**\
\
Moderator: Sharon Burton\
March 19, 2008\
2:00 PM ET**

Sharon Burton: And this is the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools
Partnerships in Character Grant Competition Conference Call. And I want
to thank everyone for being on the call today. My name is Sharon Burton.
I\'m with the U.S. Department of Education Office of Safe and Drug Free
Schools and I\'m here to talk about the Partnerships in Character Grant
Competition information and, again, welcome you all to this call. This
is part of a series of technical assistance calls designed to assist you
in answering any questions or concerns that you may have regarding the
application process.

With me today is Dr. Elizabeth Warner. She is from the Institute for
Educational Sciences here at the U.S. Department of Education and
she\'ll also be on the call to answer any questions about the evidence
based program evaluation competitive preference priority that is part of
this application.

This is the third in a series of four dial-in calls that will be hosted
for the Partnerships in Character Education Program Grant Competition
for fiscal year 2008. The purpose of the call is to provide an
opportunity for the public and potential applicants to ask questions
about the grant competition and procedures to apply that will support a
successful submission of an application.

The notice inviting applications for the Partnerships in Character
Education Program was published in the Federal Register on February 21,
2008. This notice is considered the official document governing this
grant competition. The purpose of the Partnerships in Character
Education program is to provide grants to eligible entities to assist
them in designing and implementing character education projects that
teach students the elements of character, such as caring, respect,
responsibility, trustworthiness, fairness and civic virtues, just to
name a few.

> Eligible applicants are listed in the Federal Register announcement
> and the application package. In order to apply for a grant under the
> program competition this year an applicant must meet the absolute
> priority and may apply for the competitive preference priority. The
> absolute priority is that we will award grants under this competition
> to design and implement character education programs that are able to
> be one, integrated into classroom instruction and are consistent with
> state academic content standards. And two, carried out in conjunction
> with other education reform efforts taking into consideration the view
> of parents, students, students with disabilities including those with
> mental or physical disabilities and other members of the community
> including members of private and nonprofit organizations.
>
> The evaluation for project for the competitive preference priority
> will utilize an experimental or quasi experimental design to evaluate
> program effectiveness. Applications will be reviewed using a two-stage
> process if you choose to apply for the competitive preference
> priority. In the first stage the application will be reviewed without
> taking the competitive preference priority into account. The second
> stage of the review, the applications ranked highest in stage one will
> be reviewed for the competitive preference. Under this priority we
> will give a total of up to 20 points to an applicant if they are
> proposing to use an experimental or quasi experimental design.
>
> The following selection criteria will be used to evaluate applications
> under this grant competition. The maximum score for all these criteria
> is 100 points. One, the quality of project design; the maximum points
> for that criteria is 30 points. Two, quality of management plan; the
> maximum score for that selection criteria is 25 points. Three, quality
> of project personnel; the maximum points for that criteria is 15
> points. And four, quality of project evaluation; the maximum points
> for that criteria is 30 points. It is estimated that a total of two
> new awards will be made under this competition.
>
> In making awards under this program, we will consider the rank order
> of applicants and to the extent practicable to ensure that the awards
> under this program are equitably distributed among the geographic
> regions of the United State and among urban, suburban and rural areas.
> Contingent upon the availability of funds, additional awards may be
> made in fiscal year 2009 or 2010 from the rank ordered list of
> nonfunded applications from this competition.
>
> We have a transcriber on this call that will be taking notes, as well
> as the remaining calls to capture the questions asked and responses to
> the questions so that each may be posted on the following websites for
> review. The Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools Website, which is
> [www.ed.gov/osdfs](http://www.ed.gov/osdfs)/ so that\'s
> [www.ed.gov/osdfs/](http://www.ed.gov/osdfs/). And the Character
> Education Specific Engagement Technical Assistance Center Website,
> which is [www.cetac.org](http://www.cetac.org/). Again, that\'s
> [www.cetac.org](http://www.cetac.org/).
>
> Also posted on these websites is a copy of the Federal Register notice
> that was dated February 21^st^ announcing the grant competition and
> providing guidance on how to apply for the grant.
>
> The application package provides information and instructions on how
> to complete and submit an application for consideration. Please note,
> that the closing date for this application is March 31, 2008.
>
> I do want to note that for those of you that are looking to apply
> under the competitive preference priority that there are some
> resources available. One I do want to highlight is a \"Mobilizing for
> Evidence Based Character Education\" publication that was developed by
> the Office of Safe and Drug Free School in conjunction with evaluators
> in the field that can be a useful resource if you\'re looking to
> develop an experimental or quasi experimental program evaluation for
> your character education proposal. The guide does cover partnering
> with an evaluator, developing a comprehensive program and preparing
> the evaluation plan. And that document can be found at the two
> websites I mentioned earlier and can be downloaded.
>
> Okay, at this time I would like to ask Dr. Warner if she has any
> comments or anything that she\'d like to share regarding the
> competitive preference priority that might be helpful to potential
> applicants.

Elizabeth Warner: Okay, thank you Sharon. I think the main thing I would
try and suggest is that for the competitive priority you want to keep in
mind that somebody is reading this portion of the grant to try to assign
points and what they\'re looking for is a demonstration that the
proposed evaluation design that you are including in your grant proposal
can credibly be carried out to address effectiveness because that\'s
what the competitive priority points are assigned based on.

So, what you want to do is to make sure that you\'re including a number
of different aspects of an evaluation plan that will basically outline
exactly what you intend to do in terms of the evaluation. So, they would
include things like a clear presentation or articulation of what you
will be testing.

> Oftentimes, that\'s referred to as the research question. You would
> want to clearly indicate what you\'re going to be collecting in terms
> of data so that people would know what would happen in the absence of
> the program versus what\'s happening as the result of you putting in
> the program. And here you need to be basically talking about the
> research design that you\'re going to be using. And there are various
> research designs that you might employ. One is a random assignment
> design where you select who\'s going to receive the character ed.
> program versus those who don\'t based on a lottery process.
>
> Another way to articulate a design is a quasi experimental design
> where before you do the program itself or before you do any data
> collection you indicate who\'s getting the program, and then you
> select who doesn\'t get the program and collect some information about
> those, what is called, baselines and make sure that you know what it
> looks like before the program is put in place and then you can take a
> look at what happens as the result of putting in the program.
>
> Another way to go about a quasi experimental design is through
> regression discontinuity but there the selection of the comparison
> group is based on a cutoff point where you\'re ranking who gets the
> program versus who doesn\'t ahead of time.
>
> I also wanted to articulate that you want to make sure that it\'s
> clear what data you\'re intending to collect and when, what sorts of
> instruments you might use or where you would get those instruments.
> And it should be consistent with the research question that you have
> in mind so that it\'s very clear how it is \-- what it is that you\'re
> going to answer as a result of this evaluation. How you\'re going to
> inform that answer with the kinds of data collection that you\'re
> doing and that it\'s consistent with the program that you\'re actually
> putting in place. So, all of these things should be consistently and
> clearly described in your evaluation plan.
>
> And the one last thing I would say is that it just has to be something
> that can feasibly be done and that\'s what you want to try and convey
> in your write up. So, hopefully that helps a little bit.

Sharon Burton: Thank you, Dr. Warner. I do want to just provide some
additional information before we open the call for questions. I want to
remind everyone of the eligibility of eligible applicants for this
competition and that is a state education agency in partnership with one
or more local education agencies; or one or more local education
agencies and or a nonprofit organization, including \-- or entities, and
including an institution of higher education; or a local education
agency or consortium, or local education agencies, or a local education
agency in partnership with one or more nonprofit organizations or
entities, including an institution of higher education. Charter Schools
that are considered local education agencies under state law are also
eligible to apply.

The other thing that I do want to note, which was brought to our
attention recently; in the application package there is a misprint
regarding the project period for funding. It\'s on page nine. At the
bottom of that page it says project period. It says projects will be
funded for up to 48 months, four budget periods of twelve months each,
of which no more than 12 months may be used for planning and program
design. Grants awarded under this program will be funded for one year at
a time. Decisions regarding additional years of funding for all grant
awards will be made on the basis of such factors as (a) whether or not
the grantee has made substantial progress of achieving the goals and
objectives of their project and (b) availability of funds.

On page 59 under number four towards the bottom of the page where it
says budget narrative it indicates that the budget would cover a single
18-month period. That is incorrect. Please focus on page nine under
project period, the 48 months is correct. So I did want to note that in
case there was a question about that.

Okay, we\'re going to now open the call \-- open the lines for questions
and Matthew who is with us today is going to kind of help me moderate
the questions that are being asked.

Operator: Thank you. If you have a question at this time, please press
the one key on your touchtone telephone. If your questions has been
answered or you wish to remove yourself from the queue please press the
\# key. And if you\'re using a speaker phone, please lift the handset.

Sharon Burton: Any questions?

Operator: Our next question comes from Caller #1, your question?

Caller #1: Yes, what would you consider appropriate documentation of the
partnership between a state educational agency and a local education
agency? Would a letter of support suffice or do you want a memorandum of
agreement or something along those lines?

Sharon Burton: As far as any documentation of that nature, there\'s no
requirements for this program. However, the stronger the documentation
that relationship in support of the grant activities the better; so, you
know, the memorandum of agreement would probably be the strongest that
you could provide but even a letter of support will do; but something
that documents that both entities will be working together throughout
the four-year period, or what every period, to implement the program
activities.

Caller #1: Okay.

Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Caller #2.

Caller #2: Regarding the language in the absolute priority concerning
carried out with other educational reform efforts, does that mean reform
efforts going on within the LEA School District or does it mean national
education reform efforts? Could you clarify that?

Sharon Burton: What we mean by that is whatever reform efforts that are
going on within the entity that you\'re going to be getting funding for.

Caller #2: Oh.

Sharon Burton: If it\'s a local education agency there\'s other reform
efforts that are going on locally or within that state.

Caller #2: Okay, good.

Sharon Burton: If it is, you want to make sure that the program, you
know, works closely with those reform efforts. That it\'s not something
that is going to go against what\'s, you know, going on with that state
or that local district, as far as some of the education reforms that
they are implementing.

Caller #2: Okay, I had another questions if that\'s all right?

Sharon Burton: Um-hum.

Caller #2: With respect to the evaluation, the report that you mentioned
entitled \"Mobilizing.\" They suggest at much as 35-55% for evaluation.
Now, could that encompass though, say, some of the activities of the
director, some of the activities of the consultant; in other words, not
just the outside evaluation organization? In relation to that, is there
any penalty if one doesn\'t spend, you know, that would be upwards of
\$300,000 on a \$500,000 proposal for a large district?

Sharon Burton: And I understand your question and understand your
concern. First of all, the \"Mobilizing\" book is just mentioned as a
guideline. It\'s not an absolute.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: It\'s based on the resource that is available to you, as
far as evaluation contracts and what have you. And when we talk about
the evaluation budget, it can include, but not be limited to, the
evaluator\'s fee, cost associated with acquiring, you know, like
parental consent...

Caller #2: Or even like data collection done by the on site project
staff, the director, and consultants and so forth?

Sharon Burton: And, you know, the IRB review, depending if you go
commercial versus a local university. You know, cost of printing and
mailing the surveys, you know, data collectors and all that kind of
stuff.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: So, it\'s really based on the needs of what the
evaluation design demands, as far as what needs to happen and how that
can be budgeted.

Caller #2: Now is an IRB review necessitated for this project?

Sharon Burton: It\'s only necessitated if you\'re using an experimental
or quasi experimental design that\'s going to be collecting personal
data, particularly of the students. And you also have to look at
anything that might be collected from parents, you know, information
that will be collected as part of your evaluation design. What happens
is that once we receive an application and it\'s recommended for funding
we do forward it to our human subjects office and they make a
determination whether an IRB approval is needed. Dr. Warner, I don\'t
know if you want to weigh in on this?

Elizabeth Warner: Well, let me add a few things. I do sort of want to
accentuate one of the things that you said, which is the cost really has
to be commensurate with the kind of design that you\'re proposing and I
would think that somebody who\'s reviewing it should be looking at
whether it makes sense. So, for example, if you propose a very fancy,
what appears to be expensive, extensive data collection but you\'re
going to do it for \$5000 that\'s not a credible evaluation, perhaps,
you know, depending upon your size and that sort of things. Whereas, if
it\'s a pretty \-- it doesn\'t have as much data collection or they\'re
ways to cut corners or you can use a local university that has lower
rates or something like that then you wouldn\'t necessarily have as
large of an evaluation cost. So, it really has to make sense and lend
credibility to the evaluation design that you\'re proposing.

Caller #2: Thank you.

Elizabeth Warner: And I don\'t want to \-- and you probably will need to
look into this IRB stuff but sometimes it also has to do with what kinds
of questions you ask. So it\'s not just the kind of design that you
have. It\'s also the kind of questions and some questions actually
necessitate an IRB.

Caller #2: Okay.

Elizabeth Warner: And some of those more sensitive questions can be
relevant for a character ed. program but it depends upon what your
program is exactly.

Sharon Burton: And that\'s why we usually \-- we have Jeff Rodamer take
a look at not only the evaluation design but the instruments and the
kinds of survey questions that are being proposed to ask to get the data
that you need to make that kind of determination. Do we have any other
questions?

Operator: Again, if you have a question at this time, please press the
one key on your touchtone telephone. If your question has been answered
or you wish to be removed from the queue, please press the \# key.

Our next question comes from the line of Caller #3. Caller #3, your line
is open.

Caller #3: Okay, thank you. In the, you know, the checklist for
submitted documents they discuss a letter to the single point of
contact, a copy of the letter of the single point of contact. Does that
mean the head of department of education in our state or what does that
mean?

Sharon Burton: There is an individual, and I\'m not sure what office and
I don\'t know what state that you\'re in, that serves as the point of
contact for local education agencies or state education agencies in your
\-- or any entity in your state that\'s applying for a federal grant.
And there should be some information on how you can find out who that
person is in your application package. And there\'s a website that you
can go to see if your state does have that kind of liaison to the
department or to the federal agency and I\'m in the process of getting
that now. Do you know if your state has a liaison?

Caller #3: That I don\'t know. We\'re a consortium of local education
agencies.

Sharon Burton: Okay.

Caller #3: And so I am not sure of that but I\'m sure I could find out.

Sharon Burton: Okay, in the application package there should be
information on where you can go. We used to put that information in our
application packages but because the personnel in those positions change
so often it didn\'t make sense for us to continue to do that. And the
website that you can go \-- are you ready?

Caller #3: Yep, I\'m ready.

Sharon Burton: Okay, it is
[www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html).

Caller #3: HTML?

Sharon Burton: HTML, um-hum.

Caller #3: Okay, thank you very much. I have another question. This is
just kind of an organizing our grant.

Sharon Burton: Um-hum.

Caller #3: And we probably won\'t have \-- we\'re not going to have the
project director hired because unless we get a grant we can\'t hire a
project director. And so we would include job descriptions for that.

Sharon Burton: Um-hum.

Caller #3: Would that be considered like an attachment to the narrative,
an optional attachment to the narrative or would it be like other
attachments? I mean where do I put it?

Sharon Burton: Well, you could it as, the actual job description, as an
attachment. Now, in the narrative you may want to explain, you know, the
kinds of things that you\'re looking for, for this position so you can
let the peer reviewers know the kinds of experience and that there\'s
been some thought going into the kind of person that would be doing that
position. So, you may want to describe, you know, we\'re looking for
someone that has this background, that background, you know.

Caller #3: Yeah, and I guess I\'m just asking because under the
mandatory narrative project file, you know, it says mandatory project
narrative file and then it says add optional project narrative file but
I wasn\'t sure if I was supposed to put it there or supposed to put it
at the end where it says just attachments, other attachments.

Sharon Burton: You could put the actual job description under
attachment.

Caller #3: Okay.

Sharon Burton: And when you\'re addressing the personnel selection
criteria you may want to just explain what you\'re looking for or what,
you know, will be looking for in that position as part of your
narrative.

Caller #3: And then can I go on to a couple other questions?

Sharon Burton: You have the mic.

Caller #3: Okay, thank you. Then like when you do a timeline do want
like, and this is going to be in the project narrative. Do you want like
a separate section that says timeline that\'s going to address all four
years or how, you know...

Sharon Burton: It depends. You may want to look at \-- I always kind of
point people to some of the applications that have been funded to kind
of get a sense of how other people have handled that.

Caller #3: Well, you know, and I have tried to get some but I haven\'t
been able to get any. I\'ve just been able to see the abstracts.

Sharon Burton: Okay, where are you looking?

Caller #3: I \-- actually I emailed Sharon and said where can I get like
an actual application and I was told I could go under CETAC and I could
get the abstracts and I didn\'t know where to go from there.

Sharon Burton: Okay, you emailed me.

Caller #3: Yeah, I emailed you.

Sharon Burton: All right, you go under the
[www.cetac.org](http://www.cetac.org/) Website. If you go under, I
believe it\'s PCEP Grant, if you go on that link. Once you click on that
you will see the years that we funded, the last two years, which you
should be able to find the grant applications for fiscal year \'06 and
fiscal year \'07.

Caller #3: I...

Sharon Burton: If you go under those they\'re listed, I believe, by
state. If it says state you can just go and there should be a
highlighted link that takes you right to their application.

Caller #3: Okay, I guess I didn\'t see that. I know I called one state
and they just told me that they couldn\'t give me \-- or one site, that
they could not give me their application because it belonged to somebody
else.

Sharon Burton: Well, yeah, you should be able to download that
information just straight from the website and sometimes with, you know,
for me I always have to play around on a website to find things.

Caller #3: Yeah, okay.

Sharon Burton: Go to PCEP Grantees and then also if you go to the grant
competition information you should be able to get some of that
information before. She\'s looking for the actual...

Caller #3: I\'ve found it.

Sharon Burton: Okay, you found it?

Caller #3: Thank you, I found it, yea.

Sharon Burton: Oh sometimes \-- oh, also under the 2008 grant
competition information, I\'ve been told, there\'s even a link right
there on that page that says 2007 Successful PCEP Grant Applications.
Just click on that, download that and you\'re done.

Caller #3: Yep, I found it, okay.

Sharon Burton: Always take a little time with a website to figure out
where things are.

Caller #3: Yeah, I was looking and I could not find it. Thank you so
much.

Sharon Burton: No problem, any other questions?

Caller #3: The other question is like we have a consortium and it\'s
like 14 school districts.

Sharon Burton: Wow, that\'s a large one.

Caller #3: Yeah, and we\'re going to do memorandums of agreement on
those.

Sharon Burton: Um-hum.

Caller #3: And you can only do like 10 attachments \-- you know, they
only accept like 10 attachments. So I should maybe combine them all into
one document and attach them as one attachment.

Sharon Burton: You could do that.

Caller #3: Okay, I think that\'s all I have.

Sharon Burton: Okay, thank you.

Caller #3: Thank you very much.

Sharon Burton: You\'re welcome. Any other questions?

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Caller #2. Caller #2,
your line is open.

Caller #2: Yes, Sharon?

Sharon Burton: Yes?

Caller #2: Yes, now I\'ve been a reviewer on some other department of
education programs and I know sometimes the opening orientation will
point out some additional concerns that reviewers need to look for. Are
there any such things with the respect to this program? Are there any
kinds of things that are not explicitly stated in the review criteria
that you\'re aware of or...

Sharon Burton: No.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: Everything is pretty much straightforward.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: In the application packet the same information that you
see there is the same information that the reviewers received.

Caller #2: Okay, all right, very good. All right, well, thank you very
much.

Sharon Burton: Yeah, I mean the only other thing is that they have to,
you know, just make sure that the applicants, you know, address the
criteria that\'s listed.

Caller #2: Right.

Sharon Burton: But outside of that \-- and that they\'re doing a
competitive preference but outside of that there\'s nothing that is not
listed or not provided in the application package that would need to be,
you know, identified.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: Any other questions?

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Caller #1. Your line
is open.

Caller #1: Is it appropriate to include costs for food for some of the
trainings that our people will be participating in in the budget? I know
some of the trainings are going to be, you know, five to ten days long
and I didn\'t know if that was acceptable or not.

Sharon Burton: Generally, we do not encourage people to budget food
costs and that\'s part of the \-- and that gets into some complicated
stuff but it\'s part of the, what we call, the approved costs for
discretionary grants We always encourage our grantees to look for other
ways to fund that kind of thing. There are some instances where that
could be covered but you have to really prove that there\'s some kind of
activity going on that makes it necessary that food be served during the
training period but it\'s pretty complicated. I just tell people to stay
away from it if possible.

Caller #1: Okay. All right, thank you. Is there also a limited number of
attachments? I know for grants.gov you can\'t have more than 10 but for
this purpose can you have \-- I mean if I combined them in one document
can I have, say, 12-15 different appendices that are referenced?

Sharon Burton: If you\'re able to do it within the 10 that\'s a lot but
through grants.gov that\'s not a problem.

Caller #1: Okay.

Sharon Burton: Grants.gov is just set up where, you know, it just can\'t
take all kinds of different documentations but if it\'s something that
you definitely need and if you can combine it, you know, you\'re welcome
to do that.

Caller #1: Okay.

Sharon Burton: And, you know, if you\'re not sure about that you can
contact grants.gov help desk.

Caller #1: Yeah, I\'ve done it before, not a problem.

Sharon Burton: Yeah, you can talk with them specifically about what you
can do. Matthew, how many people do we have on?

Operator: I\'m sorry, what was that ma\'am?

Sharon Burton: How many people do we have on the call?

Operator: We have 14 people on the call.

Sharon Burton: Okay, thank you.

Operator: And I\'m also not showing any further people in queue.

Sharon Burton: Okay, what I thought I would share is the Government
Performance and Results Act or GPRA. And I share this because in the
former grant competitions that we\'ve had up to date we had a different
GPRA requirement, or measure, for this program and this is the first
year that has changed since a measure was placed for this program. And
let me tell you a little bit about what GPRA is. It is the acronym for
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and it\'s designed to
address problems identified by Congress, including lack of performance
data that can be used by federal program managers to improve program
efficiency and effectiveness. And by Congress to ensure that spending
decisions and oversight are informed by information about program
performance.

So this is information that the Department of Education collects to
actually see how effective the program is, if it\'s meeting its intended
goals. And it also helps Congress when they go through the
appropriations process to make some decisions as to whether to continue
to fund a particular discretionary grant program or what have you.

As required by GPRA the Department of Education has developed a GPRA
measure for the Partnerships in Character Education Program. And the
measure for this -- the measures for this program are (1) the percentage
of character education projects that use an experimental or quasi
experimental design for their evaluation and (2) the percentage of
character education projects that use and experimental or quasi
experimental design for their evaluation that are conducted successfully
and that yield scientifically valid results.

And, again, these measures are identified for our grants to constitute
the way in which we will measure the success of the programs. Applicants
for the program should give careful consideration to these measures in
developing their projects and, particularly, to how they will collect
and report data for their measures. So, just wanted to make sure that
you\'ve got that information, there is a complete narrative about GPRA
on Page 17 of the application package.

Do we have any additional questions?

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Caller #2. Caller #2,
your line is open.

Caller #2: Yes, this relates to what you were just saying about GPRA. I
know in \-- see I was funded back in 2002, that was the project in
Harlem with Region 10, Howard Krieger. And then in 2006 even though I
addressed GPRA I didn\'t explicitly say so. So a couple of the
evaluators took off for that. So with respect to this proposal now the
GPRA criteria are really more on the program level, I guess but to be
safe do we need to explicitly say in accordance with GPRA we are
submitting a scientifically based experimental design, etcetera?

Sharon Burton: Well, what \-- if you choose to apply for the competitive
preference priority...

Caller #2: Yes we are.

Sharon Burton: Okay, that would basically meet, you know, what the GPRA
measurement is for this particular program. Again, what we are asking is
that the grantees applicants actually just consider how they are
developing their project. If they choose to use the competitive
preference priority and how you will collect and report the data that
will support, you know, providing that information to us as part or
their \-- of the GPRA reporting.

Caller #2: Right.

Sharon Burton: Now, when it comes...

Caller #2: So the reviewers will be told that as long as that\'s the
case that the person doesn\'t have to spell out in a separate phrase
that this is where I\'m addressing GPRA?

Sharon Burton: Well, I think what \-- for one thing, we work with peer
reviewers so, you know, we do share information as to what they need to
look for, which as such is outlined here.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: I\'m not sure the particular situation or the particular
application that you, you know, submitted the last time. But I think
what you should do is just be very clear in your evaluation plan and
design on what you plan to do, how you plan to collect the data so that
will give the peer reviewer an idea of how you intend to meet this GPRA
requirement.

Caller #2: Okay.

Sharon Burton: So, you know, I don\'t know about saying we will meet the
GPRA requirement by thus and so.

Caller #2: All right.

Sharon Burton: A clear plan is going to indicate to the reviewer that,
you know, information is going to be collected that will meet the
requirement.

Caller #2: All right.

Sharon Burton: Does that answer your question?

Caller #2: Yes.

Sharon Burton: Okay, all right. Is there any other questions?

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Caller #4. Caller #4
your line is open.

Caller #4: Hi, thank you. I\'m calling with a question with regard to
the selection of the evaluation \-- of the evaluators and it talks about
using a particular process under Section AD36 of the Education
Department General Regulations. Is there a particular process that needs
to be followed in procuring an evaluator for the project?

Sharon Burton: What we tell people and what the information that you
just highlighted basically emphasizes is that you should follow whatever
procurement or contractual procedures that you\'re district or state
follows to, you know, contract with a person or entity to do an
evaluation for the grant. If it\'s done in-house that\'s one thing but
if you\'re working with someone like an independent evaluator that
language is just there to emphasize that it should be something that is,
you know, procured through the right procedures and the policies and
procedures that your state or your local district uses for those types
of contracts.

Caller #4: Okay, thank you.

Sharon Burton: You\'re welcome.

Operator: I\'m not showing any further questions at this time. Would you
like to proceed with any further remarks?

Sharon Burton: Dr. Warner, did you have anything else that you\'d like
to add? Dr. Warner?

Elizabeth Warner: I can\'t think of anything to tell you the truth. I
think actually the main thing is what you\'ve been saying a number of
times, that is being clear about how you\'re handling various things and
that\'s going to be true in the main portion of the grant, as well as
the competitive priority of exactly how you\'re doing your evaluation
efforts.

Sharon Burton: Okay. I guess one last round. Do we have any additional
questions before we close the call? Okay, thanks. Hello?

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Caller #3. Caller #3,
your line is open.

Caller #3: This is just a real simple question. Now, the table of
contents is supposed to address all of our submitted documents that we
attach to the grant? Is that correct?

Sharon Burton: Yes, are you submitting through grants.gov?

Caller #3: Yes.

Sharon Burton: Okay, just make sure that you follow the procedures in
the grants.gov as far as, you know, submitting that kind of information.
But yes, it should include, you know, the narrative, any appendices, all
of that.

Caller #3: Abstract?

Sharon Burton: Yes, and the abstract definitely. And it should be
submitted in the way that grants.gov requires for that kind of \-- for
that portion of the application.

Caller #3: I\'ve just looked at the electronic version and it doesn\'t
really say any place where you submit the table of contents other than
maybe at the beginning of the narrative?

Sharon Burton: That might be true. You may want to contact grants.gov
though just to see if there might be an area that\'s not, for whatever
reason, highlighted.

Caller #3: Okay.

Sharon Burton: I\'m not familiar with grants.gov from an applicant point
of view so I always leave it up to them to kind of instruct people on
how to do that.

Caller #3: Okay, and I\'ve never been able to locate like a paper
document application?

Sharon Burton: Okay, well, you can actually download it from the
websites that I mentioned earlier.

Caller #3: Okay.

Sharon Burton: I think the department\'s website and the CETAC website.
If you go to the department\'s website to the Office of Safe and Drug
Free Schools page and look up Character Education under that section, I
believe it\'s either under awards or it might be under a different
thing. You might have to play around a little bit with it. There\'s all
the information about the current competition. The same way with CETAC;
there\'s actually a big fat button right in the middle of the page that
has PCEP Competition information. You click on that and there\'s links
to everything from the application package to the Federal Register
notice, all of that good stuff.

Caller #3: Okay, well, I found all that. I just didn\'t find a paper
document. I found an electronic document but I didn\'t find a paper
document. So, I\'ll have to look a little bit more.

Sharon Burton: We could send you a copy -- a paper document if needed
but you could actually just download it straight from the website. Yeah,
it\'s right there, 2008 Application Package and Procedures is right
there on the CETAC website.

Caller #3: Okay, I got that.

Sharon Burton: Okay.

Caller #3: I just don\'t have the actual \-- like the SF424, that type
of thing.

Sharon Burton: Oh, oh no, it won\'t be there. It won\'t be there. I\'m
sorry. I thought you were talking about the application packet.

Caller #3: No, no I have that. I was just looking for like the forms to
fill out to send as a paper document.

Sharon Burton: Okay, you should \-- but that should be on there if it\'s
\-- it should be the electronic versions of those forms should be at the
very end of that document. You didn't\' see those?

Caller #3: The electronic version, would that be the same, you know? I
did print off the electronic version; so that would be the same whether
you submitted by grants.gov or not?

Sharon Burton: Yes.

Caller #3: Okay.

Sharon Burton: The SF424 is in the back there. And, again, those are --
particularly if you have to do a paper application all of that is there.

Caller #3: The paper one as well as the electronic one?

Sharon Burton: Um-hum.

Caller #3: Okay, then I\'ve got it. It just looked more like an
electronic one but okay.

Sharon Burton: And then on grants.gov, you know, if you go through \--
follow through that procedure the forms are right there and they\'re \--
that\'s what you fill out electronically as you go along. So everything
\-- either you can download it, print it all out and you have it right
there or if you apply through grants.gov those forms are right there.

Caller #3: Okay, thank you.

Sharon Burton: Um-hum. Are there any other questions? We have less than
\-- we have about five minutes left on the call.

Operator: I\'m not showing any further questions at this time.

Sharon Burton: Okay, just to remind you the closing date for this
application is Monday, March 31^st^. We have one more call in between
time. If you have some additional questions, that\'s going to be on
March 25^th^ and the time will be, I believe it\'s 2:00 that day. And
one last thing I do want to mention and for those of you that plan to
submit your application through grants.gov a couple things. (1) You
don\'t want to wait until the last minute to submit this.

> If you wait until that day and that last hour you\'re putting yourself
> in a very precarious situation because, as you know, we\'re dealing
> with technology. It\'s a wonderful thing to have paperless kinds of
> mechanisms but they will sometimes not work for you. If it gets to
> that point and you\'re sweating and your heart is beating and the
> system shuts down on you make sure you have a back up paper copy that
> you can slip in the mail that day before 4:30 so you can, you know,
> get that out in the mail, FedEx it or whatever to the address that\'s
> listed on the application package because if it shuts down at the time
> that you\'re submitting your application, you know, there\'s nothing
> we can do.
>
> That\'s \-- we\'ve had timelines and deadlines and time constraints
> that\'s listed for a reason and we won\'t be able to help you,
> grants.gov won\'t be able to help, nobody will be able to help you
> unless it\'s some kind of thing that\'s beyond anybody\'s control. So,
> I will just encourage you just to make sure that you have a paper copy
> ready to be put in the mail that you can send that afternoon if you
> run into that problem.

Sharon Burton: Okay, we\'re going to close the call at this time. Thank
you so much for your participation and if you have any additional
questions that were not covered by this call feel free to email me at
<sharon.burton@ed.gov> and, again, I encourage you to check out those
websites. Look at them thoroughly. Most of the information that you\'re
interested or trying to find is right there, it\'s just a matter of
clicking around and seeing what you can find. And, you know, best of
luck in your application process for this competition. Thank you.

Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today\'s
conference. This concludes the program. You may all disconnect.