resource.

Up to 5 points

Competitive Preference Priority 3

Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness

No Projects or proposals that are designed to prioritize and expand Registered Apprenticeships in education, including Registered Apprenticeships to prepare one or more of the following:

(a) Elementary educators, or

(b) Secondary educators, by including one or more of the following:

(i) Supporting the development and expansion of Registered Apprenticeship programs designed to lead to educator certification.

(ii) Creating targeted pathways for instructional assistants, paraprofessionals, Up to 5 points https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-77.1 https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEN/2025/TEN%2007-25/TEN%2007-25%20%28complete%20document%29.pdf https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEN/2025/TEN%2007-25/TEN%2007-25%20%28complete%20document%29.pdf substitute teachers, career changers, and other individuals already working in educational settings to earn teaching credentials and to become certified educators while employed.

(iii) Aligning secondary and postsecondary educator-registered apprenticeship programs with State educator licensure requirements and workforce shortage areas.

(iv) Providing technical assistance to school districts, educator preparation providers, institutions of higher education, and registered apprenticeship intermediaries to establish or expand Registered Educator Apprenticeship programs.

(v) Promoting earn-and-learn models through registered apprenticeships that reduce financial barriers and increase access to the teaching profession, particularly in high-need subject areas, including provision of:

(1) Paid work experience in a full-time position;

(2) A progression of wage increases; and

(3) Coursework that leads to certification, delivered to accommodate full-time work schedules.

Note: Registered Apprenticeships are industry-vetted and approved and validated by DOL or a State Apprenticeship Agency as fulfilling the requirements of 29 CFR part 29.

An applicant must identify at least one, but no more than two, citations for the purposes of meeting the evidence requirements under Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2. In addition, an applicant must provide at least one, but no more than two, citations meeting the evidence requirements under Absolute Priority 3 or Absolute Priority 4. For more information on meeting the evidence citation requirement for this program, review the “Evidence Form” section.

Selection Criteria Selection criteria outline how the application will be scored. The maximum possible total score an application can receive for addressing the criteria is 100 points. The maximum possible score for addressing each criterion is indicated in parentheses following the criterion. The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210.

(a) Quality of the project design (Up to 40 points): The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers:

(i) 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. (Up to 8 points)

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build capacity and yield sustainable results that will extend beyond the project period. (Up to 8 points)

(iii) The quality of the logic model or other conceptual framework underlying the proposed project, including how inputs are related to outcomes. (Up to 8 points)

(iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project demonstrates meaningful community engagement and input to ensure that the project is appropriate to successfully address the needs of the target population or other identified needs and will be used to inform continuous improvement strategies. (Up to 8 points) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-29/subtitle-A/part-29 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-29/subtitle-A/part-29 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.210

(v) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources. (Up to 8 points)

(b) Quality of the management plan (Up to 25 points): The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for 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, measurable, and ambitious yet achievable within the project period, and aligned with the purposes of the grant program. (Up to 13 points)

(ii) The feasibility of the management plan to achieve project objectives and goals on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. (Up to 12 points)

(c) Quality of the project evaluation or other evidence-building (Up to 25 points): The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation or other evidence-building of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation or other evidence-building, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce evidence about the effectiveness of the project on relevant outcomes that would meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards without reservations, as described in the What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks. (Up to 7 points)

(2) The extent to which performance feedback and formative data are integral to the design of the proposed project and will be used to inform continuous improvement. (Up to 6 points)

(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other evidence-building include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quality data that are quantitative and qualitative. (Up to 6 points)

(4) 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 valid and reliable information about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the project. (Up to 6 points)

Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbooks are available at the What Works Clearinghouse website.

(d) Adequacy of resources (Up to 10 points): The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of support for the project, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant or the lead applicant organization. (Up to 5 points)

(ii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the number of persons to be served, the depth and intensity of services, and the anticipated results and benefits. (Up to 5 points)

See the Appendix for the suggested scoring rubric external peer reviewers can use in evaluating applications.

Performance Measures The SEED program is designed to foster the use of rigorous evidence-based practices in selecting and implementing strategies and interventions that support educators’ development across the continuum of their careers (e.g., in preparation, recruitment, professional learning, and leadership development). For the purposes of ED reporting under 34 CFR 75.110, ED has established a set of performance measures.

Applications must describe:

The data collection and reporting methods the applicant would use and why those methods are likely to yield reliable, valid, and meaningful performance data.

The applicant's capacity to collect and report reliable, valid, and meaningful performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data collection, analysis, and reporting in other projects or research.

Program Measure Description Program Performance Measure 1 Percentage of teachers, principals or school leaders who serve concentrations of high-need students.

Program Performance Measure 2 Percentage of teachers, principals or school leaders who serve concentrations of high-need students and are designated as highly effective.

Program Performance Measure 3 Percentage of teachers, principals or school leaders who serve concentrations of high-need students for https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.110

Program Measure Description at least two years and are designated as highly effective.

Program Performance Measure 4 Percentage of students demonstrating improvement in mathematics through pre and post assessments.

Program Performance Measure 5 Percentage of students demonstrating improvement in literacy through pre and post assessments.

Program Performance Measure 6 Number of grantees with evaluations that meet the WWC standards with reservations. Grantees will report annually on each measure.

Program Performance Measure 7 Percentage of teachers, principals or school leaders who become certified through Registered Apprenticeship programs, when applicable.

Application Submission Information Pre-Application Webinar

ED will conduct informational webinars to provide technical assistance to interested applicants for grants under this program. The schedule for these informational webinars that will occur approximately 2 weeks after the publication of this notice on Grants.gov will be posted at SEED website, including a Registered Apprenticeship 101 webinar hosted by

DOL.

Registration

To apply, you must first be registered in two systems: SAM.gov and Grants.gov. If you are already registered, make sure your registration is active and up to date.

Grants.gov registration involves several steps, including registration on SAM.gov. You may begin working on your application while completing the registration process, but you cannot apply until all registration steps are complete. Once your SAM registration is active, it will take 24-48 hours for the information to become available in Grants.gov. For detailed information on the registration steps, please go to Grants.gov Applicant Registration.

Please note that your organization will need to update its SAM registration annually.

SAM.gov

You must have an active account with SAM.gov. This includes having a Unique Entity Identifier. SAM.gov registration can take several weeks. Begin that process early.

To register, go to SAM.gov and click on "Get Started."

Click on the Entity Registration Checklist for the information you will need to register in SAM.gov.

If you need help, you can call 866-606-8220 or live chat with the Federal Service Desk.

https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/teacher-preparation-grants/supporting-effective-educator-development-grant-program http://www.sam.gov/ https://grants.gov/ http://www.sam.gov/ https://www.grants.gov/applicants/applicant-registration https://sam.gov/ https://sam.gov/entity-registration https://sam.gov/sites/default/files/2024-11/entity-checklist.pdf https://www.fsd.gov/gsafsd_sp

ED strongly recommends that you do not wait until the last day to submit your application.

Grants.gov will put a date/time stamp on your application and then process it after it is fully uploaded. If Grants.gov rejects your application, you will need to resubmit successfully to Grants.gov before 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the deadline date.

You must provide the Unique-Entity ID (UEI) on your application that was used when you registered as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) on Grants.gov. This UEI is assigned to your organization in SAM at the time your organization registers in SAM. If you do not enter the UEI assigned by SAM on your application, Grants.gov will reject your application.

A Grants.gov applicant must apply online using Workspace, a shared environment in Grants.gov where members of a grant team may simultaneously access and edit different web forms within an application. The Grants.gov website contains further instructions on how to apply.

Intergovernmental Review

This is subject to Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. One of the objectives of Executive Order 12372 is to strengthen federalism – or the distribution of responsibility between localities, States, and the Federal government – by fostering intergovernmental partnerships. This idea includes supporting processes that State or local governments have developed to coordinate and review proposed Federal financial grant applications. Grant applicants need to contact State Single Points of Contact (SPOC) for information on their State’s procedures. Multi- State applicants should follow procedures specific to each state. Further information about the SPOC List and the official list of entities can be found online.

Grants.gov

You must also have an active account with Grants.gov.

To register, go to Grants.gov and click “Register.” When ready, click on “Get Registered Now” and complete the required fields.

For more information or assistance, click on “Applicant Registration Page.”

https://www.grants.gov/applicants/grant-applications/how-to-apply-for-grants https://www.grants.gov/applicants/grant-applications/how-to-apply-for-grants https://www.ojp.gov/IntergovernmentalReviewSPOCList.pdf https://grants.gov/ https://grants.gov/register https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/register.faces?INITIAL_LOAD=true https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/register.faces?INITIAL_LOAD=true https://grants.gov/applicants/applicant-registration

Verify Submission

Verify that Grants.gov received your application submission on time and that it was validated successfully. To see the date/time your application was received, log in to Grants.gov and click on the Track My Application link. For a successful submission, the date/time received should be earlier than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on the deadline date, AND the application status should be: Validated, Received by Agency, or Agency Tracking Number Assigned.

If the date/time received is later than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the deadline date, your application is late. If your application has a status of “Received,” it is still awaiting validation by Grants.gov. Once validation is complete, the status will either change to “Validated” or “Rejected with Errors.” If the status is “Rejected with Errors,” your application has not been received successfully. Some of the reasons Grants.gov may reject an application can be found on the Encountering Error Messages webpage at Grants.gov.

For more detailed information on troubleshooting Adobe errors, you can review the Adobe Reader Software Tip Sheet. If you discover your application is late or has been rejected, please see the instructions below. Note: You will receive a series of confirmations both online and via e-mail about the status of your application. Please do not rely solely on e-mail to confirm whether your application has been received timely and validated successfully.

Helpful Hints When Working with Grants.gov

Please go to the Grants.gov Support Center for help with Grants.gov. For additional tips related to submitting grant applications, please refer to the Grants.gov Applicant FAQs as well as additional information on Workspace.

Submission Problems – What should you do?

If you have problems submitting to Grants.gov before the closing date, please contact Grants.gov Customer Support at 1-800-518-4726 or via email at: support@grants.gov. You may also access the Grants.gov Self- Service Knowledge Base web portal.

Application Review Information Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217, information outside the rank order of applications, including the information in each application; and any other information— https://www.grants.gov/applicants/encountering-error-messages https://www.grants.gov/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility https://www.grants.gov/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility https://www.grants.gov/support https://www.grants.gov/applicants/applicant-faqs https://www.grants.gov/applicants/workspace-overview mailto:support@grants.gov https://grants-portal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Grants https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.217#p-75.217(d)(3) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.217#p-75.217(d)(3)

(a) Relevant to a criterion, priority, or other requirement that applies to the selection of applications for new grants;

(b) Concerning the applicant's performance and use of funds under a previous award under any ED program; and

(c) Concerning the applicant's failure under any ED program to submit a performance report or its submission of a performance report of unacceptable quality.

Before making awards, ED staff will screen applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in this notice to determine whether applications have met eligibility and other requirements, including whether an application may fail to meet the “Terms and Conditions” applicable to awarded funds referenced elsewhere within this notice. This screening process may occur at various stages of the review and selection process.

Applicants that are determined to be ineligible will not receive a grant, regardless of whether the application was included in the peer review process. Applications not selected for funding will be informed of ED's decision in accordance with 34 CFR 75.218.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, ED requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from ED (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

Under section 2242 of the ESEA, we consider the following additional factors in selecting an application for an award:

(a) ED must ensure that, to the extent practicable, grants are distributed among eligible entities that will serve geographically diverse areas, including urban, suburban, and rural areas.

(b) ED must not award more than one grant under this program to an eligible entity during a grant competition. If an entity submits multiple applications for this competition, only the highest rated application will be considered for an award.

Definitions The definition of “evidence-based” is from section 8101 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7801) (as referenced in section 2242 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6672(e)). The definitions of “institution of higher education,” which incorporates by reference section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801(a)), “local educational agency,” “professional development,” “school leader,” and “State educational agency” are from section 8101 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7801). The definitions of “continuous improvement,” “evaluation,” “evidence-https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-75.218 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-100.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-104.5 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-106.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-108.8 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-110.23 https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/7801 https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/6672 https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/7801 https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/20/7801 building,” “experimental study,” “logic model,” “moderate evidence,” “project component,” “promising evidence,” “quality data,” “quasi-experimental design study,” “relevant outcome,” and “What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks” 34 CFR 77.1. The definition of “national nonprofit entity” is from the notice of final definition published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2022 (87 FR 19388) (Final Definition). The definition of “evidence framework,” “evidence-based literacy instruction,” “experimental study,” and “quasi-experimental design study” is from the 2025 Supplemental Priorities. The definition of “artificial intelligence” is from the Advancing Artificial Intelligence Supplemental Priority.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).

Continuous improvement means using plans for collecting and analyzing data about a project component's implementation and outcomes (including the pace and extent to which project outcomes are being met) to inform necessary changes throughout the project. These plans may include strategies to gather ongoing feedback from participants and stakeholders on the implementation of the project component.

Evaluation means an assessment using systematic data collection and analysis of one or more programs, policies, practices, and organizations intended to assess their implementation, outcomes, effectiveness, or efficiency.

Evidence framework means an approach to providing a determination about whether an activity, strategy, or intervention meets each aspect of the definition of strong evidence or moderate evidence (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(21)(A)(i)(I-II)), as applicable.

(a) An evidence framework must include each of the following:

(i) Whether or not a study is an experimental study or quasi-experimental design study;

(ii) Whether or not a study shows a positive, statistically significant effect on student outcomes or other relevant outcomes;

(iii) Whether or not a study uses outcome measures that demonstrate validity and reliability, that do not give an unfair advantage to participants in one condition over another, and that are measured consistently for the groups or participants that are being compared;

(iv) Whether or not a study design is otherwise of high quality, including whether it minimizes factors outside the intervention that could affect student or other relevant outcomes (confounds) and whether random assignment (if used) was done with integrity; and https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-77.1%22%20/t%20%22_blank https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/15/9401

(v) Whether or not study implementation and analysis is appropriate, including whether groups or participants being compared demonstrate baseline equivalence on key individual and other relevant characteristics, whether differences in baseline equivalence are statistically controlled, and by considering the impact on the validity of the study of any changes to the sample over time.

(b) An evidence framework may be implemented or verified by the Department or peer reviewers with statistical expertise who affirm an applicant's assertion that relevant information is strong evidence or moderate evidence because it is supported by study ratings included in the What Works Clearinghouse in one or more of:

(i) a practice guide;

(ii) an intervention report; or

(iii) individual studies otherwise assessed to meet strong evidence or moderate evidence.

Evidence-based, when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on--

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

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

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

Evidence-based literacy instruction means literacy instruction that relates to explicit, systematic and intentional instruction in phonological awareness, phonic decoding, oral and sign language, vocabulary, language structure, reading fluency, reading comprehension, and writing; promotes knowledge-rich materials; and is backed by one or more of the following, as supported by an evidence framework (as defined in this notice):

(a) strong evidence, meaning an activity, strategy, or intervention that demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (strong evidence as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(21)(A)(i)(I)) or

(b) moderate evidence, meaning an activity, strategy, or intervention that demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (moderate evidence as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(21)(A)(i)(II)).

Evidence-building means a systematic plan for identifying and answering questions relevant to programs and policies through performance measurement, exploratory studies, or program evaluation.

Experimental study (for the purposes of the Promoting Evidence-Based Literacy competitive preference priority) means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy as compared with a control group that does not. Experimental studies can support claims of strong evidence. Randomized controlled trials and single-case design studies are specific types of experimental studies that meet this definition.

Experimental study (for the purpose of the other priorities) means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group that does not. Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbooks:

(a) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group).

(b) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of outcomes.

(c) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case (e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the treatment.

Institution of higher education (IHE) means an educational institution in any State that--

(a) Admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate, or persons who meet the requirements of section 484(d) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA);

(b) Is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education;

(c) Provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor’s degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or awards a degree that is acceptable for admission to a graduate or professional degree program, subject to review and approval by the Secretary;

(d) Is a public or other nonprofit institution; and

(e) Is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted pre-accreditation status by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the granting of pre-accreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time.

Local educational agency (LEA) means:

(a) In General. A public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools or secondary schools.

(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.

(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does not have a student population that is smaller than the student population of the LEA receiving assistance under the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational agency (SEA) other than the Bureau of Indian Education.

(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies.

(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the SEA in a State in which the SEA is the sole educational agency for all public schools.

Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes.

Moderate evidence means evidence of effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(a) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, 4.1, or 5.0 of the WWC Handbooks reporting “strong evidence” or “moderate evidence” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(b) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, 4.1, or 5.0 of the WWC Handbooks reporting “Tier 1 strong evidence” of effectiveness or “Tier 2 moderate evidence” of effectiveness or a “positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a sample including at least 20 students or other individuals from more than one site (such as a State, county, city, LEA, school, or postsecondary campus), or a “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a sample including at least 350 students or other individuals from more than one site (such as a State, county, city, LEA, school, or postsecondary campus), with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(c) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental design study reviewed and reported by the WWC most recently using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, 4.1, or 5.0 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 5.0 of the WWC Handbook, as appropriate, and that—

(i) Meets WWC standards with or without reservations;

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

(iii) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, 4.1, or 5.0 of the WWC Handbooks; and

(iv) Is based on a sample from more than one site (such as a State, county, city, LEA, school, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(i) through (iii) of this definition may together satisfy the requirement in this paragraph (c)(4).

National nonprofit entity means an entity that—

(a) Meets the definition of “nonprofit” under 34 CFR 77.1(c); and

(b) Is of national scope, which requires that the entity—

(i) Provides services in three or more States; and

(ii) Demonstrates a proven record of serving or benefitting teachers, principals, or other school leaders across these States.

Professional development means activities that—

(a) Are an integral part of school and LEA strategies for providing educators (including teachers, principals, other school leaders, specialized instructional support personnel, paraprofessionals, and, as applicable, early childhood educators) with the knowledge and skills necessary to enable students to succeed in a well-rounded education and to meet the challenging State academic standards; and

(b) Are sustained (not stand-alone, 1-day, or short term workshops), intensive, collaborative, job-embedded, data-driven, and classroom-focused, and may include activities that—

(i) Improve and increase teachers’—

(1)…